The last time I could be bothered to check the FAQ, it specifically stated that they don't do any fact-checking at all, and that they leave that up to us. More cynically, slashdot is now a commercial operation (has been for a while of course) and anything that drives page impressions (and thus ad impressions) is in their interest; throwing in a "stoopid EUian gubmint don't unnerstand t'Interweb!" angle helps fan the fires of controversy.
And copyrights have nothing to do with preventing foreign companies from using the results of research - or do you imagine that those copyrighted journals are available only in the US, cannot be exported, are only able to be read by US citizens, etc?
That was his point - copyrighted or not, others are free to use the results of the research. If you want to prevent that (which as others have pointed out would be astoundingly short-sighted) then you need to patent it (which for pure research may well not even be possible), and this entire discussion is about copyrights.
It would be option C), the police breathalyse him (which is almost certainly done in the case of any road traffic accident), and either i) they too find he's under the limit, or ii) they find he's over, in which case the breathalyser manufacturer will have questions to answer.
People will sue over all sorts of sensor input that maybe, possibly the car could have reacted to.
I dare say drivers will also sue if the car does react in time and they suffer whiplash. Society is far too "me me me" sue-happy for the manufacturers of self-drive cars to ever be safe from lawsuits, no matter how good the cars.
Maybe the situation is different in the US (and in France), but:
A bit of hypocrisy to allow establishments, who serve NOTHING but alcohol (the common bar)
I've been in a large number of bars, pubs and clubs in the UK, and every single one served soft drinks as well as alcoholic ones. Besides, I really don't see the hypocrisy - there is a limit for consumption of alcohol below which you can drive, and above which you can't; you can still drive to the bar and have a drink or two, then drive off. Or are you suggesting that people should be allowed to drink as much as they like before they drive?
There are certainly people who don't enjoy the taste of alcohol
They've just not found the right drink.
(I'm serious; alcoholic drinks come in pretty-much every flavour imaginable, "I don't like the taste" doesn't remain a real reason for very long at all)
Maybe you're referring to Germany's laws against nazi symbols?
I suspect he's referring to the laws against Holocaust denial that exist in a number of European countries. I once read a justification along the lines that by denying that the Holocaust ever happened, you are effectively calling anyone who claims to have survived it a liar. As those people have suffered enough, rather than making them sue for libel/slander (and so have to give evidence, thus forcing them to remember and relive their experiences) the state takes on the prosecution to spare them the experience.
A conversation would take 8 years - you say something, 4 years later I hear it, 4 years after that you get my reply. Even if the reply is to send the supplies you ask for, it's still 8 years before you get them (and that's if I can send them immediately, and they travel at c the entire way which they can't, etc).
Potentially it's even more confusing than that - for example, I use Virgin Media as my ISP. While I never use it, I get a free web-based email account with them. I completely forgot until I happened to sign into it the other day but some time ago they switched providers to Google.
I wonder how many people have Google accounts without realising it.
Of course not, it's a licence to own and operate equipment capable of receiving television broadcasts, not a guarantee of service. In a similar (but otherwise unrelated) vein, a train ticket guarantees you carriage (unless you miss the train, of course) but doesn't guarantee you a seat.
I have a friend who doesn't even own a TV, she is occasionally hassled by TV Licensing. I understand it's annoying, but given that you need a licence to own a TV, and the number of people who don't own a TV is vanishingly small compared to the number that do, and is also almost certainly dwarfed by the number that do but don't have a licence, it's understandable they may be sceptical.
... using the expertise of a bunch of German rocket scientists.
...and chased there by the Soviets (first artificial satellite, first animal in orbit (though not the first in space), first man in space and first EVA).
No offence, but no it isn't - I also read "the games will become apps for Chrome" as "existing Flash games will be ported to Chrome apps".
For what it's worth, I disagree; I can't see anyone that's making money from Flash games (e.g. Zynga) targetting a single browser, and most if not all of the Flash games I've played simply won't work on a smartphone. They might work on a tablet, but that's currently still a niche market (though one that is growing, I'll grant you).
That's not to say that new games won't be implemented in HTML 5, but we're a fair way from that being practical either given the current state of HTML 5 support.
I always assumed that everyone had them, that they were essentially just dust and assorted other crap floating on the eye, and that they came and went.
Also, I have just become very aware of mine having read this comment thread, so thanks for that...;p
No no wants to spend a week in an elevator even if it means you get to go into orbit.
Are you kidding? Where do I sign up? Besides which while it's an elevator in that it's pulled up a string, it most certainly won't be a 3m-cubed metal box.
That depends - given that in many ways the EU is more like the US than any individual member state is, perhaps we should be comparing the EU and the US? Alternatively, we should compare the individual EU member state to an individual US member state.
The thing is, you don't know how many lawyers/law firms were approached and turned them down, before they found one that said "Yeah, ok, sure, we'll take your money off your hands". (Which of course may be none - that's the point, we don't know either way.)
you can't improvise a vegan regime but need to follow a specific regime
I might be wrong, but I think that would be news to my (healthy) vegan friend. I've not actually asked her, but I've certainly never noticed her following a regime of any kind.
There is an excuse for a splash screen on a business app - it gives quick feedback that yes, you did (double-)click the icon properly and yes, the application is now starting (so please don't hammer it like a monkey and so get three, four or even more copies starting at the same time).
That's because while it's perfectly natural for animals to kill and eat other animals (including for humans to do it), the activists believe that unlike other carnivorous animals we have a choice.
Even a lot of those of us who do eat meat tend to believe that the animals shouldn't be caused unnecessary suffering, which also tends to fall under the "animal rights" label. As for the name, it's similar enough in intent to human rights that the name is appropriate (and even more so for those of us who do not consider human rights to be "God-given", but to be an artificial construct of a rational, civilised society).
What are you, 12? Over here in the adult world we're responsible for our own actions. There was no need for the hunters to shoot at the drone (it wasn't a danger to them they were just pissed off), so trying to blame the inherent riskiness of the hunters' actions on the operator of the drone is facile.
No, I think the point was meant to be that the larger the business, the more customers/users your actions (potentially) affect, and so the harsher your punishment is likely to be.
Slashdot Mirror
The last time I could be bothered to check the FAQ, it specifically stated that they don't do any fact-checking at all, and that they leave that up to us. More cynically, slashdot is now a commercial operation (has been for a while of course) and anything that drives page impressions (and thus ad impressions) is in their interest; throwing in a "stoopid EUian gubmint don't unnerstand t'Interweb!" angle helps fan the fires of controversy.
And copyrights have nothing to do with preventing foreign companies from using the results of research - or do you imagine that those copyrighted journals are available only in the US, cannot be exported, are only able to be read by US citizens, etc?
That was his point - copyrighted or not, others are free to use the results of the research. If you want to prevent that (which as others have pointed out would be astoundingly short-sighted) then you need to patent it (which for pure research may well not even be possible), and this entire discussion is about copyrights.
It would be option C), the police breathalyse him (which is almost certainly done in the case of any road traffic accident), and either i) they too find he's under the limit, or ii) they find he's over, in which case the breathalyser manufacturer will have questions to answer.
People will sue over all sorts of sensor input that maybe, possibly the car could have reacted to.
I dare say drivers will also sue if the car does react in time and they suffer whiplash. Society is far too "me me me" sue-happy for the manufacturers of self-drive cars to ever be safe from lawsuits, no matter how good the cars.
A bit of hypocrisy to allow establishments, who serve NOTHING but alcohol (the common bar)
I've been in a large number of bars, pubs and clubs in the UK, and every single one served soft drinks as well as alcoholic ones. Besides, I really don't see the hypocrisy - there is a limit for consumption of alcohol below which you can drive, and above which you can't; you can still drive to the bar and have a drink or two, then drive off. Or are you suggesting that people should be allowed to drink as much as they like before they drive?
There are certainly people who don't enjoy the taste of alcohol
They've just not found the right drink.
(I'm serious; alcoholic drinks come in pretty-much every flavour imaginable, "I don't like the taste" doesn't remain a real reason for very long at all)
I don't like queer - and you want to call that "homophobia"?
Well, my dictionary says that homophobia is "a fear or dislike of homosexuals". So yes, you're a homophobe.
Good lord, are you mad!? Don't waste time studying it, get publishing papers now!!
Maybe you're referring to Germany's laws against nazi symbols?
I suspect he's referring to the laws against Holocaust denial that exist in a number of European countries. I once read a justification along the lines that by denying that the Holocaust ever happened, you are effectively calling anyone who claims to have survived it a liar. As those people have suffered enough, rather than making them sue for libel/slander (and so have to give evidence, thus forcing them to remember and relive their experiences) the state takes on the prosecution to spare them the experience.
6 year old PC's can still run XP, and once XP support is withdrawn, they will have to either sell off those PC's or move to Linux
Why? It's not like XP will refuse to boot one day because it's expired.
A conversation would take 8 years - you say something, 4 years later I hear it, 4 years after that you get my reply. Even if the reply is to send the supplies you ask for, it's still 8 years before you get them (and that's if I can send them immediately, and they travel at c the entire way which they can't, etc).
Potentially it's even more confusing than that - for example, I use Virgin Media as my ISP. While I never use it, I get a free web-based email account with them. I completely forgot until I happened to sign into it the other day but some time ago they switched providers to Google.
I wonder how many people have Google accounts without realising it.
Of course not, it's a licence to own and operate equipment capable of receiving television broadcasts, not a guarantee of service. In a similar (but otherwise unrelated) vein, a train ticket guarantees you carriage (unless you miss the train, of course) but doesn't guarantee you a seat.
I have a friend who doesn't even own a TV, she is occasionally hassled by TV Licensing. I understand it's annoying, but given that you need a licence to own a TV, and the number of people who don't own a TV is vanishingly small compared to the number that do, and is also almost certainly dwarfed by the number that do but don't have a licence, it's understandable they may be sceptical.
NASA went to space...
... using the expertise of a bunch of German rocket scientists.
...and chased there by the Soviets (first artificial satellite, first animal in orbit (though not the first in space), first man in space and first EVA).
No offence, but no it isn't - I also read "the games will become apps for Chrome" as "existing Flash games will be ported to Chrome apps".
For what it's worth, I disagree; I can't see anyone that's making money from Flash games (e.g. Zynga) targetting a single browser, and most if not all of the Flash games I've played simply won't work on a smartphone. They might work on a tablet, but that's currently still a niche market (though one that is growing, I'll grant you).
That's not to say that new games won't be implemented in HTML 5, but we're a fair way from that being practical either given the current state of HTML 5 support.
I always assumed that everyone had them, that they were essentially just dust and assorted other crap floating on the eye, and that they came and went.
;p
Also, I have just become very aware of mine having read this comment thread, so thanks for that...
Or another popular one, that TL lights are healthy and generally good, especially CFL bulbs. We all know you get headaches from them
No, I don't - that is, I neither know that (that's the first I've heard of it) nor do I get headaches from them.
No no wants to spend a week in an elevator even if it means you get to go into orbit.
Are you kidding? Where do I sign up? Besides which while it's an elevator in that it's pulled up a string, it most certainly won't be a 3m-cubed metal box.
That depends - given that in many ways the EU is more like the US than any individual member state is, perhaps we should be comparing the EU and the US? Alternatively, we should compare the individual EU member state to an individual US member state.
The thing is, you don't know how many lawyers/law firms were approached and turned them down, before they found one that said "Yeah, ok, sure, we'll take your money off your hands". (Which of course may be none - that's the point, we don't know either way.)
you can't improvise a vegan regime but need to follow a specific regime
I might be wrong, but I think that would be news to my (healthy) vegan friend. I've not actually asked her, but I've certainly never noticed her following a regime of any kind.
There is an excuse for a splash screen on a business app - it gives quick feedback that yes, you did (double-)click the icon properly and yes, the application is now starting (so please don't hammer it like a monkey and so get three, four or even more copies starting at the same time).
That's because while it's perfectly natural for animals to kill and eat other animals (including for humans to do it), the activists believe that unlike other carnivorous animals we have a choice.
Even a lot of those of us who do eat meat tend to believe that the animals shouldn't be caused unnecessary suffering, which also tends to fall under the "animal rights" label. As for the name, it's similar enough in intent to human rights that the name is appropriate (and even more so for those of us who do not consider human rights to be "God-given", but to be an artificial construct of a rational, civilised society).
What are you, 12? Over here in the adult world we're responsible for our own actions. There was no need for the hunters to shoot at the drone (it wasn't a danger to them they were just pissed off), so trying to blame the inherent riskiness of the hunters' actions on the operator of the drone is facile.
No, I think the point was meant to be that the larger the business, the more customers/users your actions (potentially) affect, and so the harsher your punishment is likely to be.