Besides, why the heck do you allow animals if you aren't willing to put up with the results of your decision?
The owners are expected not to allow dog poop to remain where it's dropped. They're the ones failing in their responsbility. Unless the managers are DNA matching dogs to poop for their own amusement (we've all done it), I assume they're doing so in order to take action against the owners and force them to live up to their responsbilities as pet owners. That's hardly "putting up with it."
Take the current top story in the World section on BBC News:
Thai Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra has rejected protesters' demands that she step down, amid ongoing clashes in Bangkok.
Surely anyone even remotely interested in reading about that would already know who Yingluck Sinawatra is, right?
Here's another one from Technology:
Amazon, the world's largest online retailer, is testing unmanned drones to deliver goods to customers, Chief Executive Jeff Bezos says.
I'd argue that far more people reading the BBC website will know what Amazon and Jeff Bezos are, than Slashdot readers would know what Jolla and Sailfish are.
It's not dumbing down; it's for not pissing off the readers who need that little bit of extra information.
Judging the moderation of and number of comments on my original comment, this is obviously a topic that riles people up one way or the other. With just a few extra words peppered here and there that no-one better informed would have even noticed, this summary could probably have been a lot clearer to a lot of people.
There are no monotheistic religions. Christians believe in God
who is a god
Jesus, Satan, angels, saints, prophets, etc.
who are not gods. Hmm.
But okay, let's say you're right and everyone else in the world is wrong about monotheism. All you've done is show that three religions aren't monotheistic (in your terms). What about Eckankar? Rastafari? Tenriyko? Zoroastrianism? The Baha'i Faith?
Did you bother to look into those or did you just want to take a cheap shot at the Big Three?
Both of those articles - now that I've gone back and found them, I don't recall seeing them in the RSS feed - neatly and succinctly explain what Jolla and Sailfish are.
It's not like you could search it or Google on a separate browser tab, anyway, right?
It's not like I should have to, if Slashdot wants to be a news site which informs its readership. Call me lazy if you wish, but I prefer to be less mystified after reading the news.
"I would love an explanation, apology, clarification," Starr wrote on Facebook,
What more explanation do you need? Why do you believe you're owed an apology? What needs to be clarified?
"and if the staff member was in the wrong and lost the owner money last night and also future income as well, that this income be deducted from her pay or her termination."
Who the hell is this guy to think he knows best as to how the owner should handle their staff? I hope the staff member gets a bonus and a promotion for puncturing this self-inflated cock-womble's ego.
Talouselämä Magazine met Jolla CEO Tomi Pienimäki and asked a puzzling question. If Jolla truly is compatible with Android devices, is Jolla going to let individual users to install the Sailfish operating system on the Android devices that they already have?
That certainly is a puzzling question if you have absolutely no idea what Jolla and Sailfish are.
Go ahead, rant and rave all you want and ask me how I dare to read Slashdot if I don't know what they are already, but would it kill you just to give a hint of what Jolla and Sailfish are? At least then I'd have some idea whether the article might fall within my interest without having to research it. That is what a summary is meant to be for, isn't it?
And it can be done so easily without looking like you've dumbed it down - they do it all the time proper news sites.
A search for overly broad keywords such as "CNO" and "computer network attack" would be tantamount to conducting a manual search through thousands of folders and then reading each document in order to determine whether the document pertains to a contract.
Going from that to "ZOMG! NSA has contracts only on paperz!" seems a bit of a stretch.
Disabled Woman Denied Entrance To US Due To Private Medical Records
While it wouldn't necessarily be a surprise to find out that her physical disability (paraplegia) might have had some affect on her mental wellbeing over the years, is it not just a little bit disingenuous to make it the first word of the headline, implying that it was her physical disability rather than her mental illness that caused the issue at the border?
You wouldn't write the headline "Black man arrested for insider trading" would you?
Slashdot Mirror
Such mercurial joviality mars this saturnine thread. Something about venereal disease...
a manufacturer actually doing whatever they can to mitigate the bad publicity that goes along with the revelation of a critical security flaw
FTFY.
Interestingly, iOS users accounted for 18.1% of online sales, while Android users accounted for just 3.5%.
Must be that new meaning of "interestingly" I've been hearing about.
How is this better than a huge-ass monitor?
Obviously there are some operations - especially in the US - where only a huge ass-monitor will do.
Besides, why the heck do you allow animals if you aren't willing to put up with the results of your decision?
The owners are expected not to allow dog poop to remain where it's dropped. They're the ones failing in their responsbility. Unless the managers are DNA matching dogs to poop for their own amusement (we've all done it), I assume they're doing so in order to take action against the owners and force them to live up to their responsbilities as pet owners. That's hardly "putting up with it."
So drive a truck full of octocopters to an area, send them off, ten minutes later they're all back.
You hope.
I agree. Trebuchet development has been woefully stagnant for the past 500 years and this could be the killer app that'll give it the push it needs!
It's a simple question of weight ratios. A one kilogram octocoptor could not carry a three kilogram PS4.
Why not?
Hush!
Take the current top story in the World section on BBC News:
Thai Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra has rejected protesters' demands that she step down, amid ongoing clashes in Bangkok.
Surely anyone even remotely interested in reading about that would already know who Yingluck Sinawatra is, right?
Here's another one from Technology:
Amazon, the world's largest online retailer, is testing unmanned drones to deliver goods to customers, Chief Executive Jeff Bezos says.
I'd argue that far more people reading the BBC website will know what Amazon and Jeff Bezos are, than Slashdot readers would know what Jolla and Sailfish are.
It's not dumbing down; it's for not pissing off the readers who need that little bit of extra information.
Judging the moderation of and number of comments on my original comment, this is obviously a topic that riles people up one way or the other. With just a few extra words peppered here and there that no-one better informed would have even noticed, this summary could probably have been a lot clearer to a lot of people.
Maybe the editor has a slightly higher reading comprehension level?
It's a very poor editor who assumes everyone knows what he knows.
God's sarcastic tone doesn't come across in the written text.
There are no monotheistic religions. Christians believe in God
who is a god
Jesus, Satan, angels, saints, prophets, etc.
who are not gods. Hmm.
But okay, let's say you're right and everyone else in the world is wrong about monotheism. All you've done is show that three religions aren't monotheistic (in your terms). What about Eckankar? Rastafari? Tenriyko? Zoroastrianism? The Baha'i Faith?
Did you bother to look into those or did you just want to take a cheap shot at the Big Three?
C:\>ping www.healthcare.gov
Pinging bh.georedirector.akadns.net [127.0.0.1] with 32 bytes of data:
Both of those articles - now that I've gone back and found them, I don't recall seeing them in the RSS feed - neatly and succinctly explain what Jolla and Sailfish are.
It's not like you could search it or Google on a separate browser tab, anyway, right?
It's not like I should have to, if Slashdot wants to be a news site which informs its readership. Call me lazy if you wish, but I prefer to be less mystified after reading the news.
"I would love an explanation, apology, clarification," Starr wrote on Facebook,
What more explanation do you need? Why do you believe you're owed an apology? What needs to be clarified?
"and if the staff member was in the wrong and lost the owner money last night and also future income as well, that this income be deducted from her pay or her termination."
Who the hell is this guy to think he knows best as to how the owner should handle their staff? I hope the staff member gets a bonus and a promotion for puncturing this self-inflated cock-womble's ego.
What a git.
Talouselämä Magazine met Jolla CEO Tomi Pienimäki and asked a puzzling question. If Jolla truly is compatible with Android devices, is Jolla going to let individual users to install the Sailfish operating system on the Android devices that they already have?
That certainly is a puzzling question if you have absolutely no idea what Jolla and Sailfish are.
Go ahead, rant and rave all you want and ask me how I dare to read Slashdot if I don't know what they are already, but would it kill you just to give a hint of what Jolla and Sailfish are? At least then I'd have some idea whether the article might fall within my interest without having to research it. That is what a summary is meant to be for, isn't it?
And it can be done so easily without looking like you've dumbed it down - they do it all the time proper news sites.
Sounds like you've taken a little too much LDS.
A search for overly broad keywords such as "CNO" and "computer network attack" would be tantamount to conducting a manual search through thousands of folders and then reading each document in order to determine whether the document pertains to a contract.
Going from that to "ZOMG! NSA has contracts only on paperz!" seems a bit of a stretch.
http://search.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4497283&cid=45550699
What, her legs stopped working because she was sad?
It's not the one referred to in the headline.
Disabled Woman Denied Entrance To US Due To Private Medical Records
While it wouldn't necessarily be a surprise to find out that her physical disability (paraplegia) might have had some affect on her mental wellbeing over the years, is it not just a little bit disingenuous to make it the first word of the headline, implying that it was her physical disability rather than her mental illness that caused the issue at the border?
You wouldn't write the headline "Black man arrested for insider trading" would you?
Ah, someone spotted my deliberate mistake. Good to know you're paying attention.
Or you've somehow misread my posts and inferred my viewing habits despite me not saying anything about it - I'm not the AC.
As it happens, I do have better than 20:20 with my contacts in.