Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Re:it could have been an accident (Score 1) 708

by Cajun Hell (#49345399) Attached to: Germanwings Plane Crash Was No Accident

when that doesn't work (because the door is in "locked" state), the terrorist just threatens the (co)pilot inside to cabin to unlock or he'll kill the pilot and/or everyone else... At which point the pilot opens the door anyway.

He might open the door if he's armed (with the intent to come out blasting), but otherwise I don't think that's very likely.

Comment: Re:it could have been an accident (Score 4, Insightful) 708

by Cajun Hell (#49344705) Attached to: Germanwings Plane Crash Was No Accident

Having a "Locked" position is idiotic to the extreme.

Unfortunately, not having a "Locked" position would be the same amount of idiotic.

Giving one pilot (in the cockpit) the means to basically lock himself in with no ability for the other pilot to enter is too great a danger.

But also failing to give one pilot the means to lock out the other pilot would be too great a danger.

Both scenarios presume one pilot who intends to destroy the aircraft and one pilot who intends to save it. That's the presumption either way, and however you approach the problem it's going to come down to whether the bad guy is locked into, or locked out of, the cockpit.

It's a coin toss, not 9/11-triggered-stupidity corruption.

Comment: mod question down (Score 0) 385

by Cajun Hell (#49287347) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Choosing a Laptop To Support Physics Research?

This question really has jack shit to do with physics. You're looking for whatever laptop best fits a bunch of preferences that nobody else will ever guess (seriously, this is going to be the most important stuff) plus with the requirement that it also be good for editing and compiling C++. The latter can be done with damn near anything. So that leaves people to only debate .. all the usual stuff we have been talking about for the last 30 years. Your entire question is really just this: what's the best laptop?

Next, we shall Kirk vs Picard vs Sheridan. You might also want to Ask Slashdot which political party's candidates you should vote for.

Comment: Re:well.. (Score 1) 759

In regards to your first point, the system would have to be based on the offender's net worth rather than their income in the US, due to all of the tricks that the rich have paid to create in the tax code.

He was talking about hiding it. When things are hidden, tax loopholes are irrelevant because tax law isn't applied to the money in question anyway. If you can hide income then you can probably also hide the accumulated assets.

And as for loopholes, was the idea really based on income, or was it just taxable net?

Speeder: "Your honor, I have dependents and pay mortgage interest, so my fine should have exemptions and a deductible applied before you calculate my fine."

Judge: "?!"

Speeder: "Furthermore, a lot of my income is from gains, so I should be fined at a lower rate than people who have jobs."

Judge: "Wow. You think I'm with the IRS."

Comment: Well, this is embarrassing (but good) (Score 1) 228

I thought Kim Stanley Robinson was dead. No really, I thought I read something a few years ago (maybe even here on Slashdot) that he had died and remember thinking "shit, he'll never get to see Mars."

Obviously, I'm remembering this wrong, and he's alive. Good. I'm glad. I really liked the Mars series, especially the first book.

So.. uh.. I wonder who that was, who died and I got mixed up with KSR. Whoever you are, you will be .. remembered? Oops.

Comment: Re:Could work if they complete it (Score 1) 284

by Cajun Hell (#49229301) Attached to: UK Gov't Asks: Is 10 Years In Jail the Answer To Online Pirates?

If you're a shop owner, then presumably your goods are actually for sale, so you're willing to accept money in exchange for goods which don't suddenly explode and retroactively bind me to a previously-unknown contract after I step out of the store. Few people would be interested in stealing your goods, because they can simply hand you money for them.

I was talking about a very different scenario than anything you will ever face involving shopkeepers: DRM, i.e. a form of fraud. That situation presumes you intend harm to others, so yes, shooting all would-be-customers as they walk into your "store" (if I may use that term very loosely) just might blend into that context seamlessly.

Comment: Could work if they complete it (Score 0) 284

by Cajun Hell (#49209953) Attached to: UK Gov't Asks: Is 10 Years In Jail the Answer To Online Pirates?

There needs to be more-than-ten years of imprisonment for using DRM. One work sold with DRM makes multiple people need to pirate it in order to watch it. If you sell a DRMed work that results in six people pirating it, then you get 60 years.

That would probably deter the crime of DRM, and once you do that, you eliminate the chief motive for piracy.

Just deal with both sides of the problem, and you might have a pretty good solution. The only remaining problem is that the constants are messed up and have a clipping problem on one side. If a million people pirate Game of Thrones, you can't really imprison the responsible HBO exec for ten million years. So make his sentence, say, 50 years, and then imprison each pirate for 50/10M years.

Comment: No need to wait (Score 1) 220

by Cajun Hell (#49080409) Attached to: Obama Says He's 'A Strong Believer In Strong Encryption'

The first time that an attack takes place in which it turns out that we had a lead and we couldn't follow up on it, the public's going to demand answers.

Public, I already have your answer. You problem is that back around 1789 you moved to America. If you wanted the needs of a police state to come before your freedom, you could have lived pretty much anywhere else. And you still have a lot of options, if you're simply convinced that America is a bad idea.

Comment: You think YOU are fast? (Score 2, Interesting) 117

by Cajun Hell (#49077005) Attached to: Another Star Passed Through Our Oort Cloud 70,000 Years Ago

Wikipedia says that star is 17-23 light years away. If it passed nearby only 70000 years ago, then that means it must be moving at nearly at about 1/3000 to 1/4000 the speed of light. So, like, about ten times faster than the Space Shuttle or five times faster than V'ger.

Forget ion drives; let's build star-hooks.

The goal of Computer Science is to build something that will last at least until we've finished building it.