Slashdot Mirror


User: dcw3

dcw3's activity in the archive.

Stories
0
Comments
5,723
First seen
Last seen
Profile
(view on slashdot.org)

Comments · 5,723

  1. Re:yes lets never improve ourselves on Scientists Call For Global Moratorium On Gene Editing of Embryos (theguardian.com) · · Score: 1

    You lost me at "proletariat". You come off sounding like you're trying to be Lenin, and failing miserably.

  2. Re:scientist i dont give a shit! on Scientists Call For Global Moratorium On Gene Editing of Embryos (theguardian.com) · · Score: 1

    Please describe the abuse. One person's abuse is often another's sound parental discipline.

    I've seen too many entitled brats raised by people who let their children do whatever they want.

  3. Re:Why exactly are genetically edited humans bad? on Scientists Call For Global Moratorium On Gene Editing of Embryos (theguardian.com) · · Score: 2

    Stop it before we Bashir head in.

  4. Re:"Broad public support? on Scientists Call For Global Moratorium On Gene Editing of Embryos (theguardian.com) · · Score: 1

    Can't believe I'm actually applauding your sarcasm.

  5. Re:Thanks for a new bullshit libertarian perspecti on Scientists Call For Global Moratorium On Gene Editing of Embryos (theguardian.com) · · Score: 1

    As someone who actually is Libertarian, I just called him out. You clearly have no idea what the meaning of the word actually is.

  6. Re:Thanks for the bullshit libertarian perspective on Scientists Call For Global Moratorium On Gene Editing of Embryos (theguardian.com) · · Score: 1

    You sir, win the tin-foil hat award of the year.

  7. Re:No arguments here on Scientists Call For Global Moratorium On Gene Editing of Embryos (theguardian.com) · · Score: 1

    And what makes you think there wouldn't be an even larger population if China had not? I'm not advocating it, I'm merely pointing out that with more females, you'd have an even larger population of both.

  8. The tech isn't ready? What do you think just happened here?

    "The call comes four months after Chinese researcher He Jiankui used human embryos modified with CRISPR to create twin girls resistant to HIV."

  9. Because government...

    Doesn't have to compete
    Can't pay as well
    Can't be agile
    Has red tape for everything
    Almost never fires anyone who's incompetent

  10. Re:Benefits of a in-house app without being one on Apple Says Spotify Wants 'the Benefits of a Free App Without Being Free' (engadget.com) · · Score: 1

    You bought a phone and knew exactly what you were getting along with it. To pretend otherwise is just BS. If you don't like it, buy a different phone.

  11. Re:An aware city's zoning board would require it on Apple Says Spotify Wants 'the Benefits of a Free App Without Being Free' (engadget.com) · · Score: 1

    I'll agree that the accountants would do whatever was necessary to maximize any tax benefits, but that's no different than any other company.

    When have cities given a shit about monopolies with maybe the exception of ISPs?

  12. Re:off your high horses on Apple Says Spotify Wants 'the Benefits of a Free App Without Being Free' (engadget.com) · · Score: 1

    I'd mod you up if I hadn't already commented.

  13. If you owned a shopping mall, and had your own restaurant inside that mall as well, would you charge yourself the same as you charged other restaurants? Why should Apple have to play that game?

  14. Please explain...

    How is music being ruined?
    Tell us which artist is getting paid $80 for their "millions of song plays"?

    And finally...Why, if you don't like it, don't you take your business elsewhere?

  15. Re:Benefits of a in-house app without being one on Apple Says Spotify Wants 'the Benefits of a Free App Without Being Free' (engadget.com) · · Score: 0

    When you got your iPhone, you knew you were locked into the Apple Store, right? There's nothing stopping you from having another phone. There is no monopoly...it's not even as bad as local ISPs where you really don't have a choice in many cases.

  16. Win one for the Gripper!

  17. Re:Jeff, you've been out-whataburgered on Amazon Lobbied More Government Entities Than Any Other Public US Company Last Year (fortune.com) · · Score: 1

    The saddest part of it all is the American President out-thought you there.

    Which one? Oh, and every member of Congress too?

  18. I want to destroy that list by getting the fucking money out of bribing our politicians. Here's the 2018 list...

    US Chamber of Commerce $94,800,000
    National Assn of Realtors $72,808,648
    Open Society Policy Center $31,520,000
    Pharmaceutical Research & Manufacturers of America $27,989,250
    American Hospital Assn $23,927,842
    Blue Cross/Blue Shield $23,604,221
    Business Roundtable $23,160,000
    Alphabet Inc $21,740,000
    American Medical Assn $20,417,000
    AT&T Inc $18,529,000
    Boeing Co $15,120,000
    Comcast Corp $15,072,000
    Amazon.com $14,400,000
    Northrop Grumman $14,303,000
    National Assn of Broadcasters $14,170,000
    Bayer AG $13,430,000
    NCTA The Internet & Television Assn $13,240,000
    Lockheed Martin $13,205,502
    Facebook Inc $12,620,000
    Southern Co $12,300,000

  19. Re:Fraud on Two-Thirds of Android Antivirus Apps Are Total BS (tomsguide.com) · · Score: 1

    Do we really want the government dictating more online shit? How'd that work out for Net neutrality? How'd that work out for healthcare? How'd it work out for the partisan shit show that we've had for the last couple decades?

  20. Re:the Google Play app store on Two-Thirds of Android Antivirus Apps Are Total BS (tomsguide.com) · · Score: 1

    Have you ever tried searching for "Flashlight" on iTunes?

    Um, no because my fucking iPhone comes with a built in flashlight and I normally search for apps in the App Store, not iTunes. But to the overall point of the article, how many iPhones, iPads, iEtc., have ever had a problem with malware compared to Android?

  21. And in both cases, sketchy != illegal, and that's all that really matters.

  22. Wait until the military version mis-identifies some target and your face was part of the training. Some lawyer is probably already drooling.

  23. But aren't they profiting off of the use of the pictures? If so, and the pictures happen to be copyrighted, isn't that a violation?

  24. Not sure I agree but IANAL. I believe you're not allowed to profit off of someone else's copyright, and if you're feeding it to your AI, you're likely doing so for profit.