This isn't a library, it's a glorified Internet cafe. We've had them for years, most of them shut down. People generally have computers at home, they don't have thousands of books.
Every heard of Buffy the Vampire Slayer? Go and watch that and you'll be sending poison letters to Joss Whedon. Apparently Firefly has the same awful style of characters and dialogue. The target audience is teenage girls.
It's funny how Slashdot bemoans corporations not doing research into science and technology, then turns round and complains when a company invents something and patents it. Apparently companies should spend billions inventing technologies just to give them away.
You're joking right? FPS have the most convoluted controls in the world. Three hundred keys, seven button mouse, eight thousand different things to do. They're the antithesis of playability. And the elitist pricks that play them whine about playing them on a console because the controller only has a dozen buttons.
I don't think people who play FPS actually like games, they just like configuring and memorising buttons.
When Google take a common service and release a half-baked beta version with a few interface changes, it's an amazing, earth-shattering innovation.
When Microsoft take a common service and release a half-baked beta version with a few interface changes, it's a terrible, broken rip-off proving that Microsoft can't innovate just steal.
How is it cool that hard working people struggling to make ends meet were taxed billions of pounds, just so a few very very rich businessmen could get to New York a bit quicker?
Sometimes you have to look beyond simply making a profit.
Not when it's tax-payer's money being used to fund luxuries for the elite. You're probably American so it wasn't your taxes spent. I bet you'd be pissed off if money was taken from your pay cheque so that Bill Gates or Donald Trump could get around faster.
To the point that you'd pay a significant surcharge to already be at your destination, asleep in your hotel room
Well, clearly not that many people were willing to pay the surcharge, otherwise the Concorde would have been full. As someone's already said, the people who fly regularly across the Atlantic/Pacific are not the people willing to drop tens of thousands of pounds on a ticket.
Problem with that is you have to plan it in advance. You have to spend ages downloading, moving things across etc. And if you change your mind about what to listen to, you're stuck. With a radio you just turn it on, and that's that. If you want to listen to something else you just change the channel. And unlike 'podcasts', radio doesn't run out.
Linux and Macs aren't usable for the majority? That's odd because every other comment on this site is people saying that Linux is 'ready for the desktop', some even saying that it's MORE user-friendly than Windows.
Windows doesn't have a strong grip on operating systems, in fact everyone who uses Microsoft software could convert to alternatives tomorrow, erasing the supposed monopoly overnight. If it were a true monopoly, it would be hard or even impossible to switch to alternatives.
Windows is a monopoly? Funny then, this Linux thing I'm using now must just be an illusion. There is more competition for Microsoft on PCs than there is for Apple on Macs, but no-one complains when Apple clamps down on people trying to run OSX on x86. Maybe that's a monopolistic tactic.
An alternative operating system to Windows is as simple as buying a Mac or installing Linux.
You're joking right? A five-mile taxi trip costs about £10. If you travel twenty miles to work and back every day, that's £400 a week. Somehow I don't think that owning a car costs that much.
There's nothing wasteful about owning your own car, unless you think that creating jobs is a waste. Not to mention the millions of problems with using rented cars rather than your own:
- Taxis are all exactly the same, whereas a private cars can be chosen to suit your purpose. - You can't keep anything in them. - You can't go on long journeys. - They're never there exactly when you need them. Have fun waiting after work for a taxi, bearing in mind everyone else in the country is also ordering a taxi. - You can't leave them around where you need them, they go back to be used by someone else. - They'll be cheap and not very comfortable, no opportunity to buy a more expensive model. - Where would all the taxis go when not being used? Bear in mind there'd probably need to be nearly as many taxis as there are private cars, where do they all sit at 3am?
Wrong. This is about protecting us from OTHER PEOPLE. Road accidents wouldn't be a big deal if only the driver was ever killed/injured in an accident. The fact is, most people can't drive and are a danger to everyone else.
I for one would rather have a computer drive for me. I don't really like driving, I never feel like I'm in total control or that I know what's going on, especially on motorways. Changing lanes at 80mph and I always feel like I'm either about to steer into someone or into the barrier. Driving just isn't safe.
And if there were computers driving then I could drink a lot more and still use the car.
I didn't really follow the rest of your post as it was confusing.
Either that or cars are just unsafe, they often crash themselves. Whatever you do, never get a Cleo, it's a death-trap, you can't go round a corner at more than 5mph without it steering itself off the road.
Re:Slow people cause Frustration if they don't yei
on
The Future of the Car
·
· Score: 1
So you're saying that people should drive faster than they want to just because you don't know how to takeover? Slow people don't cause accidents, fast impatient people cause accidents.
People have no patience these days, unless you're going 20 over the limit you have cars right up your arse, even on narrow bendy roads in the rain where even the speed limit is unsafe. All the arguments about accidents/safe speeds aside, people just like driving as fast as they can get away with, and expect everyone else to cooperate with them.
I don't get the appeal of American football, it seems to represent the worst of how Americans do sport.
Endless hype, adverts, cheerleaders, fireworks, half-time shows, adverts, patronising commentators, adverts, even more adverts. All sorts of crap that sport doesn't need, it's liked it's deliberately dumbed down in every possible way. Treating the spectator like an idiot with a short attention span who has to be constantly entertained or advertised to.
Over here in Britain, football's a lot different (And I don't mean the actual sport). Teams are called clubs, they have large local followings, ninety-two teams in the league, even the small teams from tiny towns get good support. In America, they're not clubs, they're franchises. Businesses designed to sell adverts. There's no loyalty because the teams move around to where they can make more money.
There's no league structure with dozens of teams, and hundreds more below them, just a few big marketable franchises, nothing below it, no relegation or promotion.
We have cup competitions where even small amateur teams can be drawn against the best in the world. In America, there are no small teams, just a few big teams never playing anyone else. No chance of small clubs becoming big because the NFL is a closed system. Over here, small amateur clubs can rise right to the top.
We have loud passionate fans, you have fat bastards sitting there in a semi-comatose state. No singing, no banter, but fast food and giant cups of coke.
We have international games, where the whole country can get behind a single team. You don't have that.
We have sports that can be played by people of any body type, you have 400 pound steroid-fueled freaks of nature.
This isn't just NFL, it's a lot of American sports in general. I don't know why it's like that, it's completely soulless, any last ounce of interest sucked out by marketing executives. American football might be an interesting sport, but I wouldn't know because I can't look past all the crap that comes with it.
Non-stop action, except when they're just in a pile in the middle of the pitch doing nothing, or spending twenty minutes preparing for a lineout or penalty.
And how about Basketball? Not enough action for you? A couple points every 30 seconds seems pretty good to me
And it happens so often it's completely meaningless.
Slashdot Mirror
Why would we take advice on books from someone who doesn't like reading? That would be like taking advice on cooking utensils from Ally McBeal.
If you find 500 page books ugly and heavy, I can only conclude that:
1. You have a muscle-wasting disease.
2. You're Fred Flinstone.
This isn't a library, it's a glorified Internet cafe. We've had them for years, most of them shut down. People generally have computers at home, they don't have thousands of books.
Every heard of Buffy the Vampire Slayer? Go and watch that and you'll be sending poison letters to Joss Whedon. Apparently Firefly has the same awful style of characters and dialogue. The target audience is teenage girls.
I think it's more likely because Buffy/Angel 'fan girls' are more often than not morbidly obese.
It's funny how Slashdot bemoans corporations not doing research into science and technology, then turns round and complains when a company invents something and patents it. Apparently companies should spend billions inventing technologies just to give them away.
Well, you have to question how well thought-out a game is if you need a massive resolution and need to aim the weapons manually.
You're joking right? FPS have the most convoluted controls in the world. Three hundred keys, seven button mouse, eight thousand different things to do. They're the antithesis of playability. And the elitist pricks that play them whine about playing them on a console because the controller only has a dozen buttons.
I don't think people who play FPS actually like games, they just like configuring and memorising buttons.
It's a sorry day when the most unoriginal, trite, predictable, unfunny comment is not only first post, but modded up to +5.
Why can't people think before posting?
You're saying no-one cares?
Don't forget:
When Google take a common service and release a half-baked beta version with a few interface changes, it's an amazing, earth-shattering innovation.
When Microsoft take a common service and release a half-baked beta version with a few interface changes, it's a terrible, broken rip-off proving that Microsoft can't innovate just steal.
And besides, it's cool.
How is it cool that hard working people struggling to make ends meet were taxed billions of pounds, just so a few very very rich businessmen could get to New York a bit quicker?
Sometimes you have to look beyond simply making a profit.
Not when it's tax-payer's money being used to fund luxuries for the elite. You're probably American so it wasn't your taxes spent. I bet you'd be pissed off if money was taken from your pay cheque so that Bill Gates or Donald Trump could get around faster.
To the point that you'd pay a significant surcharge to already be at your destination, asleep in your hotel room
Well, clearly not that many people were willing to pay the surcharge, otherwise the Concorde would have been full. As someone's already said, the people who fly regularly across the Atlantic/Pacific are not the people willing to drop tens of thousands of pounds on a ticket.
What the hell is salted MD5 hashes? I sort of understand what hashes are, but salted?
Seems like the system's working: they're both exactly the same.
Problem with that is you have to plan it in advance. You have to spend ages downloading, moving things across etc. And if you change your mind about what to listen to, you're stuck. With a radio you just turn it on, and that's that. If you want to listen to something else you just change the channel. And unlike 'podcasts', radio doesn't run out.
And good luck getting news/sport etc.
Linux and Macs aren't usable for the majority? That's odd because every other comment on this site is people saying that Linux is 'ready for the desktop', some even saying that it's MORE user-friendly than Windows.
Windows doesn't have a strong grip on operating systems, in fact everyone who uses Microsoft software could convert to alternatives tomorrow, erasing the supposed monopoly overnight. If it were a true monopoly, it would be hard or even impossible to switch to alternatives.
Windows is a monopoly? Funny then, this Linux thing I'm using now must just be an illusion. There is more competition for Microsoft on PCs than there is for Apple on Macs, but no-one complains when Apple clamps down on people trying to run OSX on x86. Maybe that's a monopolistic tactic.
An alternative operating system to Windows is as simple as buying a Mac or installing Linux.
You're joking right? A five-mile taxi trip costs about £10. If you travel twenty miles to work and back every day, that's £400 a week. Somehow I don't think that owning a car costs that much.
There's nothing wasteful about owning your own car, unless you think that creating jobs is a waste. Not to mention the millions of problems with using rented cars rather than your own:
- Taxis are all exactly the same, whereas a private cars can be chosen to suit your purpose.
- You can't keep anything in them.
- You can't go on long journeys.
- They're never there exactly when you need them. Have fun waiting after work for a taxi, bearing in mind everyone else in the country is also ordering a taxi.
- You can't leave them around where you need them, they go back to be used by someone else.
- They'll be cheap and not very comfortable, no opportunity to buy a more expensive model.
- Where would all the taxis go when not being used? Bear in mind there'd probably need to be nearly as many taxis as there are private cars, where do they all sit at 3am?
I don't think you've really thought this through.
Smells of the stadium? Do they mean piss, sweat and tobacco?
"We must be protected from ourselves!"
Wrong. This is about protecting us from OTHER PEOPLE. Road accidents wouldn't be a big deal if only the driver was ever killed/injured in an accident. The fact is, most people can't drive and are a danger to everyone else.
I for one would rather have a computer drive for me. I don't really like driving, I never feel like I'm in total control or that I know what's going on, especially on motorways. Changing lanes at 80mph and I always feel like I'm either about to steer into someone or into the barrier. Driving just isn't safe.
And if there were computers driving then I could drink a lot more and still use the car.
I didn't really follow the rest of your post as it was confusing.
Either that or cars are just unsafe, they often crash themselves. Whatever you do, never get a Cleo, it's a death-trap, you can't go round a corner at more than 5mph without it steering itself off the road.
So you're saying that people should drive faster than they want to just because you don't know how to takeover? Slow people don't cause accidents, fast impatient people cause accidents.
People have no patience these days, unless you're going 20 over the limit you have cars right up your arse, even on narrow bendy roads in the rain where even the speed limit is unsafe. All the arguments about accidents/safe speeds aside, people just like driving as fast as they can get away with, and expect everyone else to cooperate with them.
I don't get the appeal of American football, it seems to represent the worst of how Americans do sport.
Endless hype, adverts, cheerleaders, fireworks, half-time shows, adverts, patronising commentators, adverts, even more adverts. All sorts of crap that sport doesn't need, it's liked it's deliberately dumbed down in every possible way. Treating the spectator like an idiot with a short attention span who has to be constantly entertained or advertised to.
Over here in Britain, football's a lot different (And I don't mean the actual sport). Teams are called clubs, they have large local followings, ninety-two teams in the league, even the small teams from tiny towns get good support. In America, they're not clubs, they're franchises. Businesses designed to sell adverts. There's no loyalty because the teams move around to where they can make more money.
There's no league structure with dozens of teams, and hundreds more below them, just a few big marketable franchises, nothing below it, no relegation or promotion.
We have cup competitions where even small amateur teams can be drawn against the best in the world. In America, there are no small teams, just a few big teams never playing anyone else. No chance of small clubs becoming big because the NFL is a closed system. Over here, small amateur clubs can rise right to the top.
We have loud passionate fans, you have fat bastards sitting there in a semi-comatose state. No singing, no banter, but fast food and giant cups of coke.
We have international games, where the whole country can get behind a single team. You don't have that.
We have sports that can be played by people of any body type, you have 400 pound steroid-fueled freaks of nature.
This isn't just NFL, it's a lot of American sports in general. I don't know why it's like that, it's completely soulless, any last ounce of interest sucked out by marketing executives. American football might be an interesting sport, but I wouldn't know because I can't look past all the crap that comes with it.
Non-stop action, except when they're just in a pile in the middle of the pitch doing nothing, or spending twenty minutes preparing for a lineout or penalty.
And how about Basketball? Not enough action for you? A couple points every 30 seconds seems pretty good to me
And it happens so often it's completely meaningless.