So white kids and businessmen don't consider BlackBerry to be "cool".
You should see the shittier parts of London, where all the black gangsta types carry Blackberries. Not because of encrypted free BBM, but because it's "bidness, innit".
Don't think for a minute that you are the final arbiter of what is 'cool' out there, because as we should all know, one man's meat is another man's poison.
Given a big enough electricity supply and a plentiful supply of air and water for feedstock and cooling, this would be a great way to produce a bottomless petrol station.
Private Eye is awesome. There are very few publications that deliberately go looking for the shit quite like Ian Hislop and friends.
I've heard by word-of-mouth that they've got the biggest pile of cash to defend against libel lawsuits of any publisher in the UK.
Significant, given how slap-happy the rich cunts are in this country (and in much of Russia and the Middle East), and how fond they are of taking advantage of Britain's broken libel laws to attack their critics in court.
Any Slashdotters know anything about manufacturing engineering, and would like to fill us in on why Apple can construct such a sophisticated thing as an iPhone 5, that still needs to be assembled largely by hand?
Surely a mass-marketed consumer device like that, they'd design for manufacturability, and/or design the tools required to assemble it efficiently?
Maybe, with (Chinese) labour costs being such an insignificant part of the sticker price, it's simply not worth the trouble?
A good decision on its own merits, I think. His crimes were made out to be first degree murder by the US side, and he was going to go down for a LONG time for something that script kiddies do quite often.The guy obviously has something wrong with him, and he'd unlikely get a fair hearing in the States, where the favourite sport of the rich and powerful is to inflate claimed harm in court cases to crucify people they don't like (e.g. Kevin Mitnick causing a billion dollars damage and able to start nuclear war with a payphone).
That said, in context, it looks terrible. After what happened to Abu Hamza and friends, it says that if you're brown and Muslim, you're going to get thrown to the wolves. But if you're white, you're all right. I have zero sympathy for sub-human shit like Abu Hamza -- but the apparent double-standard is a very bad look.
They need a reality check. If those Wahhabi bastards think we're going to let them have anything of the kind, they are sadly, sadly mistaken.
This is a symptom of a far bigger problem -- the Saudis, with their oil money have been spreading their evil Wahhabi poison -- and the accompanying ignorance and fanaticism -- around the world for decades.
We need to kneecap them. Find ways to make oil worthless, and it'll crush the Saudi powers-that-be economically. Without money as a crutch to bribe/subjugate their people, they'll be swept away.
"Set America Free", while being a think-tank run by conservatives, have pretty much the right idea. Get off fossil fuel oil for transport, introduce fuel choice, develop alternatives, and then we can crush the Saudi oil despots and set the world free.
This whole notion of a 'geek rapture' is not only incredibly, insultingly dumb, it doesn't stand up to any scientific scrutiny at all, as does any childish 12yo playground fantasy.
Bless you, Ray. At least you're trying to be 'original' and 'innovative', by throwing in a few new hip buzzwords so that the Forbes-reading crowd will think you're hip and cool.
Academic publishing is obscenely, ridiculously profitable, because the scammers who publish the journals use sharp sales and marketing tactics, jack up prices for universities until the pips squeak, and yet happily accept free labour for editing journals, moderation, peer review, whatnot.
Academic journals enjoy net margins in excesss of 45%. That's extremely high. Clearly, the market is broken somehow, because if the barriers to entry in this market were not so high, the profits wouldn't be quite so outrageous.
I wish ReadCube all the best. I would love to know why so many smart people are around to publish in journals, yet haven't yet figured out a way to break the power of the publishing cartels.
Just because governments occasionally do the wrong thing doesn't give Julian Assange a license to act like an entitled self-aggrandizing douchebag who can rape and commit treason without consequences.
You libertoons are hilarious. I suppose you'll be telling us how the charges are trumped up, and a plot by teh evil gubmint to stifle the freedom of speech of mentally ill, basement dwelling, Atlas Shrugged-reading little boys who barely have gotten their pubes, and know ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about how the real world works.
Julian Assange is a terrible individual with a narcissistic, attention-seeking personality. Only a truly cynical person would take advantage of the Bolivarian twits from Ecuador to try and beat rape charges. His arguments that running from a rape charge is somehow applaudable, because the Swedes might send him to the US to face justice for his other crimes is laughable -- Sweden, apart from Russia, is probably the last place on Earth who would extradite anybody to the US.
An absolute disgrace, aided and abetted by the media looking for a good story.
Flame away, fanboys. I'm looking forward to reading the broken basement-dweller logic in the replies.
I would've thought that blanket dismissal of any attempt of the people to act for the common good, is more of a libertarian value, rather than a conservative one.
Distain for government really only makes sense in the American context; most other Western countries accept the need for government (collective) action, regardless of whether people are on the Left or Right. The difference tends to be what they think should be regulated.
How is government action to stop some harmful or self-destructive behaviour (e.g. drink driving, smoking), different from other harmful behaviour (wasting lots of electricity)? I personally see no harm in nudging people towards doing the right thing and acting sensibly.
I think loaded language (snarl phrases), like 'nanny state' should be avoided. It's an appeal to emotion.
How is wasting electricity a conservative value? Opposing a light bulb ban just seems like opposition for opposition's sake, and some people seriously need to grow the fuck up.
I think it's got something to do with the fact that China's situation is mitigated by their ability to raise living standards.
Credit where it's due, the CCP have done an outstanding job of lifting hundreds of millions out of poverty (or have at least been a reasonably safe pair of hands in a process that would have happened anyway.)
Doesn't mean they don't give a tinker's damn about human rights, or fairness, or rule of law.
A lot of abusive regimes scrape by, by keeping the good times rolling, and by keeping peoples' stomachs full. When that stops -- look out.
Slashdot Mirror
So white kids and businessmen don't consider BlackBerry to be "cool".
You should see the shittier parts of London, where all the black gangsta types carry Blackberries. Not because of encrypted free BBM, but because it's "bidness, innit".
Don't think for a minute that you are the final arbiter of what is 'cool' out there, because as we should all know, one man's meat is another man's poison.
Very informative. I nearly forgot just how incredibly energy dense liquid fuels are.
http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2010-03/mobile-nuclear-reactors-could-provide-power-and-jet-fuel-military-darpa-says
... and you've got my money. Best game ever.
Any particular reason why they didn't support three-phase power supply?
Maximum current of 6.6kW seems a bit on the low side...
Given a big enough electricity supply and a plentiful supply of air and water for feedstock and cooling, this would be a great way to produce a bottomless petrol station.
Ideal for aircraft carriers, in other words.
Private Eye is awesome. There are very few publications that deliberately go looking for the shit quite like Ian Hislop and friends.
I've heard by word-of-mouth that they've got the biggest pile of cash to defend against libel lawsuits of any publisher in the UK.
Significant, given how slap-happy the rich cunts are in this country (and in much of Russia and the Middle East), and how fond they are of taking advantage of Britain's broken libel laws to attack their critics in court.
Does it come in brown?
Any Slashdotters know anything about manufacturing engineering, and would like to fill us in on why Apple can construct such a sophisticated thing as an iPhone 5, that still needs to be assembled largely by hand?
Surely a mass-marketed consumer device like that, they'd design for manufacturability, and/or design the tools required to assemble it efficiently?
Maybe, with (Chinese) labour costs being such an insignificant part of the sticker price, it's simply not worth the trouble?
Make it more popular (or less unpopular, as it were), by giving it a name change.
Call it 'RicerFS', and make everyone compile it from sources only (especially for Gentoo users).
Thank you, thank you. I'm here all week.
A good decision on its own merits, I think. His crimes were made out to be first degree murder by the US side, and he was going to go down for a LONG time for something that script kiddies do quite often.The guy obviously has something wrong with him, and he'd unlikely get a fair hearing in the States, where the favourite sport of the rich and powerful is to inflate claimed harm in court cases to crucify people they don't like (e.g. Kevin Mitnick causing a billion dollars damage and able to start nuclear war with a payphone).
That said, in context, it looks terrible. After what happened to Abu Hamza and friends, it says that if you're brown and Muslim, you're going to get thrown to the wolves. But if you're white, you're all right. I have zero sympathy for sub-human shit like Abu Hamza -- but the apparent double-standard is a very bad look.
Isn't it funny how whenever Muslims complain about something, the figure they keep quoting for the number of Muslims in the world keeps growing?
15 years ago, it was 850 million.
10 years ago, it was a billion.
Last year it was 1.2 billion.
Now it is 1.6 billion.
Are they liars, stupid -- or both?
They need a reality check. If those Wahhabi bastards think we're going to let them have anything of the kind, they are sadly, sadly mistaken.
This is a symptom of a far bigger problem -- the Saudis, with their oil money have been spreading their evil Wahhabi poison -- and the accompanying ignorance and fanaticism -- around the world for decades.
We need to kneecap them. Find ways to make oil worthless, and it'll crush the Saudi powers-that-be economically. Without money as a crutch to bribe/subjugate their people, they'll be swept away.
"Set America Free", while being a think-tank run by conservatives, have pretty much the right idea. Get off fossil fuel oil for transport, introduce fuel choice, develop alternatives, and then we can crush the Saudi oil despots and set the world free.
http://www.setamericafree.org/
This whole notion of a 'geek rapture' is not only incredibly, insultingly dumb, it doesn't stand up to any scientific scrutiny at all, as does any childish 12yo playground fantasy.
Bless you, Ray. At least you're trying to be 'original' and 'innovative', by throwing in a few new hip buzzwords so that the Forbes-reading crowd will think you're hip and cool.
Wow, that's some pretty topsy-turvy logic right there.
You surely must be a Fox Fan.
Academic publishing is obscenely, ridiculously profitable, because the scammers who publish the journals use sharp sales and marketing tactics, jack up prices for universities until the pips squeak, and yet happily accept free labour for editing journals, moderation, peer review, whatnot.
Academic journals enjoy net margins in excesss of 45%. That's extremely high. Clearly, the market is broken somehow, because if the barriers to entry in this market were not so high, the profits wouldn't be quite so outrageous.
I wish ReadCube all the best. I would love to know why so many smart people are around to publish in journals, yet haven't yet figured out a way to break the power of the publishing cartels.
Oh, the journal publishers are *hurting*. Because for the greedy c**ts, 45% margins simply aren't enough.
I hope Obama wins a second term, and takes aim at the academic publishing racket.
Nice going. Depending a rapist. "He's not a rapist, he's a libertarian just like MEEEEEE"
Just because governments occasionally do the wrong thing doesn't give Julian Assange a license to act like an entitled self-aggrandizing douchebag who can rape and commit treason without consequences.
You libertoons are hilarious. I suppose you'll be telling us how the charges are trumped up, and a plot by teh evil gubmint to stifle the freedom of speech of mentally ill, basement dwelling, Atlas Shrugged-reading little boys who barely have gotten their pubes, and know ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about how the real world works.
Julian Assange is a terrible individual with a narcissistic, attention-seeking personality. Only a truly cynical person would take advantage of the Bolivarian twits from Ecuador to try and beat rape charges. His arguments that running from a rape charge is somehow applaudable, because the Swedes might send him to the US to face justice for his other crimes is laughable -- Sweden, apart from Russia, is probably the last place on Earth who would extradite anybody to the US.
An absolute disgrace, aided and abetted by the media looking for a good story.
Flame away, fanboys. I'm looking forward to reading the broken basement-dweller logic in the replies.
I call right-wing partisan beatup.
Stupid talking point for dumb people, who don't realize that in real life, a crime can't be solve in 40 minutes, like on CSI: Miami.
Another piss weak right wing dummy spit.
The world does not exist purely for your profit, douchebag.
Until somebody gets around to launching a set of lunar comsats similar to the TDRS network around Earth.
I would've thought that blanket dismissal of any attempt of the people to act for the common good, is more of a libertarian value, rather than a conservative one.
Distain for government really only makes sense in the American context; most other Western countries accept the need for government (collective) action, regardless of whether people are on the Left or Right. The difference tends to be what they think should be regulated.
How is government action to stop some harmful or self-destructive behaviour (e.g. drink driving, smoking), different from other harmful behaviour (wasting lots of electricity)? I personally see no harm in nudging people towards doing the right thing and acting sensibly.
I think loaded language (snarl phrases), like 'nanny state' should be avoided. It's an appeal to emotion.
Republican supporters tell me this...
How is wasting electricity a conservative value? Opposing a light bulb ban just seems like opposition for opposition's sake, and some people seriously need to grow the fuck up.
I think it's got something to do with the fact that China's situation is mitigated by their ability to raise living standards.
Credit where it's due, the CCP have done an outstanding job of lifting hundreds of millions out of poverty (or have at least been a reasonably safe pair of hands in a process that would have happened anyway.)
Doesn't mean they don't give a tinker's damn about human rights, or fairness, or rule of law.
A lot of abusive regimes scrape by, by keeping the good times rolling, and by keeping peoples' stomachs full. When that stops -- look out.