And uhh, why exactly are we talking like computer programmers are somehow in charge of the world? Why isn't there a call for _laws and politicians_ to finally start respecting human rights?
Funny how you seem ok with killing everything that is good in someone's life (their freedom, access to their loved ones, etc.), yet seem concerned about when they technically die. Your "nah we can always change our mind after a lifetime thrown away" attitude is extremely disturbing.
"Oops, sorry, we made a mistake. You are now 75, jobless, penniless, and entirely without friends or family in the world. You have no idea what happened in society in the last 40 years, but good luck out there. Don't let the door hit you on the way out."
Locking someone away for life should not have a lower standard than killing them.
One innocuous sentence was picked out and blown into a gale of tornado-like proportions. So no, it's not _me_ who is overreacting.
Also, it's a bit of a shame that apparently discussions must now _always_ include a personal insult. It's the same thing, though, isn't it? Zero respect for other points of view, only total war on those who disagree with you. Give no quarter. And scream for mercy when they finally come for you...
To think, of all those millions of federal employees, over all the years the US has been a nation, and here is the _very first_ one to talk about politics! The miscreant! The crook! Hang him! Destroy his carreer, burn his house, harass his family! Never, never let anyone get away with saying anything favorable about Trump!
Because when _some people_ lose the election, the only answer possible is total war on the rest of the nation. Take it all down, until they learn their lesson and bow their heads to those who should rightfully be in power.
That said, Muslims are expected to be able to read the Koran for themselves (and even memorize it).
In the islamic world, it's not considered necessary to actually speak arabic in order to memorize the koran - you can memorize it just fine without understanding a word of what it says. And the goal is really memorisation, and not reading, in order to make a difference between in-group and out-group people, not to actually gain any kind of knowledge or wisdom.
They can pry it from my cold dead fingers. Nothing gets rid of roaches like it
And here, in a nutshell, is why this law won't work: the pesticides will still be widely available because it is still allowed in greenhouses, and farmers simply won't care about it.
The only way to stop this is by banning those pesticides outright.
As demonstrated by both Apple (with their OS X, but no OS XI) and Microsoft (with their Windows 10, but no Windows 11), ten is just the highest number an OS can have. Linus is just preparing for the day when Linux, too, reaches its final version number.
Why are you blaming the programmer? The feature must have been designed; did the design call for empty being interpreted as a wildcard? It must have been tested; something as important as this has a testing budget associated with it, surely? Some company executive must have signed off on it. There will have been a formal handover from development to production. Did the programmer have the power to correct the design? Did he have the power to enforce testing? Did he have the power to stop deployment? Or was he just some underpaid wage slave who was paid by the hour to stamp out code as quickly as possible? Someone told by his manager he is just a warm body who can be replaced at a moment's notice? What was written in the user manual? Was there a procedure for blocking a number, and if so, was it followed? Was training given on how to use the software correctly? How can it be that the company has no liability, but somehow, someone who formed only a tiny part of the chain (and certainly not the best-paid part of it) should, according to you, now face prison time?
Two things you shouldn't do on the internet: rely on URL shorteners (because they remove human readability from URLs, add an extra unnecessary lookup, and rely on a service that may randomly disappear), and rely on Google (because anything they make may randomly disappear).
Don't use their office tools. Don't use their programming languages. Don't use their online storage. Don't use their email service. Don't even use their bloody search engine. Sooner or later they get tired of it, and it will disappear without a trace.
I geocache. So far I found 2735 caches in 42 countries, so I'm not doing too badly. I remember when I first started, there was this cool website by and for nerds. It had fascinating articles, interesting and stimulating discussion, and whenever an article was posted you could count on at least a few real experts chiming in. Sadly, it declined greatly since then. What was it called again... something like 'sloshdad'.
If you use any offensive language anywhere on or near your computer, or store files that have offensive contents, or do anything that's offensive to someone somewhere without even using a computer, Microsoft will withdraw your Windows 10 license and erase all your... I mean _their_, who are we kidding after all... files.
Yeah, this AI revolution will be so great... Only yesterday having automated nannies watching over everyone's shoulders and approving, or disapproving, their behaviour seemed like a dystopian future. Now it seems like it has become a dystopian _now_...
I remember when almost all Slashdotters respected science. That was a long time ago.
I remember when science was respectable, before it made statements like "the science is settled" and "90% of scientists agree". That, too, was a long time ago.
Do we have any evidence that the rocket was not simply pulled up by a cable? _no_. There is a close-up shot where a cable could easily have been hidden, and a long distance shot that is very clearly made on a computer. Just look at that horizon! Are we supposed to be living at the bottom of a bowl?
And it's not even very good special effects, but I guess that's what you get for a home-grown production... Just look at that puny steam cloud. Is that supposed to be lifting an entire rocket?
Back then, each development brought something new, something you couldn't do before. Nowadays? Not so much: a decade ago my computer could render beautiful worlds in real time, or stream full-screen HD video from the internet, and today it still does that. Yes, the shadows are slightly softer and the hair is a bit more realistic, but those are refinements, not entirely new capabilities.
Thirty years ago, having sampled sound was magic. The ability to manipulate objects the size of the screen was magic. Having (primitive!) 3D was magic. Having the unlimited storage and speed of a harddisk was magic. Those were new things; they opened new vistas, new possibilities, new applications, new ways of thinking. I cannot think of a single recent example of a development that did that.
He has no clue about the complexities of the environment. We already have unleashed diseases by accident when we modified the environment, AIDS and ebola are examples.
AIDS probably jumped from monkeys to humans when people were eating bushmeat. Ebola was probably transmitted from bats. Neither event has anything to do with modifying the environment.
The green jihad against nuclear power, a safe and generally cheap source of reliable low-carbon energy, is especially counterproductive.
This is true, you know. We could solve our energy problems effectively, cheaply, and without huge cost to our landscape. If we were to replace all of our existing coal powered reactors by modern, reliable nuclear reactors, the world would be far better off. Moreover, abundant energy would make it possible to desalinate water on a very large scale as well.
Is there a risk? Yes, there is a risk. Is the risk beyond our ability to contain? No, it isn't. Safe, modern reactor designs exist. By and large we don't need the ability to create plutonium for nuclear weapons; most countries would be well-served by thorium reactors that produce far less radioactivity, and simply fizzle out in case of accident. And the only reason we aren't doing that is because of constant, utterly unnecessary scaremongering from so-called 'green groups'. Funny name, that: by opposing further development of safe nuclear energy they have probably done more to harm the environment than any other group on the planet...
While earlier civilizations had, sometimes locally catastrophic, impacts on the environment they were never anywhere close to drastically altering the overall carbon budget or nitrogen budget of the biosphere as we are today. Nor did they pose anything like the challenges represented by biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons.
The only thing earlier civilisations had going for them was their small numbers. It was not technology that deforested Easter Island; it was people armed with nothing more than primitive hand axes. The only reason people didn't do so much damage in earlier times was because there just weren't enough of them to do any signicant damage.
It doesn't matter. The goal is not to stop copyright infringement; the goal is to stop the free flow of information across the 'unregulated' internet. And that especially includes political information: communication between people who don't approve of the EU, who oppose immigration, etc. So what if the only way to create such a filter is by having a person check every upload? That will mean the goal is reached: instead of being able to freely post ones opinion anywhere, every little piece of 'content' must be checked manually first, thus vastly reducing volume and flow of information of any kind. That effectively disables the free communication between people, and is precisely what the EU is going for.
Only after the Netherlands was massively flooded that they started their Deltaworks.
That's not true: by 1953, the time of the last great flood, the Netherlands had already been controlling water for centuries. Haarlemmermeer, a lake that caused regular flooding in various cities around it (most notably Haarlem and Leiden) was drained around 1850. The North Sea Canal (which was created not by digging, but by constructing dykes in a swamp) was built around 1870. The Afsluitdijk, arguably the most important of the country's protections, was constructed around 1930. Zeeland was still badly protected when 1953 came around, but plans to construct better dykes were fairly well advanced by that time. One major problem was that the port of Rotterdam needed to keep its sea access, and something like the Maeslantkering required 20th-century technology before it became possible.
It should also be noted that construction is still ongoing, and will remain so until the country gets swallowed by the sea. Only two years ago the weakest point of the coastal defenses, a puny stone wall in the village of Katwijk, was replaced by a proper dyke. If a storm had swept away that wall, it would have flooded pretty much all of South Holland, an area with 3.6 million people, and containing most of the country's economic activity, as well as the national airport...
Nothing, but it lacks the budget to set up the kind of health care that Americans would expect. Yet that doesn't stop it from, apparently, offering better healthcare anyway.
Oh dear, another one who hasn't been following the news. Newsflash: this is already ongoing, and has been for several years. This just takes it to the next level - the internet.
No, they merely want the power to censor anything they don't like. The law is only a framework, an excuse to provide them with the necessary tools. The goal is to stifle political dissent; the ability to remove from public discourse the voices of anyone who disagrees with them.
Who cares if it doesn't work for the stated purpose? They will be able to censor anyone with an opposing political view, and that's what this is about.
Slashdot Mirror
What now, "politically correct sorting"?
And uhh, why exactly are we talking like computer programmers are somehow in charge of the world? Why isn't there a call for _laws and politicians_ to finally start respecting human rights?
1035 doesn't sound so bad. 10^35 on the other hand...
Funny how you seem ok with killing everything that is good in someone's life (their freedom, access to their loved ones, etc.), yet seem concerned about when they technically die. Your "nah we can always change our mind after a lifetime thrown away" attitude is extremely disturbing.
"Oops, sorry, we made a mistake. You are now 75, jobless, penniless, and entirely without friends or family in the world. You have no idea what happened in society in the last 40 years, but good luck out there. Don't let the door hit you on the way out."
Locking someone away for life should not have a lower standard than killing them.
Or will this be backported to Windows 7?
Overreacting much? Kinda snowflakey....
One innocuous sentence was picked out and blown into a gale of tornado-like proportions. So no, it's not _me_ who is overreacting.
Also, it's a bit of a shame that apparently discussions must now _always_ include a personal insult. It's the same thing, though, isn't it? Zero respect for other points of view, only total war on those who disagree with you. Give no quarter. And scream for mercy when they finally come for you...
To think, of all those millions of federal employees, over all the years the US has been a nation, and here is the _very first_ one to talk about politics! The miscreant! The crook! Hang him! Destroy his carreer, burn his house, harass his family! Never, never let anyone get away with saying anything favorable about Trump!
Because when _some people_ lose the election, the only answer possible is total war on the rest of the nation. Take it all down, until they learn their lesson and bow their heads to those who should rightfully be in power.
That said, Muslims are expected to be able to read the Koran for themselves (and even memorize it).
In the islamic world, it's not considered necessary to actually speak arabic in order to memorize the koran - you can memorize it just fine without understanding a word of what it says. And the goal is really memorisation, and not reading, in order to make a difference between in-group and out-group people, not to actually gain any kind of knowledge or wisdom.
They can pry it from my cold dead fingers. Nothing gets rid of roaches like it
And here, in a nutshell, is why this law won't work: the pesticides will still be widely available because it is still allowed in greenhouses, and farmers simply won't care about it.
The only way to stop this is by banning those pesticides outright.
As demonstrated by both Apple (with their OS X, but no OS XI) and Microsoft (with their Windows 10, but no Windows 11), ten is just the highest number an OS can have. Linus is just preparing for the day when Linux, too, reaches its final version number.
"you join us and you lose all ability to control your own future" is not a particularly good selling point for a political union.
Don't knock it, it works great for the EU...
Why are you blaming the programmer? The feature must have been designed; did the design call for empty being interpreted as a wildcard? It must have been tested; something as important as this has a testing budget associated with it, surely? Some company executive must have signed off on it. There will have been a formal handover from development to production. Did the programmer have the power to correct the design? Did he have the power to enforce testing? Did he have the power to stop deployment? Or was he just some underpaid wage slave who was paid by the hour to stamp out code as quickly as possible? Someone told by his manager he is just a warm body who can be replaced at a moment's notice? What was written in the user manual? Was there a procedure for blocking a number, and if so, was it followed? Was training given on how to use the software correctly? How can it be that the company has no liability, but somehow, someone who formed only a tiny part of the chain (and certainly not the best-paid part of it) should, according to you, now face prison time?
Two things you shouldn't do on the internet: rely on URL shorteners (because they remove human readability from URLs, add an extra unnecessary lookup, and rely on a service that may randomly disappear), and rely on Google (because anything they make may randomly disappear).
Don't use their office tools. Don't use their programming languages. Don't use their online storage. Don't use their email service. Don't even use their bloody search engine. Sooner or later they get tired of it, and it will disappear without a trace.
I geocache. So far I found 2735 caches in 42 countries, so I'm not doing too badly. I remember when I first started, there was this cool website by and for nerds. It had fascinating articles, interesting and stimulating discussion, and whenever an article was posted you could count on at least a few real experts chiming in. Sadly, it declined greatly since then. What was it called again... something like 'sloshdad'.
If you use any offensive language anywhere on or near your computer, or store files that have offensive contents, or do anything that's offensive to someone somewhere without even using a computer, Microsoft will withdraw your Windows 10 license and erase all your... I mean _their_, who are we kidding after all... files.
Yeah, this AI revolution will be so great... Only yesterday having automated nannies watching over everyone's shoulders and approving, or disapproving, their behaviour seemed like a dystopian future. Now it seems like it has become a dystopian _now_...
I remember when almost all Slashdotters respected science. That was a long time ago.
I remember when science was respectable, before it made statements like "the science is settled" and "90% of scientists agree". That, too, was a long time ago.
Do you see him get in? _no_.
Do we have any evidence that the rocket was not simply pulled up by a cable? _no_. There is a close-up shot where a cable could easily have been hidden, and a long distance shot that is very clearly made on a computer. Just look at that horizon! Are we supposed to be living at the bottom of a bowl?
And it's not even very good special effects, but I guess that's what you get for a home-grown production... Just look at that puny steam cloud. Is that supposed to be lifting an entire rocket?
Let's call it what it is: a fraud.
Back then, each development brought something new, something you couldn't do before. Nowadays? Not so much: a decade ago my computer could render beautiful worlds in real time, or stream full-screen HD video from the internet, and today it still does that. Yes, the shadows are slightly softer and the hair is a bit more realistic, but those are refinements, not entirely new capabilities.
Thirty years ago, having sampled sound was magic. The ability to manipulate objects the size of the screen was magic. Having (primitive!) 3D was magic. Having the unlimited storage and speed of a harddisk was magic. Those were new things; they opened new vistas, new possibilities, new applications, new ways of thinking. I cannot think of a single recent example of a development that did that.
He has no clue about the complexities of the environment. We already have unleashed diseases by accident when we modified the environment, AIDS and ebola are examples.
AIDS probably jumped from monkeys to humans when people were eating bushmeat. Ebola was probably transmitted from bats. Neither event has anything to do with modifying the environment.
The green jihad against nuclear power, a safe and generally cheap source of reliable low-carbon energy, is especially counterproductive.
This is true, you know. We could solve our energy problems effectively, cheaply, and without huge cost to our landscape. If we were to replace all of our existing coal powered reactors by modern, reliable nuclear reactors, the world would be far better off. Moreover, abundant energy would make it possible to desalinate water on a very large scale as well.
Is there a risk? Yes, there is a risk. Is the risk beyond our ability to contain? No, it isn't. Safe, modern reactor designs exist. By and large we don't need the ability to create plutonium for nuclear weapons; most countries would be well-served by thorium reactors that produce far less radioactivity, and simply fizzle out in case of accident. And the only reason we aren't doing that is because of constant, utterly unnecessary scaremongering from so-called 'green groups'. Funny name, that: by opposing further development of safe nuclear energy they have probably done more to harm the environment than any other group on the planet...
While earlier civilizations had, sometimes locally catastrophic, impacts on the environment they were never anywhere close to drastically altering the overall carbon budget or nitrogen budget of the biosphere as we are today. Nor did they pose anything like the challenges represented by biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons.
The only thing earlier civilisations had going for them was their small numbers. It was not technology that deforested Easter Island; it was people armed with nothing more than primitive hand axes. The only reason people didn't do so much damage in earlier times was because there just weren't enough of them to do any signicant damage.
It doesn't matter. The goal is not to stop copyright infringement; the goal is to stop the free flow of information across the 'unregulated' internet. And that especially includes political information: communication between people who don't approve of the EU, who oppose immigration, etc. So what if the only way to create such a filter is by having a person check every upload? That will mean the goal is reached: instead of being able to freely post ones opinion anywhere, every little piece of 'content' must be checked manually first, thus vastly reducing volume and flow of information of any kind. That effectively disables the free communication between people, and is precisely what the EU is going for.
Only after the Netherlands was massively flooded that they started their Deltaworks.
That's not true: by 1953, the time of the last great flood, the Netherlands had already been controlling water for centuries. Haarlemmermeer, a lake that caused regular flooding in various cities around it (most notably Haarlem and Leiden) was drained around 1850. The North Sea Canal (which was created not by digging, but by constructing dykes in a swamp) was built around 1870. The Afsluitdijk, arguably the most important of the country's protections, was constructed around 1930. Zeeland was still badly protected when 1953 came around, but plans to construct better dykes were fairly well advanced by that time. One major problem was that the port of Rotterdam needed to keep its sea access, and something like the Maeslantkering required 20th-century technology before it became possible.
It should also be noted that construction is still ongoing, and will remain so until the country gets swallowed by the sea. Only two years ago the weakest point of the coastal defenses, a puny stone wall in the village of Katwijk, was replaced by a proper dyke. If a storm had swept away that wall, it would have flooded pretty much all of South Holland, an area with 3.6 million people, and containing most of the country's economic activity, as well as the national airport...
Now, guess where I live ;-)
What's wrong with Slovenia?
Nothing, but it lacks the budget to set up the kind of health care that Americans would expect. Yet that doesn't stop it from, apparently, offering better healthcare anyway.
Even social scientists can appreciate the benefits of the decimal system, and avoiding conversion factors.
_Especially_ social scientists, I'd say...
Oh dear, another one who hasn't been following the news. Newsflash: this is already ongoing, and has been for several years. This just takes it to the next level - the internet.
No, they merely want the power to censor anything they don't like. The law is only a framework, an excuse to provide them with the necessary tools. The goal is to stifle political dissent; the ability to remove from public discourse the voices of anyone who disagrees with them.
Who cares if it doesn't work for the stated purpose? They will be able to censor anyone with an opposing political view, and that's what this is about.