Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:The Republicans are right (Score 1) 517

by Calibax (#49185759) Attached to: White House Threatens Veto Over EPA "Secret Science" Bills

I think we both agree that laws should be interpreted by what's considered reasonable. One problem is that the term "reasonable" is highly subjective. You say that that no reasonable person would interpret the law that way, but what Justice Scalia or Justice Thomas thinks is reasonable is often very different from what Justice Ginsburg or Justice Breyer thinks is reasonable. And reasonable or not, justices often fall back to their default position, which is the letter of the law rather than the spirit of the law.

That's the other problem. The judiciary gets to define reasonable, and they tend to be long on law knowledge and short in other areas. Nobody can be an expert on everything, but we expect our justices to have wide ranging knowledge so they can make a judgement between two adversarial views that are often diametrically apart on highly subjective issues. As many have said, going to the courts is often a crap shoot.

You call my views bullshit. You have that right. But I believe you are incorrect on both reasonableness and Obamacare.

Comment: Re:Same old lefty games... (Score 3, Insightful) 517

by Calibax (#49185245) Attached to: White House Threatens Veto Over EPA "Secret Science" Bills

I hope you aren't suggesting that Republicans do care about science - there seems to be ample evidence to the contrary.

And why would Democrats want to destroy capitalism? The stock market has done much better under the last two Democratic presidents than under the last two Republicans who held the office. Heck, when Clinton left office we had a net surplus and were actually reducing the national Debt.

Comment: Re:The Republicans are right (Score 4, Insightful) 517

by Calibax (#49185201) Attached to: White House Threatens Veto Over EPA "Secret Science" Bills

Are you completely sure it's bullshit? Are you certain that no group impacted by a ruling will not use every possible way of undermining a negative result, valid or otherwise? Have you so little imagination?

Just look at the news today. Republicans are using four words in Obamacare to remove healthcare subsidies for 15 million people. While the act is completely clear, these four words were poorly chosen, and on that basis they want to throw out a major provision. It's no exaggeration to say that people will die if this challenge is upheld.

Comment: Re:The Republicans are right (Score 5, Insightful) 517

by Calibax (#49185075) Attached to: White House Threatens Veto Over EPA "Secret Science" Bills

The problem is that ALL the data must be public. For example, it means that medical studies that do not publish the raw data (including patient identities) cannot be used by the EPA as the basis for rule making.

It also requires the EPA to use reproducible results, which means that a number of studies are required and each must come to exactly the same result. Imagine the situation where study results have the same conclusion, but slightly different results (say one says 64% of people will die from smoking and another says 66%). Industries could then argue that the results are not reproducible and these studies should not be used as the basis for restricting cigarettes.

Comment: Re:The genie is out of the bottle (Score 1, Interesting) 216

My wife used Uber once. The vehicle was not clean, the driver was (in her words) creepy, she didn't like his driving, and he insisted on playing music she thought obnoxious. All in all, she quite unhappy with the whole experience. She insists that we'll be staying with taxis.

Comment: Re:Purpose (Score 1) 37

by Calibax (#48503621) Attached to: Cyber Ring Stole Secrets For Gaming US Stock Market

Send an email to someone with employee type click-bait (juicy info about your company or a major competitor, whatever) and get drive-by malware that installs some VBA code in Outlook.

When that employee emails others in the company, the VBA is included and installs itself, tells the user his Outlook session has expired and puts up a dialog asking for the account and password. Employee enters the data and it is sent to a command and control server. That user is now pwned.

Send messages (seemingly from a pwned employee) to the CEO, CFO, Finance and Legal departments with VBA attachments that are installed. The VBA sends all their email to the bad guys. Not saying it's the way it was done, but that's one way to do it.

Comment: Re:Deserved (Score 1) 93

by Calibax (#48442801) Attached to: Samsung Seeking To Block Nvidia Chips From US Market

That is true, but nVidia's outreach engineers have a history of checking code that regresses performance on competitor hardware. See what this Value developer has to say about "Vendor A":
Vendor A is also jokingly known as the "Graphics Mafia". Be very careful if a dev from Vendor A gets embedded into your team. These guys are serious business.

So, you are suggesting that game studios let vendors check in code totally unreviewed? I worked at a company that had two engineers from Nvidia and 3 from AMD - none of them had the ability to check in code, although they did have access to our sources.

The Nvidia engineers were top notch, knew their products, knew how to get performance from their products, and would be unhappy if we didn't take notice of what they said. The AMD people were OK, but just not in the same league as the Nvidia people. Which was best for us? The Nvidia guys improved our product for both their customers and AMD customers. The AMD people would only look at AMD specific code and provided way less assistance. I'd go with the Nvidia guys any day - they were indeed serious, hard working engineers, one with a ph.d., the other with a masters.

And the best you can suggest for fiddling is a benchmark from 13 years ago? That several lifetimes in graphics technology - go look at any 2001 game. As I recall, both Nvidia and ATI (as it was then) tweaked benchmarks to favor their product around that time and were found out. However, modern graphics benchmarks make it difficult for any manufacturer to corrupt the results.

Comment: Re:Deserved (Score 4, Insightful) 93

by Calibax (#48442649) Attached to: Samsung Seeking To Block Nvidia Chips From US Market

How, exactly, can Nvidia make games run poorly on other hardware? They don't write the games. Both AMD and Nvidia have extensive outreach programs to developers and make engineers available to game studios, and obviously those engineers will make suggestions on how to improve game performance on their hardware. But I doubt that game studio staff would be willing to cripple their games on either platform at the behest of Nvidia or AMD engineers.

Would you like to provide citations that they bribe sites? And how would that hurt game performance? How can using certain benchmarks (as you suggest) make games run slower on other hardware? And even if they did, are you saying that sites would accept Nvidia's suggestions and ignore AMD suggestions?

AMD fanboy much?

Comment: Is this legal? (Score 5, Insightful) 700

by Calibax (#48205771) Attached to: FTDI Reportedly Bricking Devices Using Competitors' Chips.

A component manufacturer is unhappy that someone else is using his product id so he puts code in a driver that sets the product id to zero. This prevents the fake component being recognized by his driver or any other driver. The license for the driver explicitly states that using the driver with a fake component may irretrievably damage the component.

If the component manufacturer doesn't want the fake product to work with his driver he can code his driver to ignore the fake. Modifying the product id to brick the component is another matter entirely.

This doesn't hurt the people who created the fake, or even the people who purchased the fake and used them in their manufacturing. It only hurts end users who have done nothing except purchase a product in retail channels. Deliberately destroying equipment because it uses a fake component goes to a whole new level of nastiness.

+ - Google Drive client is not supported on Yosemite

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes: After installing Yosemite I discovered an issue with the Google Drive client on the Mac. When I reported this to Google I received the reply "Unfortunately, MAC OS X 10.10 (Yosemite) is not something Drive supports at this time. The team is working hard to enhance the product."

So, although early versions of Yosemite have been available for at least four months to developers and three months to the public, Google has not updated the Mac client yet. Perhaps Google should warn Mac users that Yosemite is not supported, in case user data is at risk.

Comment: Tinkering not required for simples cases (Score 1) 238

by Calibax (#47891485) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Advice On Building a Firewall With VPN Capabilities?

I agree. If you don't mind tinkering, pfSense is the way to go

I agree that pfSense is a great solution but I disagree about the tinkering . pfSense fits well in the mantra of "simple things can be done simply but complex things are possible". It needs little tinkering if you have a reasonably standard setup - say an internet connection plus a local network. It has decent defaults.

If you have a more complex setup (I have a LAN interface, a DMZ, a guest network, and a VPN interface as well as several additional software packages) then some tinkering will be needed.

The greatest productive force is human selfishness. -- Robert Heinlein

Working...