Slashdot Mirror


User: galabar

galabar's activity in the archive.

Stories
0
Comments
231
First seen
Last seen
Profile
(view on slashdot.org)

Comments · 231

  1. Re:As a technopreneur ... on Study Shows Tech Execs Slightly Prefer Romney Over Obama · · Score: 1

    I think he means that he "has not yet begun to fight!"

  2. Re:Largely Demand Driven on Toyota Abandons Plans For All-Electric Vehicle Rollout · · Score: 1

    Sorry, but I'm not going to swap my new, $10,000 battery for something from the local Sip 'N Go. Now, if batteries were as cheap as propane tanks, then this might be a good idea. However, by that time, battery efficiency and charging technology will be such that swapping won't be necessary. Electric cars will take off when battery technology improves (and becomes cheaper).

  3. Re:But it's not the google experience on Amazon Debuts Kindle Paperwhite, Kindle Fire HD In 2 Sizes · · Score: 1

    When I first purchase my Kindle Fire, I thought the same thing. However, I found that I enjoyed reading the Kindle Fire better than my Kindle (2 with keyboard). The back-light and touch screen were great for reading while in bed (for my Kindle, I used a cover with a built in light, which was not great). My daughter (now 10) felt the same way.

  4. Re:Interesting graph on school expenditure by coun on Khan Academy: the Teachers Strike Back · · Score: 2
  5. Re:So what does this mean, now? on Judge Rules API's Can Not Be Copyrighted · · Score: 1

    Long live Guava (with reified generics -- finally)!

  6. Re:Ethanol on Alternative-Fuel Vehicle Recommendations? · · Score: 1

    I'll ask that shortly after I ask "what happened to all the water-wheel mill operators?", "where did all the ice house workers go?", or "why isn't there a parking spot for my horse in front of that Saloon?" I know, maybe we should refocus our efforts on saving the family computer chip manufacturer.

    We need to face the facts that certain practices become obsolete. The family farmer is an obsolete premise -- and only used by agrobusiness to extort more cash from government.

    What I find interesting is that your comment is completely void of any point -- do you think farmers should be getting this money, or are you only perturbed by someone assuming that farming is cheap and can be done with a $250,000 government subsidy?