Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×

Comment: Re:Morons ... (Score 2) 138 138

I would guess that the intent is not to make it to court.

The intent is probably to run lots of discovery and waist time tell the guy runs out of money and eventually agrees to settle by giving them the domain.

This is the kind of thing I would love to see the EFF grab and do pro-bona.

Comment: Re:Boo hoo... (Score 2) 814 814

In May 1862, Abraham Lincoln overturned an order issued by General David Hunter that would have freed every slave across vast swaths of the southern Atlantic coast.

That was after he was made president and 1 year into the civil war.

He is not the man you think he is and revising history to make him some grand savior is BS.

Comment: Re:Boo hoo... (Score 5, Informative) 814 814

Enemy oppressor?

Every slave ship sailing from Africa to the USA sailed under the US flag.
For over 100 years of slavery, it was all done under the US flag.

Abraham Lincoln won the 1860 presidential election, His name was not even on the ballot in 10 states. There were only 33 states at the time so close to 1/3 of the states did not have him on the ballot and he still won. That was the key that started the whole civil war! An election that even today would cause riots, to have a candidate win when he was not even on the ballot in 1/3 of the states!

Yes racial tensions were high and yes the south decided to make slavery a key point of there cause, but when the Civil war broke out it was not all about slavery. Abraham Lincoln himself was "Anti-Slavery" meaning against slavery's expansion, however he was not calling for immediate emancipation.

"I say that we must not interfere with the institution of slavery in the states where it exists, because the constitution forbids it, and the general welfare does not require us to do so." -- Abraham Lincoln September 17, 1859: Speech at Cincinnati, Ohio

Comment: Re:What an amazing surprise! (Score 2) 181 181

by Anon-Admin (#49976237) Attached to: Study: Major ISPs Slowing Traffic Across the US

You must be a young kid. Im guessing you dont remember when Ma-Bell ran all the phones in the US and you paid $0.25 a min to call someone that was less than 30 miles away.

Tell me, how much does it cost to call someone 30, 50, or 100 miles away now? Oh wait, it is $0 a min. All from regulating Ma-Bell and having the markets opened.

Kind of killed Phreaking with $0 a min long distance. lol

Comment: Re:Say Good By to the Rainforests .... (Score 4, Interesting) 851 851

by Anon-Admin (#49923863) Attached to: FDA Bans Trans Fat

Take 2 tbl spoons of that bacon fat and put it in a pot. Heat it up and add dry rice to it then stir and cook tell the rice goes from white to a kind of translucent.

Add the water, bring to a boil, drop to a simmer, and simmer for 20 min.

Rice turns out flaky and perfect with a hint of bacon flavor. Personally I love it for breakfast. 1cup of the rice and two eggs over easy on top. Great bacon flavor with my eggs and a whole lot less fat and calories.

Comment: Re:Free Speech (Score 3, Insightful) 180 180

by Anon-Admin (#49857377) Attached to: Anti-TPP Website Being Blacklisted

You may want to re-think your position.

The FCC redefined common Carrier to INCLUDE ISP's.

ISP's are defined as "an organization that provides services for accessing, using, or participating in the Internet."

I am sure Google and Google mail qualify under that definition, as would Facebook and Twitter.

Comment: Governments of the World Agree: Encryption Must Di (Score 2, Insightful) 73 73

by Anon-Admin (#49843363) Attached to: US Office of Personnel Management Hacked Again

Government: Crap, we got hacked again. How are we supposed to protect our lists of security clearances and employee records? Its so confusing.

IT people of the wold collectively reply: ID10T Errors, you have to solve them first! Then you can protect your data.

Comment: Re:Leaders (Score 1) 110 110

You really think a small fraction of executives have IT Skills?

If there is a small fraction then it is so small as to be non-existent. The last executive I met who claimed IT skills kept coming down to the IT department and asking us to answer lists of questions, sometimes it was "Can I get someone to write a C++ program to do XYZ?" where XYZ had nothing to do with the job. Come to find out, he was working on a degree in CS and was having the IT group do his homework.

25 years in the field and I have yet to meet an executive with anything more than the basic windows user skills. The bulk of them consider dual core systems with 2gig of ram and 500g of hard drive space as "Top of the line Desktops"

Comment: Re:32MB (Score 1) 227 227

by Anon-Admin (#49761779) Attached to: Google Developing 'Brillo' OS For Internet of Things

Im doing it on the enc28j60. It does not contain the tcp stack on the unit, you have to handle it in the CPU.

The current code uses 27,626 bytes (89%) of program storage space and 1,543 bytes (75%) of dynamic memory.

Handles web interfacing for the switch, network config, rebooting the unit, and offers a json API call for pulling current state.

That is a wired connection version. I am also working on one that uses the ESP8266 wifi unit which does have the TCP stack on it. That one is much smaller code.

Comment: Re:Sudafed (Score 4, Interesting) 333 333

Someone should read history.

Drug laws in the US are less than 100 years old. It was the late 1930's for most of them. I would suggest you read the arguments in congress while debating the law. It seems that the group FOR the law was arguing that these substances empowered the lesser races. (Im making it polite and not using the slang they used)

Drug laws in the US had more to due with racial control than they did with helping the addicts.

Just to make a point stoners are considered "lazy, irresponsible, thieves, untrustworthy, etc" All the same stereotypes used to describe blacks in the 30's, 40's, and 50's.

Comment: This is just a problem waiting to happen (Score 4, Interesting) 265 265

by Anon-Admin (#49637553) Attached to: Microsoft Releases PowerShell DSC For Linux

I only see this causing issues.

1) Windows Admins writing power shell scripts to do stuff on linux boxes
      a) setting permissions to 777 because they got in the way.
      b) why will it not write the file to c:\?
      c) A power shell script developed and tested on Windows, then pushed out to all the servers and crashing the Linux boxes.
      c) Do you really believe that a Linux admin would allow a windows Admin to run a Power Shell script as root?
2) Linux Admins being asked to manage windows servers because "You know Power Shell" (If they can get the Linux admin to manage the 300 windows servers on top of the existing 500 Linux servers he manages, it saves them headcount and $$$)

Personally I see it going the way all the other Microsoft products have gone when they release a Linux version. It gets adopted by a few windows admins that are forced to work on linux. However the Linux admins and the bulk of Linux systems will never see it or use it. It will eventually get dropped because of the bugs, memory leaks, and issues that are found in it. Those that are never fixed because they concentrate on the Windows version and ignore the Linux version.

Judging from history it is another Embrace, Extend, Extinguish attempt. Microsoft is just pulling from it's old bag of tricks.

If you can't learn to do it well, learn to enjoy doing it badly.