Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Cherry picking one's evaluative criteria (Score 1) 409

Cost is not the only consideration. It also by and large doesn't matter - environmental damage does. And build time.

Nuclear power plants can only be built so fast...I believe the chief restriction at the moment is how fast the containment vessels can be manufactured, and there's already a backlog.

What's frustrating is that we're pouring billions into fusion research with virtually no evidence of payout, instead of going with the solutions we have today, and then working on fusion once we've stopped fucking over the planet quite so quickly.

Comment Re:It wasn't his fault (Score 0) 127

Haruko Obokata was the lead researcher on those, and also the person responsible for fabricating the research results. Sure, his name was on it as a co-author, but that sounds more like the result of office politics than actually believing what she was publishing.

"Who's listed as author and in what order" is full of politics and bargaining. It's extremely common for first author to be a PI (faculty member or head of a group/lab) simply because the research happened in their lab and the actual primary researcher did most/all of the work.

Sometimes one researcher gets "scooped" and in exchange for providing help/data, gets authorship on someone else's paper as a sort of last-ditch attempt to get something out of their work.

Comment they will not release the note (Score 1) 127

Especially in a country like Japan where suicide is a huge problem, the note's contents will never be released.

Reporting on suicide has serious ethical consequences, and revealing the contents of the note means others will see suicide as a valid way to bring their ideas, grievances, or innocence to public light.

In most cases suicides are not reported, and even if they are newsworthy, generally the suicide nature is downplayed as much as possible.

It's one of those really sucky problems that's hard to deal with. Few really realize how much of a problem it is, but bringing awareness often makes it worse. One of the many things insidious about mental illness.

Comment Re:Yubikey is the way to go... (Score 1) 113

The submitter asked:

"I've been wondering whether there are any feasible and working FOSS and open hardware-based security token generator projects out there"

Is Yubikey open source software and hardware? Because it appears to be neither.

RSA was in the NSA's back pocket. Why wouldn't these people? How can their hardware or software be audited?

Comment taking things out of context (Score 1) 739

I replied to someone who said that "his manner is coarse." They were speaking of Linus's general manner, not his specific conduct in this particular case. Linus has a long history of name-calling, mocking, ridiculing, etc. So no, I have not "just learned to read recently" (hello, abuse.) You, apparently, are unaware of something called "context"

Comment Re:I know you're trying to be funny, but... (Score 1, Insightful) 739

His manner is coarse

It's not "coarse", it's abusive. Namecalling, mocking, ridicule, hyperbole. That's abuse.

you must admit that he's gotten the job done. Linux advances on schedule, patches get incorporated, code gets tested, and all proceeds smoothly.

I sacrificed a chicken yesterday and successfully committed code. You must admit that the ritualistic sacrifice got the job done.

("Getting the job done" does not, and has never required being abusive to others. Getting the job done while being abusive is not proof that being abusive is required or even was part of, "getting the job done.")

Comment I know you're trying to be funny, but... (Score 3, Insightful) 739

...the people who deserve the apology are the people who were subject to an abusive tirade.

You can point out someone made a mistake. There's no obligation to be "nice" when doing so. There is an obligation to not be abusive, which is what Linus repeatedly does. Abuse includes mockery, ridicule, name calling, etc.

He's being a bully, pure and simple - using his popularity to shove around others. That should not be tolerated, full stop.

Comment Re:power, so no, not really? (Score -1) 208

Clearly you read neither the slashdot text (which says "what should we do with these resources") not "what should we do with this website content." It's not even said that the setup is running a public-facing website, or even a website at all.

The commenter very clearly meant "donate the equipment to us."

Comment One of the most common failover mistakes... (Score 3, Interesting) 208

Keep everything ready, so you can switch back when the cloud services fail and/or your management team changes.

Did you miss the part about them trying to cut opex? *siiiiiigh*

Even that aside...Maybe the latter, but not the former. One of the most common mistakes of failover environments is using the "old stuff" for failover/backup.

That works great, until you exceed the computing/storage capacity/bandwidth of the original hardware.

Let's say in a year traffic is up 30%. Something goes wrong, big time, with Teh Cloudz. You've done a good job of keeping the old hardware current and replicated. You 'flip the switch'...and the old environment promptly chokes...oops.

Comment power, so no, not really? (Score 4, Insightful) 208

Unless you're getting power donated as well, you definitely should not be accepting every machine you can get.

If this stuff more than a few years old, the power bill is going to quickly eclipse the cost differential of better hardware.

Electricity costs vary, but a ballpark of 1 watt/year = $1 is roughly right around here. That doesn't include cooling. A probably conservative but very rough ballpark power estimate would be 3kW for that equipment...I didn't count hard drives, the firewall, the router, etc.

Slashdot Top Deals

So you think that money is the root of all evil. Have you ever asked what is the root of money? -- Ayn Rand

Working...