Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:The gap seems reasonable (Score 1) 179

I am honestly stunned that they are selling these at a loss considering how expensive they are. Is Microsoft simply incurring high manufacturing costs because this is not their normal market? How is is possible that the production costs of these tablets is so high when equivalent android tablets are sold at a fraction of the price, presumably for a profit? Why else would third party companies even sell them, after all? They don't get app sale revenue from google... It just... boggles the mind.

Comment Re:2013 N7 (Score 1) 179

What exactly is the main problem with it? That it is slow/laggy? I would agree with that, but it is still *quite* usable. This is a two year old device, that was sold for ~$230. It completely pushed the price/performance tablet boundaries, and the small tablet form factor. It literally started its market, Apple likely wouldn't have even released the iPad mini because of it. Most importantly it works bloody great for reading websites, articles, and books. I still use it daily for this purpose. It can also handle 720p video with ease, thanks to dedicated hardware, and I watch all sorts of tv shows on it a few days a week. To top it off, the batter lasts for days if used sparingly, and can handle a full 8 hour day of web browsing/video watching as well. It is a good tablet, and it was sold at an incredible price when introduced.

Comment Re:If you make this a proof of God... (Score 1) 612

They came up with what they thought was a reasonable theory. It is just one theory to explain it, there are other possibilities. The key is that they make theories that are consistent with the observable universe, and if they end up being unprovable by experiments or observations, then they are discarded, and then scientists go back to the great question, Why? You can see this with string theory, a lot of it is mathematically sound, but there is no actual observable evidence of it, so quite a few scientists now just regard it as unprovable nonsense. They may well regard dark matter/energy as nonsense if evidence continues to fall short. That is the whole point of science, observe something, come up with ideas for "Why?", and then test them. If they fail to explain it, then the theory is eventually discarded, and new ones must be made.

And that is exactly how science differs from religion. Religion is set in stone, there is only one true word of god, the bible. The mere text of it is considered divine and straight from god, written with the influence of the holy spirit. It is infallible, it cannot be questioned, and when it is proven wrong, or parts of it continue to fail the evidence test, the religious simply say "You need to have faith". There is no furthering of knowledge with religion, it is essentially a dead end that has already been decided.

Comment Re:If you make this a proof of God... (Score 1) 612

The difference is people are looking for actual evidence of it, and come up with theories and experiments to prove its nature. They only reason physicists came up with it in the first place is because... they did experiments and observed space, and noticed that there was too much gravity compared to observable objects. There is a pattern here, observation, theory, experiment, confirmation or denial of theory. How does one currently unexplainable scientific observation suddenly equate to "scientists own version of god"?

Comment Re:A lot of hunters are asshats (Score 1) 397

Is that not how humans traditionally hunted bears? I keep seeing people deride all this hunting business as using too much technology or insight to trick the animals... but that is precisely what got us to the top of the food chain in the first place. The simple fact of the matter is that killing animals is a solved problem, so these people just self impose rules to make things more 'fun'. Their time would be better spent solving actually challenging problems, but oh well, everyone needs to find entertainment from some place...

Comment Re:Obvious response from Gates (Score 1) 335

The earth is capable of sustaining everyone one of us.

This is not really true, though. Sure the land can grow enough food to support quite a bit more population, but the energy needed to harvest and distribute it? And how do we know it won't eventually turn into desert as we push it more and more? But by far the most important factor is that society itself cannot support more population, we already vastly out populate meaningful social roles. See: http://www.cabinetmagazine.org...

So what exactly happened in Universe 25? Past day 315, population growth slowed. More than six hundred mice now lived in Universe 25, constantly rubbing shoulders on their way up and down the stairwells to eat, drink, and sleep. Mice found themselves born into a world that was more crowded every day, and there were far more mice than meaningful social roles. With more and more peers to defend against, males found it difficult and stressful to defend their territory, so they abandoned the activity. Normal social discourse within the mouse community broke down, and with it the ability of mice to form social bonds. The failures and dropouts congregated in large groups in the middle of the enclosure, their listless withdrawal occasionally interrupted by spasms and waves of pointless violence. The victims of these random attacks became attackers. Left on their own in nests subject to invasion, nursing females attacked their own young. Procreation slumped, infant abandonment and mortality soared. Lone females retreated to isolated nesting boxes on penthouse levels. Other males, a group Calhoun termed “the beautiful ones,” never sought sex and never fought—they just ate, slept, and groomed, wrapped in narcissistic introspection. Elsewhere, cannibalism, pansexualism, and violence became endemic. Mouse society had collapsed.

Comment Re:Curious (Score 1) 84

They really do charge a lot for their courses... I haven't taken any of them, but I can't imagine them being particularly better than the free stuff available online, a google search away. I feel kinda bad because they support a good cause (I believe they help fund Torvalds to maintain the kernel, among other things), but their income sources are just kinda ridiculous.

And in case anyone wants some good intro to Linux material right away, check out this series by Daniel Robbins: http://www.funtoo.org/Linux_Fu...

Comment Re:Sigh - what the heck ... (Score 1) 264

Depends... many consumer versions of OSs have very lax firewall configs by default. It may very well allow it. I certainly have never had to open the port when running transmission on Fedora, it seems like it just allows it regardless. And on Windows you get those little *this application wants to connect to the internet* popups, and if you hit allow it opens up the firewall for that app, for ALL ports I believe. And, I have sat there and not hit the button, and it looks like it just allows the traffic anyway.

Comment Re:Sigh - what the heck ... (Score 1) 264

UPnP is a little less secure, IMO. I only dabble in networking as a hobby so perhaps someone else in here more knowledgable can correct me, but the main reason is: stateful firewalls.

A host with a public address behind a well configured firewall will have all incoming data dropped from any ports by default. Only established connections will be allowed in from the external network, which means the computer behind the firewall will have had to have sent something first. Furthermore, if you are *really* paranoid, you can have the firewall automatically drop everything automatically, regardless of the state of the connection, and then set up specific rules to allow certain types of connectivity (ie: only allow traffic to be returned into the internal network if it originated from the external server's port 80... and you can make it as arbitrarily complex as you want).

UPnP on the otherhand just tells the router, "Hey, open this port, and send anything that arrives on it to me!", and then *everything* sent to that port from the external network will then be routed to the internal network, regardless of whether a connection had been established or not. This is necessary if you are hosting a server behind your firewall, but with UPnP it can happen rather transparently, without the user even knowing it is going on, wheras with a mere firewall, you will have to consciously go in and change the rules to allow incoming traffic from a certain port.

Comment Mere flesh? (Score 5, Funny) 366

But barring an elixir for immortality, a body will come to a point where it has outwitted every peril life has thrown at it. And for each added year, more mutations will have accumulated. If the heart holds out, then waiting at the end will be cancer.'"

Pffft, I plan on being 100% robot by then. I'd like to see cancer bite my shiny metal ass.

Slashdot Top Deals

I've noticed several design suggestions in your code.

Working...