Back in the day Internet Explorer saved us everyone from the non-standard shit Netscape was trying to pull out.
In the days before that, Microsoft seriously proposed using Word doc files as the webpage standard. Do you think they wouldn't have done it if they were the only browser? Netscape got impatient with slow moving web standards and made up their own. Somewhat arrogant, but not nefarious.
You underestimate the survivability of US naval ships
It's not about navy vs. navy. Iran is threatening to "close the straits". To do this they just have to make a credible threat to the oil tankers, and trade will stop. US naval ships aren't going to be delivering any oil.
They don't? Trailers that show all the big stunts in 15 seconds and the walk-on cameo by a star as if he was a featured actor; actresses that start to disrobe... out of context lines from reviews...etc., etc.
Good god, temperature is the *worst* part of the metric system. I mean, WTF. How often does anybody genuinely *care* that the freezing point of distilled water at sea level is exactly zero degrees, and the boiling point of the same is exactly 100? When was the last time somebody making a cup of tea put a thermometer into the tea kettle to measure the water's temperature as it approached 100C?
Anyone who's cooking or doing any other temperature-critical work (chemistry, etc) where you need to measure the temperature. If it's just weather, you can feel how cold/hot it is, and you get used to temp in deg C pretty quickly once you stop trying to convert to F every time you hear it. It's like travelling to another country and getting used to the currency. Temp is actually the easiest conversion to make. If you Americans could get with the program I wouldn't have the hassle of when my wife looks up a recipe online and finds an American recipe with temp in F with quantities in ounces, and asks me to convert it to metric to suit our oven and measuring cups.
Indeed, it's hardly just the military. We have a huge amount of previously existing infrastructure that would have to either be torn down and replaced or cobbled together out of a mishmash of metric and customary measured components.
Every other country in the world has converted, and they all had a "a huge amount of previously existing infrastructure". In Australia, for instance, which converted in the 1970s, first they did "soft conversion" where instead of a pint of milk you got 560 cc. Eventually most quantities shifted to round metric equivalents. Milk, for instance is now 1/2, 1 and 2 litre cartons.
In the building industry, they just went from the arcane mishmash of feet and odd fractions of an inch to millimetres. The few things where the tolerances really did matter, like screw threads, you can still get SAE standard as well as metric. Nothing was "torn down" just because it wasn't metric. Things just were replaced as they wore out. There's no Thought Police forcing everyone to purge old measures from their daily lives.
Are you talking about actual pressed DVDs, or downloaded ISOs? The ISOs certainly are stripped. Pressed DVDS, at least those made in China, often do include the FBI warning and promos for other movies.
Because they piss off a lot of people and so get several hundred responses saying how wrong they are. Slashdot editors aren't trying to inform us, they're trying to provoke us, to get page hits.
Not that I care about the subject, or would ever trust what Wikipedia's current "consensus" says on it. Articles on contentious issues -- Palestine, abortion, etc, etc, are an endless battleground and a complete tarpit.
TFA "Sim Osborn, an attorney who has spent a large portion of his career representing the families of children killed or injured by dangerous magnetized toys..."
So the source for this is a personal injury lawyer. How many parents will feed magnets to their kids and give him a call?
If I dislike (or like) all candidates in an election equally,
If you can say that, you haven't even bothered to look at the candidates. Even choosing the least worst is better than abstaining and letting the worst win by default. It's self-righteous "they're all scum" people who allow the "scum" to win time after time.
I'm in Hong Kong, and when I checked Badoo, it showed a map of Hong Kong, and then a dozen mugshots of people (male and female) supposedly looking for "friends" there. Most white, one or two black, not one Chinese. So, complete fake and bullshit.
It's an "Ask Slashdot". They're as real as "Letters to Penthouse". Both carefully crafted to create a fantasy situation to excite readers. Read them if the subject is something you're interested in, but don't waste your time giving advice..
Maybe if you read the fucking article you wouldn't have to guess.
In summary "The report states that around a third of Swiss citizens over 15 years old download pirated music, movies and games from the Internet. However, these people don't spend less money as a result because the budgets they reserve for entertainment are fairly constant. This means that downloading is mostly complementary."
They actually did surveys and have figures to back that up. But don't let facts get in the way when they go against your preconceptions.
You always think about it and wish you could tun on the news
TV is purely for entertainment.
I remember when I was in primary school, the teacher asked us some questions about "current affairs" and asked if we watched the news . I said I didn't, because it was boring, for which I was sneered at. Then he proceeded to ask some questions about specific issues in the news, which I answered. He asked how I could know that if I hadn't watched the news. I replied that I read the newspaper every day. To which he was silent.
I wasn't being a smartarse, I just had never considered sitting through the dross that passes for "news" on TV as a way to keep up. Now I use mostly the BBC World Service, and still read a newspaper on Sundays, the rest via web. Never watch TV news unless there's a particularly photogenic disaster.
Let's face it, the slashdot moderation system has been broken for a long time
Bullshit. Just because the majority of people here disagree with you on these issues, you therefore assert the system is "broken". You may even be right in your opinions, but the moderation doesn't reflect "truth", it reflects simply what most people here think. If you don't like that, find a community that you are more in tune with.
I'm personally more critical of the "editorial" process here, which should be focused on verifying basic facts before publishing a story, but instead seems to just go with whatever sensationalistic crap takes their fancy
That is a direct accusation that the BAS is an advocate of nuclear energy.
FAIL off, twat with trying to restate what I wrote.
Saying that the BAS advocate nuclear power (which I think they do) isn't the same as calling them an "advocacy group".They're not corporate shills, and I'm well aware of their criticisms of nuclear policy. Nevertheless, since many of their members work in the industry, it would be naive to say they have no interest. And to get back to the original point, the summary is remiss in not mentioning the source, and TFA is biased by omitting any comparison of alternative with nuclear or fossil fuel energy.
The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists is NOT a nuclear power advocacy group
"FAIL" yourself, asshole. I didn't say they were. Nevertheless, they DO represent "atomic scientists" and this was omitted from the summary. Excuse me for thinking that the source of an article is significant, especially in considering what it took care not to mention.
More recently the BAS has increasingly focused on explaining the dangers associated with nuclear power. Here is a link to one of their publications:
It's not that there are no drawbacks or costs to renewable energy, but that this article simply presents the negatives for renewables, with no comparison with the alternatives.
So much groundwater, concrete, etc, etc. All true no doubt. But is it more than is used in a coal or nuclear power station? Wouldn't it have been useful to present that as well?
Interesting that the summary doesn't mention that TFA is published in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. Which is a quote respectable group; but nevertheless, they have a horse in the energy race, one that burns Uranium. TFA simply counts the cost of various "green" energies, but never compares them to the costs of "conventional", or nuclear, energy generation. You're left with the impression that "green" energy is a shill, that all forms of energy are equally bad, and so you might as well sit back and keep burning oil and coal until someone invents perpetual motion.
People make moonshine, even tho alcohol is legally available. People traffic in and smuggle cigarettes to avoid paying cigarette taxes. Criminals will still commit crimes.
People steal cars and sell them. But you don't HAVE to deal with a criminal to buy a car. But you HAVE to deal with a criminal if you want to buy heroin, coke, hash, etc. If drugs aren't illegal, you can be an addict and deal with that without also necessarily being a criminal.
Deal with "drug" abuse the same way you deal with alcohol abuse, and you'd still have addicts, but a lot less associated crime and violence.
I'm not sure I follow this line of reasoning, as, making murder legal would also reduce the crime rate, and over time, the quantity of violence, as there would be a much smaller population as a result.
That IS NOT AT ALL my "line of reasoning". I said ASSOCIATED crime and violence. E.g. prostitution, robbery to get money to buy the (expensive) drugs. Violence between drug dealers over turf, etc. Most of these would be much reduced, if not eliminated, if drugs were available legally, with some restrictions, like alcohol and tobacco, at prices that represented the actual costs of production and taxes.
Slashdot Mirror
Back in the day Internet Explorer saved us everyone from the non-standard shit Netscape was trying to pull out.
In the days before that, Microsoft seriously proposed using Word doc files as the webpage standard. Do you think they wouldn't have done it if they were the only browser? Netscape got impatient with slow moving web standards and made up their own. Somewhat arrogant, but not nefarious.
You underestimate the survivability of US naval ships
It's not about navy vs. navy. Iran is threatening to "close the straits". To do this they just have to make a credible threat to the oil tankers, and trade will stop. US naval ships aren't going to be delivering any oil.
Movie previews don't deceive.
They don't? Trailers that show all the big stunts in 15 seconds and the walk-on cameo by a star as if he was a featured actor; actresses that start to disrobe... out of context lines from reviews ...etc., etc.
Good god, temperature is the *worst* part of the metric system. I mean, WTF. How often does anybody genuinely *care* that the freezing point of distilled water at sea level is exactly zero degrees, and the boiling point of the same is exactly 100? When was the last time somebody making a cup of tea put a thermometer into the tea kettle to measure the water's temperature as it approached 100C?
Anyone who's cooking or doing any other temperature-critical work (chemistry, etc) where you need to measure the temperature. If it's just weather, you can feel how cold/hot it is, and you get used to temp in deg C pretty quickly once you stop trying to convert to F every time you hear it. It's like travelling to another country and getting used to the currency. Temp is actually the easiest conversion to make. If you Americans could get with the program I wouldn't have the hassle of when my wife looks up a recipe online and finds an American recipe with temp in F with quantities in ounces, and asks me to convert it to metric to suit our oven and measuring cups.
Indeed, it's hardly just the military. We have a huge amount of previously existing infrastructure that would have to either be torn down and replaced or cobbled together out of a mishmash of metric and customary measured components.
Every other country in the world has converted, and they all had a "a huge amount of previously existing infrastructure". In Australia, for instance, which converted in the 1970s, first they did "soft conversion" where instead of a pint of milk you got 560 cc. Eventually most quantities shifted to round metric equivalents. Milk, for instance is now 1/2, 1 and 2 litre cartons. In the building industry, they just went from the arcane mishmash of feet and odd fractions of an inch to millimetres. The few things where the tolerances really did matter, like screw threads, you can still get SAE standard as well as metric. Nothing was "torn down" just because it wasn't metric. Things just were replaced as they wore out. There's no Thought Police forcing everyone to purge old measures from their daily lives.
Are you talking about actual pressed DVDs, or downloaded ISOs? The ISOs certainly are stripped. Pressed DVDS, at least those made in China, often do include the FBI warning and promos for other movies.
The best part of those adds is that only people who DIDN'T pirate the DVD had to sit through the stupid thing!
Actually, a lot of pirated DVDs copy the entire thing, including the ant-piracy prelude.
Why is /. still linking to his articles?
Because they piss off a lot of people and so get several hundred responses saying how wrong they are. Slashdot editors aren't trying to inform us, they're trying to provoke us, to get page hits.
Not that I care about the subject, or would ever trust what Wikipedia's current "consensus" says on it. Articles on contentious issues -- Palestine, abortion, etc, etc, are an endless battleground and a complete tarpit.
someone pro-mutilation comes in and edits the article how he wants it, to feel better about his situation,
Not hard to guess which side you edit war for.
*screams of hysteria* But more seriously, that is a problem with environmentalists
Really seriously, this is a problem with assholes who put words in the mouths of environmentalists, and pillory them for positions they never took.
And to the original original asshole who started this thread: the word is "cue" not queue.
So the source for this is a personal injury lawyer. How many parents will feed magnets to their kids and give him a call?
If I dislike (or like) all candidates in an election equally,
If you can say that, you haven't even bothered to look at the candidates. Even choosing the least worst is better than abstaining and letting the worst win by default. It's self-righteous "they're all scum" people who allow the "scum" to win time after time.
I'm in Hong Kong, and when I checked Badoo, it showed a map of Hong Kong, and then a dozen mugshots of people (male and female) supposedly looking for "friends" there. Most white, one or two black, not one Chinese. So, complete fake and bullshit.
Question: is this for real?
It's an "Ask Slashdot". They're as real as "Letters to Penthouse". Both carefully crafted to create a fantasy situation to excite readers. Read them if the subject is something you're interested in, but don't waste your time giving advice..
How do they reach that conclusion?
Maybe if you read the fucking article you wouldn't have to guess.
In summary "The report states that around a third of Swiss citizens over 15 years old download pirated music, movies and games from the Internet. However, these people don't spend less money as a result because the budgets they reserve for entertainment are fairly constant. This means that downloading is mostly complementary."
They actually did surveys and have figures to back that up. But don't let facts get in the way when they go against your preconceptions.
You always think about it and wish you could tun on the news
TV is purely for entertainment.
I remember when I was in primary school, the teacher asked us some questions about "current affairs" and asked if we watched the news . I said I didn't, because it was boring, for which I was sneered at. Then he proceeded to ask some questions about specific issues in the news, which I answered. He asked how I could know that if I hadn't watched the news. I replied that I read the newspaper every day. To which he was silent.
I wasn't being a smartarse, I just had never considered sitting through the dross that passes for "news" on TV as a way to keep up. Now I use mostly the BBC World Service, and still read a newspaper on Sundays, the rest via web. Never watch TV news unless there's a particularly photogenic disaster.
Let's face it, the slashdot moderation system has been broken for a long time
Bullshit. Just because the majority of people here disagree with you on these issues, you therefore assert the system is "broken". You may even be right in your opinions, but the moderation doesn't reflect "truth", it reflects simply what most people here think. If you don't like that, find a community that you are more in tune with.
I'm personally more critical of the "editorial" process here, which should be focused on verifying basic facts before publishing a story, but instead seems to just go with whatever sensationalistic crap takes their fancy
That is a direct accusation that the BAS is an advocate of nuclear energy.
FAIL off, twat with trying to restate what I wrote .
Saying that the BAS advocate nuclear power (which I think they do) isn't the same as calling them an "advocacy group".They're not corporate shills, and I'm well aware of their criticisms of nuclear policy. Nevertheless, since many of their members work in the industry, it would be naive to say they have no interest. And to get back to the original point, the summary is remiss in not mentioning the source, and TFA is biased by omitting any comparison of alternative with nuclear or fossil fuel energy.
The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists is NOT a nuclear power advocacy group
"FAIL" yourself, asshole. I didn't say they were. Nevertheless, they DO represent "atomic scientists" and this was omitted from the summary. Excuse me for thinking that the source of an article is significant, especially in considering what it took care not to mention.
More recently the BAS has increasingly focused on explaining the dangers associated with nuclear power. Here is a link to one of their publications:
1986 is "recent"?
It's not that there are no drawbacks or costs to renewable energy, but that this article simply presents the negatives for renewables, with no comparison with the alternatives. So much groundwater, concrete, etc, etc. All true no doubt. But is it more than is used in a coal or nuclear power station? Wouldn't it have been useful to present that as well?
Interesting that the summary doesn't mention that TFA is published in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. Which is a quote respectable group; but nevertheless, they have a horse in the energy race, one that burns Uranium. TFA simply counts the cost of various "green" energies, but never compares them to the costs of "conventional", or nuclear, energy generation. You're left with the impression that "green" energy is a shill, that all forms of energy are equally bad, and so you might as well sit back and keep burning oil and coal until someone invents perpetual motion.
It'd drive Jack Bauer nuts, and you don't want to do that.
People make moonshine, even tho alcohol is legally available. People traffic in and smuggle cigarettes to avoid paying cigarette taxes. Criminals will still commit crimes.
People steal cars and sell them. But you don't HAVE to deal with a criminal to buy a car. But you HAVE to deal with a criminal if you want to buy heroin, coke, hash, etc. If drugs aren't illegal, you can be an addict and deal with that without also necessarily being a criminal.
Deal with "drug" abuse the same way you deal with alcohol abuse, and you'd still have addicts, but a lot less associated crime and violence.
I'm not sure I follow this line of reasoning, as, making murder legal would also reduce the crime rate, and over time, the quantity of violence, as there would be a much smaller population as a result.
That IS NOT AT ALL my "line of reasoning". I said ASSOCIATED crime and violence. E.g. prostitution, robbery to get money to buy the (expensive) drugs. Violence between drug dealers over turf, etc. Most of these would be much reduced, if not eliminated, if drugs were available legally, with some restrictions, like alcohol and tobacco, at prices that represented the actual costs of production and taxes.