×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Comments

top

Time To Remove 'Philosophical' Exemption From Vaccine Requirements?

Assmasher Re: Fuck You (1037 comments)

Word

3 days ago
top

Time To Remove 'Philosophical' Exemption From Vaccine Requirements?

Assmasher Re: Fuck You (1037 comments)

It would make it simpler to realize if they're just taking the piss or really are as stupid as what they write... (Although I've seen some quality AC posts as well.)

4 days ago
top

Time To Remove 'Philosophical' Exemption From Vaccine Requirements?

Assmasher Re:freedom 2 b a moron (1037 comments)

Who said they could assume they could?

I said there's very little reason to think they would not be able to.

That's a very important distinction logically.

5 days ago
top

Time To Remove 'Philosophical' Exemption From Vaccine Requirements?

Assmasher Re:freedom 2 b a moron (1037 comments)

Why would there be little reason to think that? Aside from all the expenses of homeschooling itself (books, materials, etc - both for parents and students), there's also the loss of income from at least one parent (when there even are two) not working. That can easily be half the household income gone, plus the expenses, and they still have to pay the taxes. And in a single parent household, what's the option? Live 100% on public assistance all the time?

You appear to be confusing "not be able" with "would not be a hardship."

That right there is the problem. If they had a choice, this would all be moot. Dumbasses who refuse to vaccinate their kids couple simply send them elsewhere with little or no cost. As it stands, if you're stupid enough to honestly believe vaccines will damage your child, your options come down to bending to the will of the state that you inject poison into your child or lose half/all of your household income and try to educate them yourself.

Again, you are advocating that it should be a reasonable option for parents to be unreasonable.

5 days ago
top

Time To Remove 'Philosophical' Exemption From Vaccine Requirements?

Assmasher Re: Fuck You (1037 comments)

Look at all the anonymous cowards...

5 days ago
top

Time To Remove 'Philosophical' Exemption From Vaccine Requirements?

Assmasher Re:freedom 2 b a moron (1037 comments)

Was that what you said when you found that smoking was banned in elementary schools?

Doing something that you believe to be right that puts other human beings in serious risk is a burden that YOU must bear.

Do you think driving a school bus full of children while drunk is a freedom you need?

5 days ago
top

Time To Remove 'Philosophical' Exemption From Vaccine Requirements?

Assmasher Re:freedom 2 b a moron (1037 comments)

So, basically, there's very little reason to think that a parent refusing to vaccinate their child would not be able to home school them
Not much reason to allow unvaccinated (by choice) children into public schools then.

5 days ago
top

Australian Target Stores Ban GTA V For Depictions of Violence Against Women

Assmasher I guess they missed the rape scene in... (310 comments)

...The Road Warrior then.

I bet people can still buy that movie down under.

about two weeks ago
top

Officer Not Charged In Michael Brown Shooting

Assmasher Re:Flip Argument (1128 comments)

Which has what to do with what?

The crazy ways people try to dispute or prove things with huge numbers of assumptions... lol.

Presuming you're trying to argue that you can tell from a chest wound(s), that Brown had his hands up makes the ridiculous assumption that when he was shot in the chest his hands were up instead of at some other time in the process.

Imagine the following scenario - for which there is no proof and yet it is as valid as any other - Brown starts running away, shots are fired and he turns around with his hands up - as he is turning around with his hands up, he is shot in the side. This makes Brown lower his arms and grab his side. He is now facing the officer and a round now enters his chest. Brown doubles over in pain towards the officer. The officer now puts one in the back/top of Brown's skull (because he's bent over enough for this to happen), Brown raises his head and catches the next one in the forehead.

Totally plausible - but more importantly - we have no f***ing idea if this actually happened or not.

about three weeks ago
top

Officer Not Charged In Michael Brown Shooting

Assmasher Re:Flip Argument (1128 comments)

The official report says there was a shot in his side, and one in his chest.

Entrance wounds are about as reliable an orientation indicator as you will get.

about three weeks ago
top

Officer Not Charged In Michael Brown Shooting

Assmasher Re:Flip Argument (1128 comments)

Which shot are you referring to?

Also, I am only referring to the official autopsy that the Grand Jury worked off of - apparently the autopsies differ ;)...

about three weeks ago
top

Officer Not Charged In Michael Brown Shooting

Assmasher Re:Flip Argument (1128 comments)

According to the autopsy he was shot FROM ABOVE which means that either 1.- the cop got on top of the car and jumped so he could shoot a 6 foot plus robber in the top of the head or 2.- the robber was charging at the cop in a football tackle stance (which just FYI is consistent with every wound on Brown).

Rather than dissect all of your diatribe, we can simply start with the initial faulty premise.

The autopsy claims there is a bullet entrance wound in the vertex of his scalp. That's the back side of the top of your head. The bullet came to rest in the right side of his face. That means the bullet traveled from the upper rear of his head towards the front of his face.

Now, somebody who argued like you do would claim this meant he was shot in the back of the head while walking away - but bullets can do crazy sh** when they enter a body. It certainly DOES mean that your stupid assertion that being shot in the top/rear of you head means you had your head down charging like you were in a football stance is incredibly unlikely (for many other reasons as well - people don't run in a

football tackle stance

- you can't, you start off in that stance. You can't run like that unless you like staring at the ground and being bent over at the waist.)

about three weeks ago
top

Officer Not Charged In Michael Brown Shooting

Assmasher Re:Flip Argument (1128 comments)

Maybe you should read the official autopsy report.

Shot in the top of the head.

Shot in the forehead.

Shot in the side.

Shot in the back of his right arm.

Shot in the chest.

A bullet graze wound on the outside of his right arm that doesn't seem to indicate the direction of the bullet.

A bullet graze wound on the outside and near the bottom of his hand that is oriented toward his thumb.

about three weeks ago
top

Officer Not Charged In Michael Brown Shooting

Assmasher Re:Flip Argument (1128 comments)

Yeah think about it, it makes perfect sense if he stops running away and turns around and puts his hands up.

Crazy how you didn't consider that possibility.

about three weeks ago
top

Officer Not Charged In Michael Brown Shooting

Assmasher Re:Flip Argument (1128 comments)

7 witnesses (black) collaborated cop's story. Brown was running at the cop, after beating him and pulling his gun

Can you provide any links supporting this from a credible source? I've only been able to find information that a single witness claimed that Brown charged the officer.

I can't find any witness information that says Brown beat the cop, or pulled his gun - other than the police officer himself.

Thanks.

about three weeks ago
top

Officer Not Charged In Michael Brown Shooting

Assmasher Re:MOD PARENT RACIST (1128 comments)

At least you're admitting that people get shot by the police when they're not committing crimes (unless you mean jobs that themselves are crime related.)

about three weeks ago
top

Space Tourism Isn't Worth Dying For

Assmasher Those engineers and pilots are at the peak of... (594 comments)

LOL - seriously?

I love Rutan's designs, love the idea of SS1 and SS2, and wish them the very best - I would love for them to succeed beyond even what we all hope for BUT - the peak of human achievement? We went to the moon 45 YEARS AGO. Testing a shuttlecock aircraft design that isn't even aiming for low earth orbig, for a private company, doesn't quite measure up.

about a month and a half ago
top

Creationism Conference at Michigan State University Stirs Unease

Assmasher Re:It makes you uneasy? (1007 comments)

The problem being that the location will then be used to assign 'scientific legitimacy' to the discussion (despite intentionally disregarding science...)

One of the primary goals of creationists is to try and muddy the term 'science' into something subjective.

about a month and a half ago
top

Independent Researchers Test Rossi's Alleged Cold Fusion Device For 32 Days

Assmasher Re:Hoax (986 comments)

You've mentioned this "study" multiple times - would you care to provide some links?

about 2 months ago

Submissions

top

U.S. Rollout of the flagship HTC One delayed until end of April

Assmasher Assmasher writes  |  about a year and a half ago

Assmasher (456699) writes "The widely praised and anticipated arrival of HTC's flagship Android smartphone, the HTC One, has apparently been delayed until the end of April.

From the manufacturer: "We are currently manufacturing the new HTC One and arranging delivery dates with our US carrier and retail partners. When we originally announced the new THC One, we communicated a March availability date but we unfortunately will not meet this date in the US. We now expect to roll out the new HTC One in North America before the end of April."

How this bodes for HTC's troubled and declining smartphone marketshare remains to be seen, but rest assured that Samsung will do everything in its considerable power to get the Galaxy S4 on shelves in time to make the HTC One's debut as damp a squib as possible."

Link to Original Source
top

R/C F16 Jet with realtime pilot view

Assmasher Assmasher writes  |  more than 3 years ago

Assmasher (456699) writes "Toys are infinitely cooler these days than they were when we were kids. While we had to subside on crappy Lego houses and weak Nerf guns, youngsters now get to craft accurate models of the Millennium Falcon and play with a foam arsenal that would make the CIA blush with envy.

The same goes for remote-controlled vehicles. We've already seen exactly how much fun can be had with a point-of-view camera, an RC Jeep and a little time. Now another crafty RC aficionado has applied the same camera tech to a remote-controlled F16 fighter jet.
There aren't words to describe how awesome this is."

Link to Original Source
top

Directed Energy Weapon Downs Ballistic Missile

Assmasher Assmasher writes  |  more than 4 years ago

Assmasher (456699) writes "Boeing's Airborne Laser successfully destroyed a sub launched ballistic missile on Thursday, February 11th, 2010. "This was the first directed energy lethal intercept demonstration against a liquid-fuel boosting ballistic missile target from an airborne platform" reported the Missile Defense Agency Reuters. It should be noted that destroying a liquid fueled ballistic missile is generally considered easier than killing a solid fueled equivalent due to the relative fragility of the fueling and other systems."
top

Ethics of hidden installations?

Assmasher Assmasher writes  |  more than 6 years ago

Assmasher (456699) writes "The latest Java update from SUN showed up on my desktop this morning and in the process of installing it I did what I usually do and selected the 'advanced install' checkbox on the Java Setup UI. I do this for the same reason that most of you do — to ensure that I'm only installing what I expect to install (although this can be a false sense of security.) In the past Google has often 'hidden' the installation of their toolbar in other applications' update/install packages, and recently Apple did the same with iTunes and Safari. I find these types of things distasteful because they're 'sneaky.' Unless you choose to view the installation options or choose some 'advanced' option you are possibly unaware or only marginally aware of what's being put on your machine. Lo and behold, the SUN update I just installed tried to install OpenOffice under the guise of updating my Java runtime! Now, I don't have anything against OpenOffice, in fact, I have two machines I use it on, but I don't want it on this one. Out of curiosity, how do people feel about this type of thing?"

Journals

top

Linux's biggest problem need no longer be a problem

Assmasher Assmasher writes  |  more than 10 years ago

I have to say that everytime I log into my Slackware or MDK 9.2 systems, I can't help but feel cleaner, more streamlined. Almost as if the sedentary developer's tire I've been growing for the past 5 years seems to disappear (somewhat.)

I've been working with Win32 and various *nix flavors since the early nineties (yeah, back in the Win32 'S' days, and early NT, lol) and I've always felt that way when using a *nix machine.

Cleaner, somehow healthier, as if I know that there is NO extraneous crap going on in the background, I can control everything if I wish and nothing gets installed that I don't wish to be installed.

I'm beating around the bush of the subject I really wish to diarize, but I just want to convey the actual 'feeling' of using Linux for me. Now, unlike many Slashdotters, I don't get hives when I run Win2K or XPPro; however, it just isn't the same. I feel like I'm always watching out for things when I get mail, or visit sites, or pulling things off the web to view offline. I just seem to always be looking over my shoulder and checking my system for spyware, trojans, making sure my AV software is up to date (even though it is set to 'automatic updating' I still feel I have to watch it.)

Basically this means I, later than many others, feel that Linux is TRULY ready to make the foray into desktop dominance. Server side? Not an issue, it is already there. The only reason M$ has ANY server installations is because companies haven't abandoned the M$ desktop yet. Believe me, there'll never be an IT department where the desktop machines run Linux and the IT servers run M$ OSes! LOL.

This brings me to the sticking point. What is it that keeps Linux from absolutely demolishing Windows XP (et al) right now?

Interfaces? No way. They're all pretty close to the same now.

Development tools? Not anymore. While we don't have an exact counterpart to VB (well, we sort of do), C/C++ development is trivial on Linux now.

Multimedia support? No way.

Stability? LOL! No way.

Security? While we're not as secure as we all like to pretend we are, we're still parsecs ahead of M$.

Ease of use? Not any more, with the exception of 'latest and greatest' hardware which is not a reflection on Linux but the marketplace. By this I mean that if we resolve the issues I do think we still have, this problem goes away.

Available quality software? Somewhat, many of the most important areas are covered by Linux, but there is still a gap between what kind of quality you can get on XP as opposed to Linux.

Now we get to the three things I believe are holding Linux back from replacing Microsoft's dominance of the desktop.

(1)Dependencies
(2)Games
(3)Closed Source Stigma

Number 1, our dependency issues. I'm sure everyone has run into this one. "I can't have both programs installed and usable at the same time because their dependencies conflict." It is wonderful that there are a myriad of distributions, and it is wonderful that most of them include a default installation of development tools (unless you specify not to); however, we cannot in all seriousness consider our dependency problems to be a non-issue because users can just 'build the software' themselves. This causes havoc for numerous reasons. (A)People cannot simply rely on downloading and installing software (although this is often successful) through urpmi or other package management systems because there often need to be different packages for different distributions and also it is shockingly common to find to applications which cannot run at the same time because they require different versions of (for example) glibc. (B)Relying on our current model for dependency resolution (building it yourself) keeps commercial closed source products (such as games) from seeing linux as an attractive deployment environment. They sure as hell don't want to expose the source code for 5 million dollars (a normal dev cost for a modern game) worth of software to the world for free...

(2)Games, games, and games. Games are CRITICAL to wide acceptance of Linux. Most kids through their teenage years, that's all they care about (plus Instant Messaging.) Dependencies are a concern for games, but shouldn't be a serious one as most games can solve this through static linking; however, meeting driver requirements (such as simply having hardware acceleration of OpenGL) is still a potentially tricky issue for the vast majority of linux users. This is an issue mostly (imho) on the side of the video card companies (i.e. the install process for ATI's drivers to allow for DRI support) and somewhat on the kernel/driver side (as in 'perhaps there are some changes to facilitate making this more idiot proof for companies like ATI/nVidia.)

(3)The stigma automatically assigned to closed source products on Linux. Now Linux and OSS go hand in hand; however, the 'religious' nature of the many open source zealots actively discourages smaller companies, who don't know if they do or do not wish to support linux, from feeling a level of comfort and community acceptance. MAKE ANY SOFTWARE COMPANY WELCOME IN THE LINUX COMMUNITY, even (don't laugh [too hard]) Microsoft. We may wish for Utopia; however, many companies who don't have the deep pockets (nor political motivations) of IBM are not willing to give away software that they've paid their developers to produce. Don't shun them for this. Don't disparage them for this. THANK THEM for making software for us.

I really think that with the egregiously cheap costs of massive amounts of memory and HDD space available nowadays, static linking as much as possible would remove many of the problems associated with dependencies which plague our fine operating system.

Yes that makes upgrading more of a chore in the sense that each application would need to be upgraded/patched; however, we (now) tend to break more applications through upgrading an *.so than we fix.

Let's do what we can to make Linux distributions a level gaming platform. In other words, (not that I've got the cojones to do this) we should have our own 'DirectX' of sorts. While we have systems that handle parts of these, I would argue that these should be Linux ONLY tools for the same reason that DirectX is M$ ONLY. It is a key component in the war to bring games to an OS.

Lastly, let's cut back on the rhetoric about 'evil empires', 'Windoze people are stupid', 'M$ is evil', 'Open Source is the only way', and simply take the high road in all instances. Why? Because we KNOW Linux is better. It doesn't matter if some WinTroll comes and says "Linux is sh*t" and then we retort with an educated yet vitriolic assasination of everything and everyone windows because we've likely scared some people off about ourselves in doing so. Let's do some "turn the other cheek" reasoning. I've lost count of the times I've talked to another techie who was looking into deploying Linux and told me that they found the ngs and people disturbing and disparaging, even rude.

My $0.000002 for today

top

Slashdot, no longer a free thinking demographic...

Assmasher Assmasher writes  |  more than 11 years ago

Sadly, a once great bastion of unfettered thinking for the IT world (and occasionally beyond) has become the stronghold for anti-Windows/anti-MS zealotry. How many posts in the past two years have been anti-MS? How many have been subjectively derogatory of Windows (and other MS products)?

Now, because Slashdot is (or at least used to be) for the nerd in all of us, of course there will be MS bashing and Windoze castigation; however, the level and the obvious subjectivity of those dogging anything MS related is beyond the bounds of reason.

Then, again, most of these subjective posts come from people very closely associated with Slashdot (for example, roblimo) ergo Slashdot appears to have become less of an editorial synopsis of cool world news and more of a welcome home to Linux zealots who can't seem to install Mozilla on Windows.

Now, I am a Linux, Solaris, Irix, and Win2k/XP Pro professional developer, so I am indeed disheartened by seeing my absolute favorite website in all the world (slightly ahead of consumption junction ;)) become a Linux school yard bully.

Just look at the invective and stupidity in people's posts when someone posts something that can even be remotely construed as not anti-Microsoft. LOL, not even pro-Microsoft. Apparently the absence of a deep and abiding hatred of the Redmond giant makes you a traitor to everything *nix on Slashdot.

Worst of all, the moderator scoring, lol. I read a very logical, objective post by someone in a thread about stability which was pro-NT/2K and the zealots punished the poster with such ridiculous penalties as 'off topic', lol. Maybe there should be an age requirement for posters? Most of the zealots appear to be 13 years old.

Sh*t, more to say on this later, build done...

Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?