There was nothing in the parent post that was bigoted. The post simply pointed out that businesses can build factories where the willing workers are, or they can build them someplace else and ask to workers to move.
I can't speak for pigeons, but reports of people eating raccoons isn't even close to an indication of people starving. There are reports of people eating raccoon right now. I know many people who have eaten raccoon. None of them say it was a good quality meat, but most of them said that if cooked right it was palatable.
I don't know about your local paper, but my local "legit" newspaper certainly doesn't fact check, and they absolutely publish their suspicions and air unfounded allegations. Heck, I have personally been misquoted multiple times by our local paper. I have also been told by the local paper that they don't report on anything the city doesn't want them to because the city will make their continued existence difficult if they do.
You address the "And then, what, miniaturize it? Smart ass." part which was never called into question. That isn't where you behaved as a grammar nazi. The part where you looked dumb was when you said "You should learn how to properly use a question mark." This made you look dumb because the question mark in the Stormwatches post WAS used properly. You just apparently couldn't understand that. Your retort to my post pointing out your failure to understand proper use of question marks shows that your poor language skills stretch farther than just the use of punctuation.
Tables and phones will replace dedicated gaming when they do the stuff dedicated gaming does. Just as PDA's are mostly dead because phones do everything the PDA did plus extra, If a tablet can be plugged into a TV, use game pads, and play games that are fun, they will replace under the TV consoles. For phones to replace hand held consoles, all that is needed is proper controls. Google is implementing the APIs in their newest version of Android, so we can expect either phones to be made with proper controls, or better yet, clip on controls that let you have the controls as part of your phone, or not based on your mood.
They are all just computers. The only real difference is the accessories.
This is why being a grammar nazi is bad. It always ends up backfiring. Stormwatch DID properly use the question mark. You just failed to read the sentence correctly.
Microsoft didn't have a monopoly on the operating system market. The had a monopoly on the very narrowly defined consumer desktop OS market. By the same token, Apple has a monopoly on the iOS market.
It's still being debated because the neo-luddits want to call newer tech evil, and logic will not play a roll. For them it is a matter of faith that personal electronics bring down planes.
You are under the misinterpretation that the return address on most spam is valid. It isn't. Bouncing spam does not clog the spammers pipes. I clogs some other victim. That is why the best technical solution is to block it at the time of connection. If spammers are going to take off an address, it can only happen if the connection is refused as that is the only time that most spammers can be notified the address is invalid.
The number of times that you will have a legitimate email that is sent to the wrong address AND is from someone you also have an account with will be pretty small. Even still, you set your client to delete any email with the other persons name in it and a From address that matches the sender. Problem solved. Your emails show up. The incorrect ones don't.
These are old problems that have long ago been solved or at least minimized to the point that there isn't much more to do about it. So, we are still looking at a self inflicted problem.
Your description is one of a self inflicted problem. Instead of saying "Sorry, we can't help you", you should say "Sorry you have a wrong number." If you are feeling generous, you could follow up with "You inverted the 4th and 5th digits. The company you wanted to call is at xxx-xxx-xxxx."
Wrong. You treat them like any other non-solicited email. You tell your mail provider to block them, and if there is no mechanism for that, you tell your email client to auto delete them. Problem solved.
While I am sure you are correct that many kooks claim that. I have seen the unfortunate other side of that coin far too often. That is people claiming something can NOT work because they don't understand that a system isn't closed. They like to cry "The law of thermodynamics" and "perpetual motion" not understanding that if you stick a magnet inside of something, you have added energy. It seems that there are plenty of kooks both on the 'free energy" side as well as the pseudo-"law of thermodynamics" side that can't understand the difference between a closed system and an open one.
My favorite was an actual live conversation with a woman I worked with a number of years ago. She came into my office to chat, and started a convesation about a new idea she had. When was pondering why we needed money. After several questions to get what exactly she meant, her thought boiled down to the fact that she thought we should all just work to our ability and receive what we need. She thought money just got in the way of that. When I said, "Oh, your a communist then?" She got offended, said "No, YOU are a communist and stormed off.
The poster was obviously using a turn of phrase. Clearly he didn't mean literally everyone, as literally everyone doesn't even have a Netflix account. He clearly meant that it would be common enough to be considered the norm, or at least to be unsurprising to anyone finding out that you are doing it. This is no more enforceable than any of the other examples I gave. His point was that it could not have wide scale enforcement, so it would only be enforce as a tool for harassing and oppressing people who did not break any normally enforced law.
Your inability to understand this is common, and why so many of these kinds of laws get through.
The problem isn't that everyone gives out their passwords. It is that one segment of the population gives out their Netflix password. Another segment of the population has sex before they turn 18. Another segment of the population commits consensual sodomy. Another segment of the population jay walks. Another segment of the population spanks their kids when they misbehave. Another segment of the population makes mix tapes/CDs for their sweethearts. Another segment sings birthday songs in restaurants. Another segment draws their favorite characters an puts it up for everyone to see.
The list goes on. It isn't about this one law bringing everyone down. It is that once you have 'unenforceable laws' for every segment, no one can stand up or they will be picked out for the next 'enforcement'.
Slashdot Mirror
Unfrotunatly that is what the majority of the population do. Add in absurd claims about guns, Democrates, Republicans, teachers, etc... etc... etc...
There was nothing in the parent post that was bigoted. The post simply pointed out that businesses can build factories where the willing workers are, or they can build them someplace else and ask to workers to move.
Venus might be usable as a model to prove that CO2 follows warming from the sun, but not the other way around.
That would be great if the next time there is a hurricane, or drought, or flood, we don't have to hear that is is proof of global warming.
I can't speak for pigeons, but reports of people eating raccoons isn't even close to an indication of people starving. There are reports of people eating raccoon right now. I know many people who have eaten raccoon. None of them say it was a good quality meat, but most of them said that if cooked right it was palatable.
Well, all the nay sayers that said Mono would always be trailing behind may end up having to eat their words....
Bob wasn't a failure, and it was only discontinued because it had completed it's purpose. It got Bill laid.
I don't know about your local paper, but my local "legit" newspaper certainly doesn't fact check, and they absolutely publish their suspicions and air unfounded allegations. Heck, I have personally been misquoted multiple times by our local paper. I have also been told by the local paper that they don't report on anything the city doesn't want them to because the city will make their continued existence difficult if they do.
You address the "And then, what, miniaturize it? Smart ass." part which was never called into question. That isn't where you behaved as a grammar nazi. The part where you looked dumb was when you said "You should learn how to properly use a question mark." This made you look dumb because the question mark in the Stormwatches post WAS used properly. You just apparently couldn't understand that. Your retort to my post pointing out your failure to understand proper use of question marks shows that your poor language skills stretch farther than just the use of punctuation.
Tables and phones will replace dedicated gaming when they do the stuff dedicated gaming does. Just as PDA's are mostly dead because phones do everything the PDA did plus extra, If a tablet can be plugged into a TV, use game pads, and play games that are fun, they will replace under the TV consoles. For phones to replace hand held consoles, all that is needed is proper controls. Google is implementing the APIs in their newest version of Android, so we can expect either phones to be made with proper controls, or better yet, clip on controls that let you have the controls as part of your phone, or not based on your mood.
They are all just computers. The only real difference is the accessories.
Google seems to recognize this. I have not attempted to use these APIs but:
http://developer.android.com/reference/android/view/InputDevice.html#SOURCE_GAMEPAD
I would expect to see android based consoles soon after this goes mainstream.
This is why being a grammar nazi is bad. It always ends up backfiring. Stormwatch DID properly use the question mark. You just failed to read the sentence correctly.
iOS ain't done until Greg Hughes' Wifi Sync don't run.
Microsoft didn't have a monopoly on the operating system market. The had a monopoly on the very narrowly defined consumer desktop OS market. By the same token, Apple has a monopoly on the iOS market.
It's still being debated because the neo-luddits want to call newer tech evil, and logic will not play a roll. For them it is a matter of faith that personal electronics bring down planes.
If you get hit in the head by someones laptop from several rows away, it wasn't because of a landing or takeoff.
You are under the misinterpretation that the return address on most spam is valid. It isn't. Bouncing spam does not clog the spammers pipes. I clogs some other victim. That is why the best technical solution is to block it at the time of connection. If spammers are going to take off an address, it can only happen if the connection is refused as that is the only time that most spammers can be notified the address is invalid.
The number of times that you will have a legitimate email that is sent to the wrong address AND is from someone you also have an account with will be pretty small. Even still, you set your client to delete any email with the other persons name in it and a From address that matches the sender. Problem solved. Your emails show up. The incorrect ones don't.
These are old problems that have long ago been solved or at least minimized to the point that there isn't much more to do about it. So, we are still looking at a self inflicted problem.
Your description is one of a self inflicted problem. Instead of saying "Sorry, we can't help you", you should say "Sorry you have a wrong number." If you are feeling generous, you could follow up with "You inverted the 4th and 5th digits. The company you wanted to call is at xxx-xxx-xxxx."
Wrong. You treat them like any other non-solicited email. You tell your mail provider to block them, and if there is no mechanism for that, you tell your email client to auto delete them. Problem solved.
While I am sure you are correct that many kooks claim that. I have seen the unfortunate other side of that coin far too often. That is people claiming something can NOT work because they don't understand that a system isn't closed. They like to cry "The law of thermodynamics" and "perpetual motion" not understanding that if you stick a magnet inside of something, you have added energy. It seems that there are plenty of kooks both on the 'free energy" side as well as the pseudo-"law of thermodynamics" side that can't understand the difference between a closed system and an open one.
My favorite was an actual live conversation with a woman I worked with a number of years ago. She came into my office to chat, and started a convesation about a new idea she had. When was pondering why we needed money. After several questions to get what exactly she meant, her thought boiled down to the fact that she thought we should all just work to our ability and receive what we need. She thought money just got in the way of that. When I said, "Oh, your a communist then?" She got offended, said "No, YOU are a communist and stormed off.
The poster was obviously using a turn of phrase. Clearly he didn't mean literally everyone, as literally everyone doesn't even have a Netflix account. He clearly meant that it would be common enough to be considered the norm, or at least to be unsurprising to anyone finding out that you are doing it. This is no more enforceable than any of the other examples I gave. His point was that it could not have wide scale enforcement, so it would only be enforce as a tool for harassing and oppressing people who did not break any normally enforced law.
Your inability to understand this is common, and why so many of these kinds of laws get through.
You tell me. Your the one that claims it provides no knowledge.
I am wondering how you managed to post on Slashdot as a non-subscriber of anything, and how you did it with a username....
The problem isn't that everyone gives out their passwords. It is that one segment of the population gives out their Netflix password. Another segment of the population has sex before they turn 18. Another segment of the population commits consensual sodomy. Another segment of the population jay walks. Another segment of the population spanks their kids when they misbehave. Another segment of the population makes mix tapes/CDs for their sweethearts. Another segment sings birthday songs in restaurants. Another segment draws their favorite characters an puts it up for everyone to see.
The list goes on. It isn't about this one law bringing everyone down. It is that once you have 'unenforceable laws' for every segment, no one can stand up or they will be picked out for the next 'enforcement'.
Sorry to go Godwin on you, but your comment is exactly what is being discussed here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came%E2%80%A6