Drove from the suburbs down south, not far from Orly, to work this morning, right downtown.
Guess what? Traffic was awful today. But it was also awful yesterday, and the day before, and the day before that. If it's not summer vacation, traffic in Paris is terrible. Every day.
At the time I'm reading this submission, it's tagged with "nothingofvaluewaslost". I can't fathom what this is supposed to mean. Lives in West Africa are worthless? Deaths in a developing country are meaningless because there's no economic impact? Am I missing some subtlety or other message here?
Isn't there something completely wrong about this sentence? Aside from the bad grammar, I mean...
"Hydrogen gas, under enormous pressure, is used to drive a generator, which then charged a lithium-ion battery."
Or are they using the word "generator" where they actually mean "fuel cell"? And should we be surprised that "most proposed hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are actually combined hydrogen-electric designs"? I'm not seeing many internal combustion hydrogen designs hitting the market.
Surely there was a better article to link to than this? Even the guardian article on the Mirai is more informative for a Slashdot crowd.
Proportional means that someone who steals a car should get a proportionally more lenient sentence than someone who commits murder, but there must be a limit. Depending on jurisdiction, that limit is death or life in prison.
If you start taking proportional punishment too literally then we'll be setting up torture chambers instead of execution chambers, and intentionally keeping felons alive as they writhe in pain for days on end. If that's what you want, then that's your right. I'm personally glad society is moving away from that, not toward it.
The punishment should be proportional to the crime, but does not need to mirror it. An eye for an eye is a bit outdated, no? If capital punishment is to be used, it should be done in a way that is neither cruel nor unusual - that's the law, until a jurisdiction collectively decides otherwise.
Breaking our laws to punish those who broke our laws: this may be widespread and socially acceptable to some people, but that doesn't make it right. If you want someone to be tortured to death, then seek a change in the law.
I agree with the spirit of your comment. I've bought plenty of Humble Bundle games, and have no issue with making in-game purchases available if it has no effect on gameplay.
However I take issue with labeling a subsection of microtransactions unethical. It may be annoying, and insulting, and even borderline illegal as regards false advertising, but there's nothing inherently or fundamentally wrong from a philosophical standpoint about charging extra for gameplay elements.
Now that doesn't mean that such publishers shouldn't go fuck themselves seven ways from Sunday, but that's another issue altogether.
The use of helicams is not really new for television. I know that Survivor (a guilty pleasure, flame on) has been using them for years to get sweeping overhead shots that you may believe are from a helicopter. Also, most of the Korean shows that I watch that have outdoor scenes make extensive - perhaps to the point of overdoing it - use of these things.
I agree they're a great way to get impressive footage for relatively low cost, and it makes sense to use them for sport. Just thought I'd point out this is nowhere near revolutionary - just an opportunity to use "drone" and "Sochi" in the same story.
Objectively, you're right. Of course you're right. But honestly, so what?
I'm getting really tired of this line of argument. It was all over social media last year, people accusing each other of caring more about Miley Cyrus than the war in Syria. But why can't we "care" about both? I mean, not Miley Cyrus perhaps... But my morning commute, for example. I care far more about how much awful traffic I had to endure this morning than I do about the war in Syria. It's just that much more relevant to my daily life. But I can still read about the war in Syria while I'm the bus, because I'm interested. I can actually care about both.
Syria is important. Dolphins are important. The price of cherry tomatoes is important - my wife eats too many of them. It's all important, but it's also undeniably relative.
Clearly dumb, entitled, arrogant, whatever. But why do you have to use the word bitch or twat? Using an insult that is specific to her gender suggests that part of her behaviour is defined by that gender.
So many of us claim that we're not sexist, and feminism has done its work, but we still don't realize that the way we use language degrades women in ways that it simply doesn't if we were talking about a man. And no, "asshole" is not a gendered insult. We've all got one.
Tracking numbers are provided with every single purchase these days, and I can say with great confidence that every Apple product I've ever bought online (One iPod, two iPhones, a Macbook, and a monitor) originated in China before being shipped by air.
Maybe I'm the exception, but my experience is more closely aligned with the example of the parent poster.
I'm not necessarily going to disagree with you, but do you think perhaps that the age you were when those movies came out coloured your opinion? I went back and watched Robocop recently, and sure it's great fun, and relatively clever satire, but I don't see how it's heads about Starship Troopers. All of these movies are fun (and gory) action movies, not particularly well acted, and feature some kind of pretty blatant social commentary.
Maybe the social commentary is just too damn obvious the older we get?
The reason is that a number of YouTubers are starting to actually make a career out of making videos. I consume the majority of my shows on YouTube now, rather than TV or traditional media. Many channels have multiple updates per week.
Am I willing to sit through 30 seconds of advertising (or more likely 5 seconds before being allowed to skip) in order to get such content, and promote independent videographers? Yes. I am.
I'm going to go ahead and assume that you're a man, because physical violence is generally the way that boys "tease" each other. Girls are entirely different, and your suggestion that word calling is harmless discounts the real pain that so many of them go through.
That distinction aside, I just can't agree that a punch in the face hurts more than being completely socially ostracized. Being unable to participate at all in any of the fun things that go on in your social circles, because you're seen as strange and different? There's teasing, and then there's having your social world dismantled. Also, let's not forget that this online world didn't exist when many of us were kids, and it's far, far less forgiving than the playground.
The feeling of having no friends at 12 years old feels like the end of the world. I also got punched and shoved around a bunch of times. I also got called gay, and nerd, and all the things that a lot of slashdotters will understand. I quickly got over the physical blows, but the feeling of being an outsider persisted for a very, very long time.
The summary is wrong in suggesting that the "still frame" showing Rob Ford hanging out with (alleged) drug dealers is from the video. It is in fact a photo given to Gawker to lend credence to their claim that the video is real, but from all accounts it was taken at a different time.
More generally: many people think this is a hilarious story, but as a Canadian I'm sick of it. This isn't the first time Rob Ford has done something to insult the people of Toronto and bring shame to the municipal government, it's just the most heinous thing he's done. It's been a week since we learned about the video, a week! A week and he still hasn't confirmed or denied it. That's pathetic. It's bringing attention to Toronto that the city doesn't need or want. Hockey riots in Vancouver, organized crime and corruption rampant in Montreal, and a crackhead mayor in Toronto? So much for Canada's reputation. The whole situation makes me angry.
A lot of what you say is completely valid. However this: "Medicine is sold at drug stores" is a huge assumption. If you define medicine as something that's accepted by government authorities as a substance with medicinal value, then fine. But if you define medicine as a substance that objectively helps to cure or treat the symptoms of a medical condition, then I don't agree. In that case, medicine also grows in the forest, and is defined differently depending on jurisdiction, culture, and a host of other factors.
I say this not as a burnout hippie, but rather as someone who was raised by a physician and has faith in western medicine (and a fair amount of scorn for homeopathy and the like). However one other thing my father taught me was to have an open mind, and not to speak in absolutes.
Just in case anyone didn't know how it all ends, they were kind enough to put the climax directly in the trailer. I'll withhold judgement on the film itself, but that trailer didn't do it for me.
Reading the summary made me roll my eyes, but after checking out the review I admit I'm intrigued. The docking port with controller handles could turn this into a very fun and powerful, large-screen version of a GBA/PSP/etc. I can imagine dozens of indie Steam titles that would play really well on this kind of machine - Super Meat Boy for example.
Now I'm not going to buy one, considering the price tag, but I'm surprising myself by not wanting to mock the concept.
I respect Randi and the work that he does, but I'm sadly disappointed with this interview. I was really hoping for more involved answers here; there's barely anything resembling a thought-provoking response among the bunch. Perhaps I was spoiled by the recent Dr. Bakkar Q&A.
Mildly annoying, only appears on dark greys in specific circumstances, and fades after 10-20 seconds. From my perspective, it's really nothing to get worked up about.
Slashdot Mirror
Drove from the suburbs down south, not far from Orly, to work this morning, right downtown.
Guess what? Traffic was awful today. But it was also awful yesterday, and the day before, and the day before that. If it's not summer vacation, traffic in Paris is terrible. Every day.
Worst protest concept ever.
At the time I'm reading this submission, it's tagged with "nothingofvaluewaslost". I can't fathom what this is supposed to mean. Lives in West Africa are worthless? Deaths in a developing country are meaningless because there's no economic impact? Am I missing some subtlety or other message here?
What a cynical, awful tag.
Isn't there something completely wrong about this sentence? Aside from the bad grammar, I mean...
"Hydrogen gas, under enormous pressure, is used to drive a generator, which then charged a lithium-ion battery."
Or are they using the word "generator" where they actually mean "fuel cell"? And should we be surprised that "most proposed hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are actually combined hydrogen-electric designs"? I'm not seeing many internal combustion hydrogen designs hitting the market.
Surely there was a better article to link to than this? Even the guardian article on the Mirai is more informative for a Slashdot crowd.
"... their attempt, 12 years ago, to save 900 hostages held in a theater by Chechen fighters."
In fact, 130 of those hostages died due to the gas. Is that a victory? Is that considered an effective tactic?
This is the kind of response that makes me wish it was possible to mod higher than 5. Written with passion and insight. Loved it.
Proportional means that someone who steals a car should get a proportionally more lenient sentence than someone who commits murder, but there must be a limit. Depending on jurisdiction, that limit is death or life in prison.
If you start taking proportional punishment too literally then we'll be setting up torture chambers instead of execution chambers, and intentionally keeping felons alive as they writhe in pain for days on end. If that's what you want, then that's your right. I'm personally glad society is moving away from that, not toward it.
The news has a whole lot to do with the method of execution and the combination of drugs they gave him. There's a lot of science there.
Whether or not we decide to discuss that is up to us.
The punishment should be proportional to the crime, but does not need to mirror it. An eye for an eye is a bit outdated, no? If capital punishment is to be used, it should be done in a way that is neither cruel nor unusual - that's the law, until a jurisdiction collectively decides otherwise.
Breaking our laws to punish those who broke our laws: this may be widespread and socially acceptable to some people, but that doesn't make it right. If you want someone to be tortured to death, then seek a change in the law.
I agree with the spirit of your comment. I've bought plenty of Humble Bundle games, and have no issue with making in-game purchases available if it has no effect on gameplay.
However I take issue with labeling a subsection of microtransactions unethical. It may be annoying, and insulting, and even borderline illegal as regards false advertising, but there's nothing inherently or fundamentally wrong from a philosophical standpoint about charging extra for gameplay elements.
Now that doesn't mean that such publishers shouldn't go fuck themselves seven ways from Sunday, but that's another issue altogether.
The use of helicams is not really new for television. I know that Survivor (a guilty pleasure, flame on) has been using them for years to get sweeping overhead shots that you may believe are from a helicopter. Also, most of the Korean shows that I watch that have outdoor scenes make extensive - perhaps to the point of overdoing it - use of these things.
I agree they're a great way to get impressive footage for relatively low cost, and it makes sense to use them for sport. Just thought I'd point out this is nowhere near revolutionary - just an opportunity to use "drone" and "Sochi" in the same story.
Never mind that Candy Crush is itself a rip-off of Bejeweled and countless other identical games that came before it. The whole thing just reeks.
Objectively, you're right. Of course you're right. But honestly, so what?
I'm getting really tired of this line of argument. It was all over social media last year, people accusing each other of caring more about Miley Cyrus than the war in Syria. But why can't we "care" about both? I mean, not Miley Cyrus perhaps... But my morning commute, for example. I care far more about how much awful traffic I had to endure this morning than I do about the war in Syria. It's just that much more relevant to my daily life. But I can still read about the war in Syria while I'm the bus, because I'm interested. I can actually care about both.
Syria is important. Dolphins are important. The price of cherry tomatoes is important - my wife eats too many of them. It's all important, but it's also undeniably relative.
Clearly dumb, entitled, arrogant, whatever. But why do you have to use the word bitch or twat? Using an insult that is specific to her gender suggests that part of her behaviour is defined by that gender.
So many of us claim that we're not sexist, and feminism has done its work, but we still don't realize that the way we use language degrades women in ways that it simply doesn't if we were talking about a man. And no, "asshole" is not a gendered insult. We've all got one.
Tracking numbers are provided with every single purchase these days, and I can say with great confidence that every Apple product I've ever bought online (One iPod, two iPhones, a Macbook, and a monitor) originated in China before being shipped by air.
Maybe I'm the exception, but my experience is more closely aligned with the example of the parent poster.
"robocop - brilliant
total recall - awesome
but starship troopers is fucking garbage."
Robocop - 1987
Total Recall - 1990
Starship Troopers - 1997
I'm not necessarily going to disagree with you, but do you think perhaps that the age you were when those movies came out coloured your opinion? I went back and watched Robocop recently, and sure it's great fun, and relatively clever satire, but I don't see how it's heads about Starship Troopers. All of these movies are fun (and gory) action movies, not particularly well acted, and feature some kind of pretty blatant social commentary.
Maybe the social commentary is just too damn obvious the older we get?
The reason is that a number of YouTubers are starting to actually make a career out of making videos. I consume the majority of my shows on YouTube now, rather than TV or traditional media. Many channels have multiple updates per week.
Am I willing to sit through 30 seconds of advertising (or more likely 5 seconds before being allowed to skip) in order to get such content, and promote independent videographers? Yes. I am.
Shows worth watching:
- Veritasium, 2
- SciShow
- VSauce, 2, 3
- Nerd3
- MinutePhysics
- Numberphile, Computerphile, Sixty Symbols, etc
I'm going to go ahead and assume that you're a man, because physical violence is generally the way that boys "tease" each other. Girls are entirely different, and your suggestion that word calling is harmless discounts the real pain that so many of them go through.
That distinction aside, I just can't agree that a punch in the face hurts more than being completely socially ostracized. Being unable to participate at all in any of the fun things that go on in your social circles, because you're seen as strange and different? There's teasing, and then there's having your social world dismantled. Also, let's not forget that this online world didn't exist when many of us were kids, and it's far, far less forgiving than the playground.
The feeling of having no friends at 12 years old feels like the end of the world. I also got punched and shoved around a bunch of times. I also got called gay, and nerd, and all the things that a lot of slashdotters will understand. I quickly got over the physical blows, but the feeling of being an outsider persisted for a very, very long time.
The summary is wrong in suggesting that the "still frame" showing Rob Ford hanging out with (alleged) drug dealers is from the video. It is in fact a photo given to Gawker to lend credence to their claim that the video is real, but from all accounts it was taken at a different time.
More generally: many people think this is a hilarious story, but as a Canadian I'm sick of it. This isn't the first time Rob Ford has done something to insult the people of Toronto and bring shame to the municipal government, it's just the most heinous thing he's done. It's been a week since we learned about the video, a week! A week and he still hasn't confirmed or denied it. That's pathetic. It's bringing attention to Toronto that the city doesn't need or want. Hockey riots in Vancouver, organized crime and corruption rampant in Montreal, and a crackhead mayor in Toronto? So much for Canada's reputation. The whole situation makes me angry.
A lot of what you say is completely valid. However this: "Medicine is sold at drug stores" is a huge assumption. If you define medicine as something that's accepted by government authorities as a substance with medicinal value, then fine. But if you define medicine as a substance that objectively helps to cure or treat the symptoms of a medical condition, then I don't agree. In that case, medicine also grows in the forest, and is defined differently depending on jurisdiction, culture, and a host of other factors.
I say this not as a burnout hippie, but rather as someone who was raised by a physician and has faith in western medicine (and a fair amount of scorn for homeopathy and the like). However one other thing my father taught me was to have an open mind, and not to speak in absolutes.
Just in case anyone didn't know how it all ends, they were kind enough to put the climax directly in the trailer. I'll withhold judgement on the film itself, but that trailer didn't do it for me.
And it just keeps getting stranger by the day. I have nobody to blame but myself.
Reading the summary made me roll my eyes, but after checking out the review I admit I'm intrigued. The docking port with controller handles could turn this into a very fun and powerful, large-screen version of a GBA/PSP/etc. I can imagine dozens of indie Steam titles that would play really well on this kind of machine - Super Meat Boy for example.
Now I'm not going to buy one, considering the price tag, but I'm surprising myself by not wanting to mock the concept.
I respect Randi and the work that he does, but I'm sadly disappointed with this interview. I was really hoping for more involved answers here; there's barely anything resembling a thought-provoking response among the bunch. Perhaps I was spoiled by the recent Dr. Bakkar Q&A.
"Golf Channel has taken the wraps of a new camera drone"
And camera drone wants its wraps back!
Mildly annoying, only appears on dark greys in specific circumstances, and fades after 10-20 seconds. From my perspective, it's really nothing to get worked up about.