Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment I don't get it (Score 1) 130 130

So the argument all along has been

I don't want to have the same profile across all my google products but I want to login with the same profile across all the products

Which, to put it bluntly, is fucking retarded.

If you want different profiles, create different accounts. Your identity is your identity, its pretty stupid to use the same account across all the platforms but different names, the only person you're fooling is yourself, for everyone else we can still easily link your various google accounts to the same login, but hey, you go ahead and pretend because you can now use a different alias on youtube that no one can figure out who you are when you go trolling.

So big fucking woop, you don't have to give google the 3 lines it requires for a Google+ profile in one place ... now you're going to do it in EVERY place.

If you're one of the people who think this is good, you really are stupid and need to put your tin foil hat away. Its not even hiding you from anything.

Yes, this post is inflammatory, its supposed to be, its targeted at the trolls who think hiding behind their half assed pseudonym is clever even when logging in with the same email address/account everywhere.

Comment Re:I don't think you want an OSI license. (Score 1) 85 85

real desire. It's totally possible to have a proprietary license with source provided to the customer.

That's still open source. Contrary to what Stallman and the libretards have tried to do and usurp the wording, open source doesn't mean giving it away for free. It means the source is available, maybe even at an additional cost.

It's only GPL fanboys that think OSS implies free. OSS software predates Stallman and FSF, GNU and GPL, he didn't come up with the idea ... He just tried to usurp it and twist it to his own narrow definition based on his viral agenda.

Comment Re:Good (Score 2, Insightful) 266 266

I fly drones (real ones, not this crap that DJI sells, those are just Quads with some halfassed flight controllers).

I think this is GREAT. This is simply common sense. Someone else's property is not yours to do with as you wish, that includes public lands.

Quads ARE DANGEROUS when they are large enough to carry a camera. A drop from even 10 feet above your head with a 5 pound object is MORE than enough to be RELIABLY LEATHAL.

Comment Re:He didn't prove any flaw (yet) (Score 1) 158 158

like the trunk which opens automatically when you put your foot under the car and you are nearby. This is just a big gift for thieves, just wait for tourists with a car full of stuff to leave their car, stand in the vicinity and put your foot under the car when they leave but they are still near enough to allow the trunk to open...

Awe, isn't that cute, you're talking about shit you know nothing about.

In order for that trunk to open, your key has to be within about 1/3rd of a meter from the trunk lock or it doesn't open, so if I'm close enough that you can get into the trunk that way, I'm also close enough to just beat your ass for trying, since you two are going to be well within my striking distance at that point. You'd be hard pressed to get your foot under there with me close enough because I'm going to be in between you and the sensor or the sensor is going to ignore you.

And by the way, that sensor ... its a kick button, not just an IR pickup or something.

Same for the doors, you have to be within about a foot of the door. You can't unlock the doors from the outside when the key is on the inside. You can't unlock or open any of the doors with the key at or more than a meter away from the door you're trying to unlock.

You're missing the point here. They know how to deal with keys reasonable well, this is not new. In fact anything that requires physical presence they are generally pretty good with these days. There isn't a lot new here even if you think keyless entry is, it isn't.

They don't know shit about dealing with radio connected cars that can be touched by people anywhere on the planet. THATS why this DAB thing is a possibility, previously the only people who could 'hack' the car, were physically in contact with the car, which is an easy problem to deal, Smith & Wesson sells a product for this. What they can't deal with is when some random person somewhere far away that you can't see or detect until your left front wheel locks up because someone remotely commanded the ABS/TCS system to lock the wheel. No one in the car would do that because it's dangerous to them. The dude sitting in his chair miles away? He'll do it because he's an arrogant prick that thinks he's special cause he downloaded some hax0r app where someone else did all the work and doesn't realize that being a script kiddie just makes him a douche, not powerful and impressive.

Comment Re:Music? (Score 1) 60 60

... Participating in the music (i.e. singing along or head banging) is more than just listening. Which is where you fail to understand my statement.

Simply listening to music in the background while doing another task nearly universally makes people more productive and more focused than without.

Bottom line, anything that distacts you from the task at hand, impairs your ability, contrary to what you may think.

No shit Sherlock, you figure that one out all by yourself? I'm fairly certain that we all know that before any of these studies even started, after all ... THATS THE MEANING OF DISTRACTION.

The point is that music itself is NOT distracting and is in fact helpful. Finding another excuse/distraction to not get the job done is the human's fault, not the music, but hey I'm guessing you're one of those guys that likes to have an excuse for everything, right?

Comment Re:Not sure whats more impressive... (Score 1) 150 150

you have to remember GPUs have abysmal memory bandwidth (due to being limited by PCIe's 16GB/s to the CPU)

Uhm, no. GPUs have massive bandwidth to THEIR memory. You're talking about lower speeds to memory of A DIFFERENT PROCESSOR, so essentially you're trying to compare using the PCI bus as a network and your direct memory access. These are two different things. GPUs can have far more memory than the systems they are attached to and nVidia has certainly used this as a selling point for their GPGPU stuff. If your GPU is using system memory over the PCI bus, you fucked up your hardware purchase. When you think of the PCI bus as a network bus, which is what its used for in the instance you're referring to, then its about as fast as you can find within several orders of magnitude of cost. The problem with GPUs is branching, not memory.

3.Programming is the biggest difficulty, and will make or break our company and processor. The DARPA grant is specifically for continued research and work on our development tools, which are intended to automate the unique features of our memory system. We have some papers in the works and will be talking pubicly about our *very* cool software in the next couple of months.

You've never heard of Itanium, have you? Unless you can change this so that your model fits the existing developer base, you're screwed. Seriously, go read up on Itanium, trust me, you'll realize that your best bet is to figure out how to blow as much of the money as you can on vacations and fun things before it disappears.

and stack machines are notorious for having HORRIBLE support for languages like C.

So basically everything anyone that matters understands about software dev ... won't work on your machine. Well thats handy, at least you'll have an excuse as to why no one can make useful software for your system.

have been around for over 10 years and have given nothing but talks with powerpoints (though they clearly are very intelligent and have an interesting architectures) says a lot about their future viability. I hate to be a downer like that

Thats okay, you're just too young and inexperienced to realize you'll be lucky if you last that long.

Comment Re:Yes 'drones' can take out aircraft (Score 1) 368 368

All commercially built helicopters are designed for large bird strikes, a Phantom impacting the rotor or tail rotor is unlikely to cause very much damage. You're imagining a full on direct impact with the main mass of the phantom, which would never happen, its just going to hit one or two of the arms the motors are attached to and that impact will send the rest of the phantom away from the rotor at significant speed and certainly leave the phantom in no flyable shape so its not going to happen again.

LiPo batteries that you're talking about, are far from dense, thats why they are used in aircraft, low mass == low weight == better flight performance

Comment Re:Are drones really THAT dangerous? (Score 1) 368 368

...

Its unlikely to cause very much damage to the tail rotor actually, a dent or something, maybe some vibration, but nothing thats going to down the aircraft. Tail rotors aren't made out of Balsa and a Phantom is pretty small.

And further more, 'major'' damage to the tail rotor isn't going to be something the pilot can deal with. The tail rotor either works well enough to fly and the pilot won't really notice, or it fails to the point where it doesn't counter act the torque of the main rotors, in which cause the pilot's skill level doesn't matter, the aircraft can not be 'flown' in any sense of the word. In order to not spin around in circles till he passes out, then dies, he's going to auto rotate the craft immediately, which means a very hard landing in an almost certainly unplanned place. While this is a maneuver that heli pilots are required to train for ... its also one that doesn't actually go well when you do it in a real situation. People tend to get hurt very badly or die in an auto rotation.

Comment Re:Are drones really THAT dangerous? (Score 1) 368 368

Do YOU want to be in a helicopter when a drone gets sucked into its intake.

You run on the second turbine until you can land. These aren't single engine craft.

The helicopter's engine likely stalls

Helicopters don't 'stall', thats fixed wing aircraft.

the helicopter then goes into autorotation if you are lucky

This isn't optional, its the way they work, autorotation happens without any intervention from the pilot at any point when the turbine is producing less power than the energy stored in the rotors. If this did not happen, powering down the turbine would cause the aircraft to spin out of control in circles due to the torque differences. This happens in normal operations, it is in fact required just to turn the damn thing off on the ground.

landing in the fire you are trying to put out.

You don't drop flame retardant materials in the middle of the fire, you drop them on the edges or small sections, making it trivial to 'not land in the fire', though your alternative landing sites are probably effectively dangerous due to terrain ... otherwise you'd use a fire truck.

What if the drone smashes into your windshield in limited visibility, knocking the pilot out cold or worse.

The wind shields of modern aircraft are designed for heavy high speed impacts, unless you fly into a predator drone, this is unlikely to be a problem. A helicopter simply doesn't fly fast enough (and can't due to the laws of physics) to make this a serious issue.

You are very wrong here. Look at the airplane that landed in the Hudson River that was taken out by a goose. Seriously, a goose, a lot of drones are of similar weight or larger, also a lot softer.

It was taken out by multiple, in multiple engines. It flew into a flock of them. Not one, not two, but more than 4 at a minimum judging by insturmentation.

If bird strikes are a hazard, how would a drone NOT be a hazard?

They are a hazard and should be removed from the picture in emergency situations in whatever way the first responders see fit.

The problem, which you are completely ignoring because 'omg think of the children' over reactions is what happens when the first responders take out a drone for bullshit reasons, like the cops who shoot down a drone recording them breaking the law and beating someone on the side of the road?

First responders are people, nothing more. Many of them will abuse any power they're granted. Not all, but many, and if you want to avoid having those professions attract people who abuse power, you must properly constraint that power. Otherwise, people react like you, with a whole bunch of reasons to 'do the right thing' ... but all the reasons as simply wrong due to ignorance such as your own.

Comment Re:Few people understand the economics (Score 1) 249 249

Sorry Bruce, I think you're entirely off the mark on this one.

The OpenSSL projects problem is its developers being unwilling to make the choices that need to be made for the good of the SSL project itself, not lack of money.

Lack of money certainly could have contributed, but considering what your arguing is that by allowing FEWER people to use it, it would have been handled better ... well that just doesn't stand up to me.

Couple with that the number of massive companies that use and depend on OpenSSL who did nothing for it but do contribute back to BSD licensed projects regularly ... and the number of companies that simply avoid OpenSSL (Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, eBay, PayPal, American Express, Bank of America and many other large financial institutions) because its a total mess when they could contribute to it ...

OpenSSL is an exhibit in how not to write security related code, not lack of funding. The lack of funding is a side effect of the silly SSLeay license crap thrown in and crap code. Just because it was the most popular doesn't mean it was the best, or even good.

Comment Re:It's a Good Thing (Score 1) 312 312

Because fuck those rednecks, that's why.

Ironic isn't it. That simple statement there is the biggest part of the problem.

Why can't people just accept that other people have different beliefs and stay away?

Its one thing when a racist fuck forces something on you, its an entirely THE SAME THING when you want to force yourself on some racist fuck.

And just for reference, it is not illegal to run your business in a racist manner, like 'whites only', its just REALLY difficult.

Comment Re:If race doesn't exist, how is this possible? (Score 1) 312 312

Why is one genetic expression the all important one

Because they are ignorant racists. Do you really have to even pretend to ask the question? Its not about something thats actually wrong with them, its about continuing some racists ignorance about people and historically they've only had skin color to cue on so they can't suddenly pretend skin color is irrelevant, if they did they might have to acknowledge the stupidity of the whole premise.

People hate things that are different. Skin color is something they can see from far away as different.

This isn't about actual differences in people (of which there are many between races in general! Both good and bad, in every 'race') its about the perceived difference in people and the stupidity that follows.

Comment Re:Carbon dating is a scam (Score 1) 108 108

Its certainly not as reliable as people tend to make it out/believe it to be.

This is just an example of how it can become inaccurate, and this is only one example, only god knows what happened seemingly randomly throughout the span of time. What happened to C14/C12 ratios during various asteroid impacts and such? ... no one knows, its all speculation and guesses, and due to confirmation bias the guesses are naturally aligned with what they want to confirm/prove.

So its a method that fits what the scientists using it want it to fit.

Comment STOP! (Score 1) 192 192

Head lights that try to move and predict what I'm doing are fucking obnoxious and almost no use what so ever. My wifes car has headlights that turn with the steering wheel. They are nothing but obnoxious. They turn so little it does nothing but distract me and many times they are turning the wrong way from where I actually want to see when pulling a trailer and having to swing wide before turning the actual direction I want.

12 meters? awesome, so it can focus on the guy a half a second before I run over him at 60mph, SO USEFUL! And of course I want those lights randomly change directions to point at new objects while I'm driving rather than being consistent and not distracting me while at the same time pointing away from the things I probably actually want to see, like the road in front of me.

Just fucking stop trying to make things so smart, you're being really stupid.

"Summit meetings tend to be like panda matings. The expectations are always high, and the results usually disappointing." -- Robert Orben

Working...