Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Yet another Ted Cruz bashing article ! (Score 1) 416

You must have a very dificult time with reading comprehension. I never said the concept was scientific, i said you cannot use science to disprove it. Therefore saying the earth is 10,000 years old is not anti science, its just unscientific.

Oh hey look, a semantics argument that is absolutely bereft of logic.

Insisting that the Earth is 10,000 years old /is/ anti-science because it requires one to completely ignore the evidence to the contrary and to embrace a folk tale that is the sole evidence "for" it. It requires vehemently closing one's eyes to the world.

Science requires observation. It's right there in the definition of the "scientific method" as understood by just about anyone with functioning neurons. Refusing to observe is therefore anti-science.

Q.E. motherfucking D.

Now go play in traffic. Because I assure you that if you shut your eyes to the automobiles whizzing around you, they will disappear.

--
BMO

Comment Guv'nuh Skeletor (Score 1) 366

... is yet another one of the teabagistan nutjobs that make me wonder if there is anyone left in the Republican party that isn't fucking nuts.

I mean, the Democrats aren't any great shakes (I abhor Hillary - she's morphed into just another neocon hawk), but the psychopathy exhibited by those with an R next to their names is just absolutely stunning. I look at the current list of the Presidential candidates that the RNC has foisted upon us voters, and it's a clown-car of bottom-feeding grifters and scumbags.

When they come to NH, I'm going to mosey down the hill to the Barley House (it's a 6 minute walk) just to get my picture taken so I can say "I was there when the animal atop Donald Trump's head ate Scott Walker."

--
BMO

Comment Re:Dur, how does the World Wide Web work again? (Score 1) 87

Did Tim Berners-Lee die in vain?!

No, he died in Washington DC.

BABE: I see ...well, who am us, anyway?

EDDIE: We're one of you, and you're one of us, I think.

JOE: Maybe ...

DC: Possibly ...

BABE: How do you tell? How do you know for sure? How do you ever really know?

JOE: They didn't ask questions like that back in 1776! No, they didn't have time back in 1776! Back in 1776, boy, they were too busy singing songs like...

EDDIE [Singing]:

"Yankee Doodle came to terms,
Writing Martin Buber.
Stuck a Fuhrer in our back,
And called it Shicklegruber!"

--
BMO

Comment Re:Interpreting these conditions (Score 2) 188

the GPL is largely untested in court.

No it isn't. It's been tested at the federal level.

Daniel Wallace tried to get the GPL declared invalid through stretching of legal concepts, and was thusly shown how stupid /that/ is.

Wallace v. International Business Machines Corp.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Wallace v. International Business Machines Corp. et al., 467 F.3d 1104 (7th Cir. 2006), was a significant case in the development of free software. The case decided, at the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, that in United States law the GNU General Public License (GPL) did not contravene federal antitrust laws. Daniel Wallace, a United States citizen, sued the Free Software Foundation (FSF) for price fixing. In a later lawsuit, he unsuccessfully sued IBM, Novell, and Red Hat. Wallace claimed that free Linux prevented him from making a profit from selling his own operating system.[1]

And this quote from the decision shows that the courts completely understand the values behind the GPL and copyleft.

From the 7'th Circuit decision of the Wallace vs. IBM appeal:

http://www.internetlibrary.com...
  People may make and distribute derivative works if and only if they come under the same license terms as the original work. Thus the GPL propagates from user to user and revision to revision: neither the original author, nor any creator of a revised or improved version, may charge for the software or allow any successor to charge. Copyright law, usually the basis of limiting reproduction in order to collect a fee, ensures that open-source software remains free: any attempt to sell a derivative work will violate the copyright laws, even if the improver has not accepted the GPL. The Free Software Foundation calls the result âoecopyleft.â

And notice the subsequent utter silence from Darl and the lawyers at SCO, who were jumping up and down about the so-called unconstitutionality of the GPL. Among other things.

The validity of the GPL is now settled law.

but any element of it that is reasonably subject to interpretation can be interpreted any way you like

This is why you aren't a lawyer.

--
BMO - not a lawyer, but someone who doesn't agree with people who think that lawyers perform magic. They don't.

Comment Re:Gaming on Linux will matter... (Score 3, Informative) 199

>Worthy Office Competitor

Most people don't need anything more than Google Docs.

>but muh obscure Word function

If you're using something obscure in modern versions of Office, you're going to lose when you try to share the document with /other/ Office users. And don't even get me started on formatting when everyone and his brother has slightly different fonts installed (well, it certainly seems that way).

Most (sane) offices have standardized on Office 97 formats, out of desperation with Microsoft's ever changing formats. Office 97's formats are well known and well handled by Office alternatives.

>Windows 10 looks very good

It does? When the icons look like they've been done in Paint?

The Oxygen icons in KDE are better.

>DirectX

Sorry, OpenGL is still better.

--
BMO

Comment Re:What's the alternative? (Score 1) 270

If you live in the US or various other countries the Chinese also have nuclear weapons aimed at you.

I lived through the cold war. I am going on 50 years old, and I've heard all this bullshit before multiple times in various different inflections and languages.

And that's what it is. Bullshit. Bullshit spouted by people who work for the government and defense contractors who want the big teat of corporate welfare to the war machine to keep on keepin' on.

Fuck you.

Shut the fuck up. My god.

--
BMO

Comment Re:Ah, Damnit... (Score 3, Informative) 516

Obviously there's a machine performance benefit too, when you take things like transparency into account.

No, it's not obvious. These days the video card takes care of all that. And whether the alpha channel is 0 or 255 the value is going to be read anyway. The performance hit is nil.

--
BMO

Comment Re:Actually, ADM Rogers doesn't "want" that at all (Score 1) 406

Do you understand that an individualized warrant is required to target, collect, store, analyze, or disseminate the communications content of a US Person anywhere on the globe, and that the current law on the issue is stronger and more restrictive with regard to US Persons than it has ever been?

Whether a warrant is required or not is irrelevant when the agency itself ignores such laws as "inefficient."

It has been proven that they log everything (what used to be called a pen register) and admit to it ("it's only metadata, why should you care?" we are told), and I've previously calculated how much data they'd need to record any person's utterances 24 hours a day, 365 days a year and it came out to something like 5 bucks the last time, assuming that someone talked continuously without sleep or stopping to breathe . It's less now because single 4 terabyte hard disks are available for $132 at Newegg, retail and a top-of-the-line enterprise quality 8TB disk with helium goes for under $750. And these are retail prices.

Don't believe me? 16Kb/s for that amount of time is roughly 64GB (516.7E9 bits no parity). So being generous, say we lose 500GB to formatting a 4TB drive, 3500 Salesman Gigabytes.

3500/64=54.blahblah 1 year partitions.

132/54=$2.44.

Less than an Extra Large Dunkin Donuts coffee.

For a year.

But wait there's more.

People don't talk 24 hours a day. They talk on average about 16000 words a day, according to this:

http://www.scientificamerican....

So what amount of time does that mean? It means about an hour-and-a-half of speaking at 3 words/second (which is average). 1/16'th of a day.

So take all of that $2.44, and divide it by 16

15 cents.

That's all it takes to store your utterances for an entire year. Half that if you really don't give a fuck about voice quality.

For the entire nation, which is 319 million, that gives $48 million to record everyone's utterances for an entire year. If you only record what is said on the phone, it's a tiny fraction of that.

CHUMP CHANGE WELL WITHIN A FEDERAL AGENCY'S BUDGET ESPECIALLY IF THAT BUDGET IS BLACK.

This does not include all the other stuff like connection to the networks, but that is all externalized by requiring the phone companies, etc, to take the bulk of that cost on themselves.

And by looking at that huge datacenter in Utah, they are already doing it and doubling-down on the methodology.

They don't give a flying fuck about warrants as we've seen, and it's technically and financially feasible, so they'll do it / are doing it.

--
BMO

Comment Re:Bad Advice (Score 1) 286

All the advice I had been given was that women were turned off by the kind of geeky guy who spent that much time with his computer.

>in facebook
>online acquaintance who knows I'm a geek opens chat and is frustrated with her computer
>she trusts me enough to log in remotely through Teamviewer.

She proceeded to ask me questions, because all she really knew about me was my facebook page. No, I'm not gay, but I have a lot of gay friends thus the gay rights stuff on my page. I'm older than your sister and closer to your age. Yes, I'm single.

>get to seriously talking
>get to the point of trading THESE ARE THE THINGS WHY YOU SHOULD RUN THE HELL AWAY
>both reach the conclusion "that's not a big deal"
>my plans for a weekend fall through. "Hey, why don't you come down and we hang out in Boston?"
>meet
>hit it off immediately.
>skedaddle off to Concord NH.

and we both suffered some horrible emotional scarring in our prior lives apart, but that scarring is what allowed us to appreciate what we have together.

This is why the "you should run away" stuff didn't discourage either of us, and in practice, the baggage is recognized for what it is. "Like old boxers comparing scars."

it's better to be rejected by women for who you are than to be accepted by women for who you are not.

I consider it an idiot filter. It's useful. Plus "keeping up appearances" is far too much work anyway.

It's been over a year with no end in sight, really.

>finding love later in life
>hopelessly in love with each other

All the previous bullshit was worth it in the long run even if a lot of it was unnecessary and stupid.

--
BMO

Slashdot Top Deals

Good day to avoid cops. Crawl to work.

Working...