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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:No conservation of responsibility. (Score 1) 1440

If the first car hadn't been stationary at a green light, the accident wouldn't have happened.

Why stop there? Why not just get rid of the lights? While we're at it, why not just get rid of all intersections everywhere and make the road a large, continuous loop? After all, if there are no intersections, then nobody can stop at an intersection to get rear-ended.

It's legally 100% the following car's fault when rear-ending a vehicle, here in NSW Australia, anyway. The reasoning? If there is an intersection and you crash into the car in front, then you were supposed to have seen the car in front and had plenty of time and space to slow down. The driver is likely focusing on the lights and the intersection, making sure that it's safe and permissable to proceed, instead of looking in their mirrors. If you're driving along and you crash into the car in front, even if they braked suddenly, then it's still your fault because you were tail-gating, which is also illegal.

Comment Responsibilities (Score 1) 607

From the Guardian article:

The files show that the National Security Agency and its UK counterpart GCHQ have broadly compromised the guarantees that internet companies have given consumers to reassure them that their communications, online banking and medical records would be indecipherable to criminals or governments.

As an example to compare against, I chose a major bank in my country (Australia's Commonwealth Bank), and looked around their website. There is a page called 'Security', and the first thing I spot on that page is the statement: "100% Security Guarantee: With NetBank, the safety of your money is 100% guaranteed."

Putting aside the fact that the SAFETY of something is not necessarily the same as the SECURITY of something, what does this news mean to a banking customer? Does the bank have the obligation, under the advertised "100% Security Guarantee" to find and implement methods that hinder NSA/GCHQ access?

And this doesn't affect just Commonwealth Bank (I just chose it as an example). One of the main points of putting money in a bank is that it's SECURE. If a government agency (from another country, even) has the ability to reach into my bank account and make my money disappear in a virtual puff of smoke, then how is the account any more secure than, for example, hiding cash under a mattress?

Comment Re:faster bookmarks (Score 1) 191

I read a lot of webcomics, so I tend to check each one about once a month. For me I open the webcomic's bookmark, read through the archive until I read the present, then copy a permalink into the bookmarks' properties (I keep Firefox's Bookmarks window in the background).

For me, this is analogous to reading a physical book from a marked page, then before I put the book back I pull the bookmark from its previous location and replacing it where I'm currently up to.

Comment WolframAlpha results (Score 1) 299

(Alpha Centauri) 2.1 lightyears: 6.3654 x 10^7 seconds x 2 = 4.03 years
(Gliese 581 g) 11 lightyears: 1.457 x 10^8 seconds x 2 = 9.24 years
(HD 85512 b) 18 lightyears: 1.864 x 10^8 seconds x 2 = 11.82 years
(Kepler 22-b) 300 lightyears: 7.608 x 10^8 seconds x 2 = 48.25 years
(Andromeda Galaxy) 1250000 lightyears: 4.911 x 10^10 seconds x 2 = 3115 years

(Calculated using "x lightyears at 1g acceleration", followed by "(x.xxx x x^x seconds in years)*2")

Slashdot Top Deals

"When the going gets tough, the tough get empirical." -- Jon Carroll

Working...