As a regular driver, I'm sure Bennett Haselton would approve, although he would probably require a few pages to discuss the online security implications of these cameras.
No, in the UK it is standard for the turn signal stalk to be on the left, right is usually the wipers.
It is actually a bad design, as you tend to have the headlight main beam selector/flasher on the left stalk too, plus you use your left hand for changing gear as well, since most UK cars are manual as well as RHD.
I don't understand why people buy new cars. Buy one that's 1 year old for 30% less and still get "new car insurance" since it's less than five years old. I guess it's the fanbois that like the New Shiny and just have to have it now.
Yes, it's so laughably obvious that it makes you wonder why there are slums at all.
Clearly, a lot of people must just enjoy living there. Living in a cockroach-infested slum instead of a fifty roomed mansion in its own park is just like choosing Coke instead of Pepsi, a lifestyle choice.
The amount of cheerleading for Uber here is fucking ridiculous.
They're an alternative taxi firm, big deal, most people use taxis about twice a year. Oh, but they let you order on the internet, so they're all cool and disruptive and best of all they're anti-Government, which we all know is Evil.
Australia has strict gun laws, so I imagine that it would be pretty hard to get hold of any sort of pump action shotgun.
As a comparison, here in the UK you can still get a shotgun licence reasonably easily (if you're not a convicted criminal) but you'd only be permitted a two shot standard sporting gun.
Presumably if you were a serious terrorist, you'd be using an illegal automatic weapon of some sort anyway?
I thought that the "cowards" were the ones that felt that they NEEDED to carry guns everywhere that they went ?
So the hostages in Australia are brave and the police outside with guns are cowards?
Funny how when something like this happens, the first thing everyone does is call the guys with the guns.
I carry a gun so I don't have to call anyone, I'm already there.
The same problem of facing likely armed opponents also applies in places like Iraq, Israel and Afghanistan The terrorists just use a big car bomb instead.
They aren't going to help fulfil your Wild West fantasies by standing in the coffee shop entrance and calling you out in a fast draw competition.
Well we know it wasn't the US or everyone would have whipped out a 44 magnum and the running gun battle consuming the entire suburb would still be going on.
You jest... but in Texas, we have over 800,000 concealed carry permit holders... and gun battles don't break out, well, ever between them...
And I notice that they don't try this stuff here either...
You would be hard pressed to walk into a busy Starbucks here without a dozen people carrying guns, the terrorists wouldn't have hostages, they'd have a fight on their hands, and frankly they are cowards anyway, so they won't do that here.
The "terrorists are cowards" meme is absurd. Whatever their misguided reasons, someone who is prepared to risk death or lengthy imprisonment for a cause is not a physical coward.
The mistake is categorising courage as an absolute moral good. You might be a brave soldier and a Nazi paedophile, but the bravery itself doesn't make you a good person if you are also raping and murdering children.
Saying that a terrorist has physical courage does not mean you are endorsing their beliefs or actions.
1. Islam is not a peaceful religion, and to believe so you must either be a Muslim or a very naive person. Peaceful Muslims exist of course, but simply because they do not follow Islam strictly enough.
There are no peaceful religions. Muslims, Christians, Jews, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists and everyone else have all at various times been war-like groups.
Similarly, many non religious groups have been the opposite of peaceful, e.g. the Nazis or the Khmer Rouge, or more recently the PIRA or ETA.
You can't blame violence just on one particular religion.
Given the levels of socioeconomic desperation that I've seen throughout much of the world, what surprises me is how few "terrorist" attacks there are on wealthy western countries
Socioeconomic imbalance doesn't cause terrorism. That's a myth.
Yeah, all terrorism is based on (Islamic) religious mania. So to be victors in the war on terror, we just have to kill all the Muslims.
So in your police drone example, we'd only be allowed to discuss the technical aspects of drones, and not be able to mention the context, i.e. they are being used to monitor a hostage situation involving (presumed) Islamic State supporting terrorists?
We'd just discuss the drones' battery life, top speed and stuff?
And after 9/11 we'd all just have stuck to technical analysis of the pilots' navigational skills or something?
Calling them an asshole is much more likely to be accurate. Calling them a terrorist gives them more credit than all but a tiny fraction of such scum remotely deserve.
I've often had that same thought. Calling them "terrorists" is really glorifying them, at least in the eyes of the impressionable. They are thinking "hey - I want to be a brave terrorist just like him!" All news headlines should refer to them literally as "assholes" or "losers". Then watch how many people now are going to say "hey - I want to be an asshole and a loser just like him!".I don't think quite so many would want to emulate that behaviour.
Well, the problem with that is that the people involved don't call themselves "terrorists" in the first place, and they certainly don't care how the Western Media label them.
In their eyes, they are freedom fighters, holy warriors, God's Special Forces, or whatever.
A bit of name-calling really isn't going to stop them.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah! I don't have any A-pillars in my convertible.
Me neither on my horse!
As a regular driver, I'm sure Bennett Haselton would approve, although he would probably require a few pages to discuss the online security implications of these cameras.
It is actually a bad design, as you tend to have the headlight main beam selector/flasher on the left stalk too, plus you use your left hand for changing gear as well, since most UK cars are manual as well as RHD.
do you also call a Ferrari a Fiat? a Lamborghini a Volkswagen?
Yes, it really pisses the owners off.
I don't understand why people buy new cars. Buy one that's 1 year old for 30% less and still get "new car insurance" since it's less than five years old. I guess it's the fanbois that like the New Shiny and just have to have it now.
New cars don't smell of other people's bottoms.
You appear to have copied and pasted the entire internet into your post.
But yeah - a lot of problems would be resolved if employment were more distributed.
Don't worry, The Invisible Hand will sort it out.
I'll never understand why people always wait for the very last instant to merge, slowing everyone down.
Because most people are too stupid and selfish to understand reality.
It's a version of the Prisoner's Dilemma.
Slums aren't prisons. Anyone with legs can leave.
Yes, it's so laughably obvious that it makes you wonder why there are slums at all.
Clearly, a lot of people must just enjoy living there. Living in a cockroach-infested slum instead of a fifty roomed mansion in its own park is just like choosing Coke instead of Pepsi, a lifestyle choice.
What's the matter with these people, choosing to live in shitty neighbourhoods instead of a mansion like you?
I mean, if you hate traffic that much, why not just take a break on your yacht for a few months?
Apart from British Gas (obviously), BT are the worst company in the UK.
If there was a app that encouraged people to buy drugs and deliver them to customers we wouldn't allow it no matter how "disruptive" it was.
No, but I suspect the majority on slashdot would be all in favour.
It's all to do with evil governments interfering in the right of geeks to become billionaires by doing something slightly differently on the internet.
The amount of cheerleading for Uber here is fucking ridiculous.
They're an alternative taxi firm, big deal, most people use taxis about twice a year. Oh, but they let you order on the internet, so they're all cool and disruptive and best of all they're anti-Government, which we all know is Evil.
Plus regular contributor Bennett Haselton should be invited to cogitate on the potential copyright issues in space.
The US has a secular government, and US government actions aren't in support of the Christian religion.
So how come the official US motto that appears on your banknotes is "In God We Trust"?
If you try to say that this is some general, non-Christian god, no one will believe you.
As a comparison, here in the UK you can still get a shotgun licence reasonably easily (if you're not a convicted criminal) but you'd only be permitted a two shot standard sporting gun.
Presumably if you were a serious terrorist, you'd be using an illegal automatic weapon of some sort anyway?
I thought that the "cowards" were the ones that felt that they NEEDED to carry guns everywhere that they went ?
So the hostages in Australia are brave and the police outside with guns are cowards?
Funny how when something like this happens, the first thing everyone does is call the guys with the guns.
I carry a gun so I don't have to call anyone, I'm already there.
The same problem of facing likely armed opponents also applies in places like Iraq, Israel and Afghanistan The terrorists just use a big car bomb instead.
They aren't going to help fulfil your Wild West fantasies by standing in the coffee shop entrance and calling you out in a fast draw competition.
Well we know it wasn't the US or everyone would have whipped out a 44 magnum and the running gun battle consuming the entire suburb would still be going on.
You jest... but in Texas, we have over 800,000 concealed carry permit holders... and gun battles don't break out, well, ever between them...
And I notice that they don't try this stuff here either...
You would be hard pressed to walk into a busy Starbucks here without a dozen people carrying guns, the terrorists wouldn't have hostages, they'd have a fight on their hands, and frankly they are cowards anyway, so they won't do that here.
The "terrorists are cowards" meme is absurd. Whatever their misguided reasons, someone who is prepared to risk death or lengthy imprisonment for a cause is not a physical coward.
The mistake is categorising courage as an absolute moral good. You might be a brave soldier and a Nazi paedophile, but the bravery itself doesn't make you a good person if you are also raping and murdering children.
Saying that a terrorist has physical courage does not mean you are endorsing their beliefs or actions.
1. Islam is not a peaceful religion, and to believe so you must either be a Muslim or a very naive person. Peaceful Muslims exist of course, but simply because they do not follow Islam strictly enough.
There are no peaceful religions. Muslims, Christians, Jews, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists and everyone else have all at various times been war-like groups.
Similarly, many non religious groups have been the opposite of peaceful, e.g. the Nazis or the Khmer Rouge, or more recently the PIRA or ETA.
You can't blame violence just on one particular religion.
Glad to see Uber being cutting edge and disruptive. I'd even go so far as to say they've monetized a paradigm shift in being fucking stupid and evil.
Given the levels of socioeconomic desperation that I've seen throughout much of the world, what surprises me is how few "terrorist" attacks there are on wealthy western countries
Socioeconomic imbalance doesn't cause terrorism. That's a myth.
Yeah, all terrorism is based on (Islamic) religious mania. So to be victors in the war on terror, we just have to kill all the Muslims.
It's all so simple.
Are you a paid shill for Uber, or just a disgusting human being?
Wow, did not know about Uber doing that!
I believe they have an automatic algorithm that adjusts based on supply and demand. So it's not like they're purposely trying to rip people off.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why big business wants Artificial Intelligence so desperately: nothing will ever be any human's fault ever again.
It's a tech take on "I was only obeying orders".
We'd just discuss the drones' battery life, top speed and stuff?
And after 9/11 we'd all just have stuck to technical analysis of the pilots' navigational skills or something?
Calling them an asshole is much more likely to be accurate. Calling them a terrorist gives them more credit than all but a tiny fraction of such scum remotely deserve.
I've often had that same thought. Calling them "terrorists" is really glorifying them, at least in the eyes of the impressionable. They are thinking "hey - I want to be a brave terrorist just like him!" All news headlines should refer to them literally as "assholes" or "losers". Then watch how many people now are going to say "hey - I want to be an asshole and a loser just like him!".I don't think quite so many would want to emulate that behaviour.
Well, the problem with that is that the people involved don't call themselves "terrorists" in the first place, and they certainly don't care how the Western Media label them.
In their eyes, they are freedom fighters, holy warriors, God's Special Forces, or whatever.
A bit of name-calling really isn't going to stop them.