It's a sad truth that reporting accurately and objectively on the activities of conservatives is often perceived by them to be "vile" and unfair. They tend to get upset when the happy face they try to paint on what they are doing is allowed to stand unchallenged.
Examples of this unfortunate situation are legion. I can go all the way back to when Ronald Reagan's administration tried to avoid meeting even the minimal nutrition requirements of a school lunch program by re-defining ketchup as a vegetable. The administration was deeply angered when this attempt was reported fully and accurately in the news media because average Americans correctly concluded that such a measure was morally repugnant.
It won't be long before wind and solar have reached the point where they won't need any subsidies at all to compete with fossil fuels...which no doubt will still enjoy the billions of dollars in direct and indirect subsidies they get right now.
It's unfortunate that North America squandered its opportunity to lead the world in developing and manufacturing the means to provide renewable energy, thanks to lobbying by fossil fuel corporations and low-information taxpayers who have never figured out how little they spend subsidizing renewables, and how much they spend subsidizing oil, gas, and coal.
They can call it "Soylent". And I'm sure it wouldn't take much thought to come up with a colour scheme so consumers could quickly and conveniently identify the various varieties.
Wise advice. I actually do a fair bit of cooking myself, and have used this approach with lasagna, stews and chili. Most people don't, though. They'd rather put up with "good enough kinda" and no hassle.
Governments, corporations and others who want to manipulate the public certainly have good reasons to develop AI's that pass the Uncanny Valley test.
For a lot of average people, though, I suspect a supremely uncomplicated use: make me a robot I enjoy fucking, maybe conversing with once in a while if I'm lonely, and that doesn't kick up a fuss when it gets turned off and put away in the cupboard.
Human relationships are complex and difficult. They usually require two very different individuals to compromise on what they will tolerate to make the other person happy. It's hard work, and inevitably, there's drama.
There is going to be a huge, profitable market for a "sexbot" that would allow a person to meet a "dumbed down" version of their social and physical needs without the necessity of involving another person in their situation.
Let me put it this way: Just about anybody who has ever had an Italian grandmother's lasagna will agree there's nothing better. A good Italian restaurant might come close, but not the store-bought frozen ones. Even so, add a little Parmesan and maybe throw a little red wine into the pan while it's cooking, and the store-bought version isn't all that bad. And it only takes two minutes of effort and 20 minutes in the microwave, versus hours of making the sauce, making the pasta, combining the fillings and all the rest. Not a bad trade-off when all you really want is a nice hot meal without any fuss and bother.
They should have kept their mouths shut until they had everything ready to go and the nastiest pack of legal attack dogs money can buy hired and hungry for blood.
Ajit Pai and his masters will want to strangle this baby in its cradle.
You confuse vehemence with a rational decision to publicly correct a lying cheat, and let him know he's fooling nobody. However, I have no more time to spend on an Anonymous Coward. It appears that my friends and I need to celebrate the victory of Doug Jones in Alabama.
Oh...you have a really, really early number you just don't use anymore.
Yeah, right.
As mentioned elsewhere, science and technology are deemed "political" by the conservatives attempting to take over this place. Science and technology are their enemies.
And to reiterate: it takes a special kind of bottom-feeding scum to think about intentionally deceiving people here in some kind of perverted effort to score political points...the kind of bottom-feeding scum who would claim they have been a member here for years and years, but just don't use the number that would prove it. Maybe if you somehow manage to trick your daddy out of his password you can actually get access to it.
I couldn't care less what your opinion of me happens to be.
However, what you have demonstrated is that dishonesty comes naturally to you. This is not surprising, since you are one of the late-comer conservatives who are attempting to take over this site. Of course the idea that somebody might comment incognito, then respond to their own anonymous remark, would come easily to you. It's something you would do, because you are fundamentally dishonest and unethical.
People like me, who have been participating in discussions on this site for years, have no need to engage in such foolishness. Neither do we have any tolerance for bottom-feeding scum to whom such behaviour is even conceivable, much less justifiable.
"If the US government didn't burn all those people to death, McVeigh would be some nutbag with a tiki torch today."
Let me guess...you know this because he was your good buddy and chose you to confide in before they stuck the needle in him? LOL
All I ever said is that he is a right wing terrorist. You're trying to argue what specific variety of right wing terrorist he is. The fact remains, though. He was a child-murdering, ultra-conservative right wing terrorist.
I'm sure such creatures are thankful for your continued support, and your constant attempts to excuse their conduct. You make them feel all warm and fuzzy inside when they're planning their next mass murder of women and children. Have they thanked you personally yet, or are you still waiting for a card?
Claims that Slashdot is being politicized by anybody except conservatives are at best disingenuous, at worst, outright dishonest. For example, the entire scientific world agrees that Global Warming is real, it's happening now with devastating consequences for the planet, and it's caused by humans. Reporting on current research about the subject and technology-driven efforts to become more environmentally responsible generally are obviously well within Slashdot's terms of reference. Yet every time GW is referenced, we have to endure a shitstorm of comments from conservatives who are either deluded or dishonest, or both, who keep trying to claim there's some kind of political agenda behind reporting on reality.
Sorry, but you don't get to mis-define Slashdot's terms of reference to suit your political agenda, then try to claim everybody but you is the cause of a problem you created. I'll grant that you've come up with an interesting new application of the No True Scotsman logical fallacy, though. Well done.
Conservatives are conservatives. The specific version of the delusion is irrelevant. There are moderate Muslims, but they weren't flying planes into the World Trade Centre. They were as appalled as everybody else at the act of the fundamentalist conservatives who pollute and pervert their faith.
Also irrelevant is your attempt to pretend any link between the Branch Davidians and McVeigh, if it even existed, somehow changes the fact that he was a self-confessed, proud member of the far right.
"Clap skates" are an excellent example of your point. For some reason, they've decided to allow them. But in golf, square grooves on a club make it illegal.
When the Left you hate so much plant a bomb like right winger Tim McVeigh, or the ultra-conservative fundamentalist Muslims who took down the World Trade Center, maybe you can talk. Until then, you should probably just shut your yap before you look even more like an idiot.
Surveys, studies and anecdotal evidence all dispute you. Perhaps you live in an area where conservatives are uncharacteristically tolerant.
Sadly, I have to conclude that this probably isn't the case, and you simply aren't being truthful. The anger I was discussing here is the outrage directed at the people who bought land in the path of Trump's non-existent wall with a view to impeding its construction. According to the courts, such actions qualify as "speech", and are protected under the First Amendment.
How many liberals do you know who bought one of the hundreds of thousands of t-shirts that say, "Kill them all, let God sort them out"? How many liberals do you know who fly planes into buildings? How many liberals do you know who left car bombs in front of government buildings in America, or murdered doctors who dared perform legal services for their patients "because religion"?
I'm sorry, my friend, but your statement is just plain false. Demonstrably false.
Training and equipment allowed significant performance improvements in a relatively short period of time. How high could one of today's pole vaulters reach using a pole from the 1950's? Or put one of today's cyclists on a bike from that era and see whether they break any Tour de France records. Technique and nutrition have also been refined to the point where there will probably be very few more major improvements.
These factors allowed elite athletes (now sorted into various sports by body type) to improve their performance very significantly without changing the basic human body all that much. The next step, though...actually modifying an individual's genetic structure...may produce some pretty spectacular results.
Only a conservative could be so reality-averse they are able to ignore the almost daily public temper tantrums thrown by the current US President while accusing liberals of being immature.
I have never commented as an "Anonymous Coward", and I doubt I ever will. The tactic you suggest is deeply dishonest, and the fact that you would accuse somebody of behaving that way says a lot more about you than it does about me.
Slashdot Mirror
If you look at pictures of Ronald Reagan's funeral, you'll notice there's not a lot of black faces among the mourners.
It's a sad truth that reporting accurately and objectively on the activities of conservatives is often perceived by them to be "vile" and unfair. They tend to get upset when the happy face they try to paint on what they are doing is allowed to stand unchallenged.
Examples of this unfortunate situation are legion. I can go all the way back to when Ronald Reagan's administration tried to avoid meeting even the minimal nutrition requirements of a school lunch program by re-defining ketchup as a vegetable. The administration was deeply angered when this attempt was reported fully and accurately in the news media because average Americans correctly concluded that such a measure was morally repugnant.
It won't be long before wind and solar have reached the point where they won't need any subsidies at all to compete with fossil fuels...which no doubt will still enjoy the billions of dollars in direct and indirect subsidies they get right now.
It's unfortunate that North America squandered its opportunity to lead the world in developing and manufacturing the means to provide renewable energy, thanks to lobbying by fossil fuel corporations and low-information taxpayers who have never figured out how little they spend subsidizing renewables, and how much they spend subsidizing oil, gas, and coal.
They can call it "Soylent". And I'm sure it wouldn't take much thought to come up with a colour scheme so consumers could quickly and conveniently identify the various varieties.
I'm not insulting you. I'm describing you.
OK,,,now does anybody doubt there's a concerted effort by the alt right to take over the Slashdot comments section?
Fuck you and fuck whatever white supremacist organization you're a member of, you Nazi-worshipping cocksucker.
Wise advice. I actually do a fair bit of cooking myself, and have used this approach with lasagna, stews and chili. Most people don't, though. They'd rather put up with "good enough kinda" and no hassle.
Governments, corporations and others who want to manipulate the public certainly have good reasons to develop AI's that pass the Uncanny Valley test.
For a lot of average people, though, I suspect a supremely uncomplicated use: make me a robot I enjoy fucking, maybe conversing with once in a while if I'm lonely, and that doesn't kick up a fuss when it gets turned off and put away in the cupboard.
Human relationships are complex and difficult. They usually require two very different individuals to compromise on what they will tolerate to make the other person happy. It's hard work, and inevitably, there's drama.
There is going to be a huge, profitable market for a "sexbot" that would allow a person to meet a "dumbed down" version of their social and physical needs without the necessity of involving another person in their situation.
Let me put it this way: Just about anybody who has ever had an Italian grandmother's lasagna will agree there's nothing better. A good Italian restaurant might come close, but not the store-bought frozen ones. Even so, add a little Parmesan and maybe throw a little red wine into the pan while it's cooking, and the store-bought version isn't all that bad. And it only takes two minutes of effort and 20 minutes in the microwave, versus hours of making the sauce, making the pasta, combining the fillings and all the rest. Not a bad trade-off when all you really want is a nice hot meal without any fuss and bother.
Pale Moon's not a bad choice, either.
Thanks for "Cyberfox". I'll give it a try.
They should have kept their mouths shut until they had everything ready to go and the nastiest pack of legal attack dogs money can buy hired and hungry for blood.
Ajit Pai and his masters will want to strangle this baby in its cradle.
You confuse vehemence with a rational decision to publicly correct a lying cheat, and let him know he's fooling nobody. However, I have no more time to spend on an Anonymous Coward. It appears that my friends and I need to celebrate the victory of Doug Jones in Alabama.
Kissy-kiss, bottom-feeder. Have a lovely evening.
Oh...you have a really, really early number you just don't use anymore.
Yeah, right.
As mentioned elsewhere, science and technology are deemed "political" by the conservatives attempting to take over this place. Science and technology are their enemies.
And to reiterate: it takes a special kind of bottom-feeding scum to think about intentionally deceiving people here in some kind of perverted effort to score political points...the kind of bottom-feeding scum who would claim they have been a member here for years and years, but just don't use the number that would prove it. Maybe if you somehow manage to trick your daddy out of his password you can actually get access to it.
I couldn't care less what your opinion of me happens to be.
However, what you have demonstrated is that dishonesty comes naturally to you. This is not surprising, since you are one of the late-comer conservatives who are attempting to take over this site. Of course the idea that somebody might comment incognito, then respond to their own anonymous remark, would come easily to you. It's something you would do, because you are fundamentally dishonest and unethical.
People like me, who have been participating in discussions on this site for years, have no need to engage in such foolishness. Neither do we have any tolerance for bottom-feeding scum to whom such behaviour is even conceivable, much less justifiable.
"If the US government didn't burn all those people to death, McVeigh would be some nutbag with a tiki torch today."
Let me guess...you know this because he was your good buddy and chose you to confide in before they stuck the needle in him? LOL
All I ever said is that he is a right wing terrorist. You're trying to argue what specific variety of right wing terrorist he is. The fact remains, though. He was a child-murdering, ultra-conservative right wing terrorist.
I'm sure such creatures are thankful for your continued support, and your constant attempts to excuse their conduct. You make them feel all warm and fuzzy inside when they're planning their next mass murder of women and children. Have they thanked you personally yet, or are you still waiting for a card?
"McVeigh was reprimanded by the military for purchasing a "White Power" T-shirt at a Ku Klux Klan protest"
Game. Set. Match. Now fuck off. I'm busy.
Claims that Slashdot is being politicized by anybody except conservatives are at best disingenuous, at worst, outright dishonest. For example, the entire scientific world agrees that Global Warming is real, it's happening now with devastating consequences for the planet, and it's caused by humans. Reporting on current research about the subject and technology-driven efforts to become more environmentally responsible generally are obviously well within Slashdot's terms of reference. Yet every time GW is referenced, we have to endure a shitstorm of comments from conservatives who are either deluded or dishonest, or both, who keep trying to claim there's some kind of political agenda behind reporting on reality.
Sorry, but you don't get to mis-define Slashdot's terms of reference to suit your political agenda, then try to claim everybody but you is the cause of a problem you created. I'll grant that you've come up with an interesting new application of the No True Scotsman logical fallacy, though. Well done.
Conservatives are conservatives. The specific version of the delusion is irrelevant. There are moderate Muslims, but they weren't flying planes into the World Trade Centre. They were as appalled as everybody else at the act of the fundamentalist conservatives who pollute and pervert their faith.
Also irrelevant is your attempt to pretend any link between the Branch Davidians and McVeigh, if it even existed, somehow changes the fact that he was a self-confessed, proud member of the far right.
Nice try, though
Exactly the response I'd expect from a conservative coward. You should probably leave. Adults are present, and you don't belong.
"Clap skates" are an excellent example of your point. For some reason, they've decided to allow them. But in golf, square grooves on a club make it illegal.
When the Left you hate so much plant a bomb like right winger Tim McVeigh, or the ultra-conservative fundamentalist Muslims who took down the World Trade Center, maybe you can talk. Until then, you should probably just shut your yap before you look even more like an idiot.
Surveys, studies and anecdotal evidence all dispute you. Perhaps you live in an area where conservatives are uncharacteristically tolerant.
Sadly, I have to conclude that this probably isn't the case, and you simply aren't being truthful. The anger I was discussing here is the outrage directed at the people who bought land in the path of Trump's non-existent wall with a view to impeding its construction. According to the courts, such actions qualify as "speech", and are protected under the First Amendment.
How many liberals do you know who bought one of the hundreds of thousands of t-shirts that say, "Kill them all, let God sort them out"? How many liberals do you know who fly planes into buildings? How many liberals do you know who left car bombs in front of government buildings in America, or murdered doctors who dared perform legal services for their patients "because religion"?
I'm sorry, my friend, but your statement is just plain false. Demonstrably false.
Training and equipment allowed significant performance improvements in a relatively short period of time. How high could one of today's pole vaulters reach using a pole from the 1950's? Or put one of today's cyclists on a bike from that era and see whether they break any Tour de France records. Technique and nutrition have also been refined to the point where there will probably be very few more major improvements.
These factors allowed elite athletes (now sorted into various sports by body type) to improve their performance very significantly without changing the basic human body all that much. The next step, though...actually modifying an individual's genetic structure...may produce some pretty spectacular results.
Only a conservative could be so reality-averse they are able to ignore the almost daily public temper tantrums thrown by the current US President while accusing liberals of being immature.
Thanks for the chuckle.
I have never commented as an "Anonymous Coward", and I doubt I ever will. The tactic you suggest is deeply dishonest, and the fact that you would accuse somebody of behaving that way says a lot more about you than it does about me.
You're in favour of allowing the government to come onto private property and build things against the owner's wishes?
Are you a socialist, or a full-on communist?