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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Slashdot Deals: Prep for the CompTIA A+ certification exam. Save 95% on the CompTIA IT Certification Bundle ×

Comment Re:To be expected (Score 1) 168

That article is so much bull shit and ignorance.

First the entire section about 3.x being hard to use has not supporting evidence. Anecdotally I can't recall anyone being especially confused by anything specific to the win 3.x ui. I can totally recall people who we not used to navigating nested menus having a terribly frustrating time using the Start menu. Explorer was a lot nicer than winfile I'll give you that but the rest of the claims run so counter to my experience I'd love to see some stats or a real usability study. I think timing had more to do with it personally '95 was about the time new Pentiums were getting affordable, the Internet had real things to do on that normal people wanted, so for so many Win95 was their first experience. Folks that were used to win3.x in the office spent much of their time using as a launch pad for DOS applications and terminal emulators so even for many of them '95 was "Windows". Its all a matter of what you got used to. Finally again speaking subjectively, the '95 ui was not all that good, certainly no where near as good as MacOS at the time or Norton Desktop on Windows 3.x.

The registry. Windows 3.x had a registry! It was not new in Windows 95.

Install wizards really? Plenty of Win 3.x software had easy to use very Wizard like setup programs calling that a new feature is laughable.

TCP/IP -- Again there were drivers for 3.x prior to the resale of Windows 95. You just had to install them I am not even taking about things like Trumpet etc, nope first party Windows NDIS drivers from Microsoft.

In short for the most part Windows 95, was nothing special. Plug and Play was the only real feature, otherwise it was just a fully loaded Win3.11. Which sometime not long after you could install the win32s on too.

Comment Re:Well, that's embarrassing (Score 2, Insightful) 482

Because all of Islam is a fraud. Muhammad shows up and claims "I am a profit and oh by the way I am last one" (seal of the profits).

I mean seriously how scamy is that? It rates right up there with "now all your friends are going to tell you this is to good to be true".

I am not arguing here about the validity of the rest of the Abrahamic but its painful clear Muhammad was just a con man.

Comment I think thats a problem I could handle (Score 1) 767

The biggest issue is if you have kids or not when you come into that sorta wealth. If I had children I would feel some obligation I think to retain said wealth for them and future generations.

Since I don't have kids though I think it would be fairly easy. First a billion dollars is a heck of a lot of money. If I am still a "billionaire" after paying the taxes on the windfall than I essentially have more money then I really know what to do with.

First) I'd probably make a gift to some family members of paying off their mortgages. That will probably run me a million or so. Hopefully that would be a sufficient gesture that they would not resent my sudden wealth and be glad that my good fortune has made what is probably the biggest monthly payment in their lives a thing of the past.

I don't think I'd move or anything but I could probably drop a 100K or remodeling my own place.

I'd certain acquire some new costs like hiring out the law work etc.

I'd probably blow another few hundered K building a bigger garage and picking up four or five fun cars, nothing nuts like a super car or anything stuff I could actually drive, a Tesla, Alfa 4C, Corvette, and couple interesting classics.

I'd travel and go cool places. Invite my current friends to go with with me on my tab. Again though nice hotels, good resturants etc, but no renting out the entire floor or anything nuts.

The rest I probably just live life as I do now with, for the most part. I guess I would on my own projects like OSS stuff rather than work a day job.

Comment Re:You keep using that word. I don't think it mean (Score 1) 300

That is shitty customer service too though. The network should be available when you want to use it. Its like cable modems were in some neighbor hoods in the early days. If you tried to use one between 6-8pm in some places you might as well have been on dial up. Useless slow. That's been mostly fixed now days with smaller shared segments, faster signalling, and more bandwidth dedicated to data. That is less of an option on last mile and wireless.

I should be able to depend on being able to drive around down town and get enough data throughput to facilitate using my phones navigational functions. The right/fair/just thing to since spectrum is a finite resource is a low fixed cost to cover the overhead of having an account, and then a low rate per unit. Make it a penny or two per megabyte and let users manage their own usage.

The current situation with overages is what sucks. Go a handful of megs over and get pushed into the next pricing tier. That's BS. That makes you have to monitor exactly where you are constantly instead of just making the decision "am I willing to pay a couple dollars to stream this moving here and now." Overages and caps make you afraid to use all that you have already paid for fear of crossing some invisible line.

Comment Re:The royal 'we'? Sounds like carrier shill. (Score 1) 300

Why would any traffic need to be exempt. A byte should be a byte unless it has a higher priority class set by YOU. Maybe something with a low latency QOS tag costs a little more. I don't see anything wrong with that either.

I am talking about edge networks here. Obviously the rules have to work a little different for transit networks. Those are not usually described as last mile or wireless though.

Comment Re:So it's not unlimited, then... (Score 2) 300

Right 'we' and the service providers just need to admin reality: Last mile and wireless circuits have limited bandwidth. Its not practical to sell a limited resource at a single flat price. It violates the basic principles of economics.

I would like to see a single low fixed connection fee and a per megabyte charge, starting from megabyte 1. Just sell it like electricity or water. Every bit you use has a cost, so you have some incentive to minimize use. On the other hand you don't have to sit there going gee how far off is my cap this month. If you want to use it you can and you know download that extra iso image is going to run you another dollar or so rather than another $50.

People would not download stuff they have no real intention of looking at using, but could watch binge watch netflix knowing the price tag was going to be a few dollars for doing so without panicking about the prospect of some outrageous overage fee. Just like with electricity. If its blazing hot you turn on the A/C, if its on the cusp you try an open the windows.

Comment Re:Fat Cats in the Countryside (Score 1) 198

Okay consider gasoline. What do think all the effort to achieve peace in the middle east and all the money lent or dolled out in foreign aide to evil regimes so they can militarize with our war machines is for?

It might be a little indirect but all the jet fighters and military equipment gets paid for quite often out of our treasury. One of the reasons for that is stabilize the region, so we can keep access to oil, cheap or not. If we just left things go (as I think we actually should over all) we would probably see 70s style price shocks in oil and gas with some frequency. You income taxes subsidize the price you pay at the pump even if its a long lossy process.

Comment Re:Fat Cats in the Countryside (Score 1) 198

Ultimately economics wins though and the nation ends up bankrupt. Consider your demand side equation. You have just established people will pay 'anything' for certain things. Alright what is the real cost of producing that drug? Why does that single pill need to command a price of $1500? Simply because the market will bear it? Subsidies just enable supplies of inelastic services and goods to get an economic rent.

Sure you'd mortgage your house to pay for those drugs, trouble is you only probably have $100-$200K in equity so that won't even by you a years worth. Guess what in inelastic or not the suppler will have to price it lower. Unless you subsidize it than the entire nation gets to be raped to take care of your personal problem.

Personally I think it would be better for society as a whole if we left people to play the hand they are dealt. Even when that means a life being cut short. Sure you bet in the situations you describe I would do what anyone would do and look for any way I could to buy time and wish things were different, probably wish somebody would help but it would be beyond me. At the societal level however we need to consider the larger question of allocation efficiency.

If government has to 'do something' then we should probably address situations like medical care, basic food stuffs (native vegetables and grains), from the supply side. Set price controls on those things. Has to be done carefully though you have to allow prices high enough that suppliers still want to go into production.

The other reality is there just may be no market for certain kids of medical research. Consider the ALS hubbub recently. Does subsidizing research for something like that make any sense at all? Its a very rare condition. We could probably save or improve more lives investing in improving treatment for more common perhaps even already treatable conditions.

 

Comment Re:Lasers and aircraft... (Score 1) 124

The other issue is triangulating kinda relies on either continuous or multiple transmission. It mostly boils down to you observer the transmission form multiple points, and measure the received energy at each. Next you do a bunch of math to figure out where the transmission likely originated from based on the different energy detected at the receiving stations. Doing that with accuracy to handful of meters as would be needed to quickly id a drone operator and respond is kinda hard when

1) the detection stations are far a part
2) there are structures or land forms that might absorb EM (you will need more than just the inverse square law)
3) you don't have a lot of receive station density. (cells can be quite large in rural areas)
4) you don't know what EM to tune to
5) dynamic conditions changes in atmosphere etc

The technology to auto pilot or simply execute on simple instruction is getting smaller lighter and cheaper. Already some consumer drones can proceed to a set GPS coordinates by themselves. If you don't need to be in constant or even frequent contact with the drone but only need to occasionally send a quick "GOTO $lat,$long,$altitude" it might be very hard to track you down.

Comment Legal Standing (Score 4, Interesting) 150

Another standing based evasion of the 4th amendment. As long has you have to prove a negative you have personally been the victim of a clandestine program or any government program for that matter the Constitution might as well be toilette paper.

All they have to do is classify the records and its essentially game over.

What we need to do is push for legislation that lowers the bar for legal standing in cases against the government. It should be very low. Once the program is proven to exist it should be open to challenge on the complain it violates any other laws or violates anyone's Constitutional rights. The fact that its supposed to be a government by the people and for the people, means that we the people should have automatic standing anytime the government is violated laws or the Constitution we the people enacted. The grounds should be a failure to lawfully govern, the harm being undermining societies faith in law.

This is the only way we are going make any headway.

Comment Re:LOL (Score 0) 68

Every time I hear some lefty telling me we need more government in more regulation to prevent abuses by corporation I am reminded of this stuff and laugh out loud. So called democratic countries of Western Europe and North America already have governments that are more abusive than any corporate ever could be.

Comment Reasonably (Score 1) 196

There offer is reasonable. Separation of duties is as important as all the things the original poster listed. The company is to big for the OP to be a cow boy, not saying he will but the surest way to make sure he does not go down that path is not to allow. The OP should realize that protection runs both ways. When something happens that was unauthorized he won't be on the list of suspects. I am assuming that the EA isn't also CIO.

Finally its the OP's job as EA to design a survivable architecture, that includes on that survives him leaving for any reason. Not having direct access means he will have to make sure teams working under him have the knowledge and skill sets to get the job done. That might mean training people (sending them boot camps etc), adding people, replacing people. All three of those options are sometimes hard to get done but they need to get done and they won't when the EA can just ride in on his or her white horse and do it themselves. Which by the way means you are taking your eye off the strategic objectives you are supposed to be working on and doing tactical.

EA isn't a tech job. Its a management/analyst role that demands a technical background. It will and should take your hands off the tech. Yes you still need to keep up on new tech, but in the what can it do, what is good for way not in the, this how you implement this type of abstract interface or here is how you install memory in a SAN controller way.

He: Let's end it all, bequeathin' our brains to science. She: What?!? Science got enough trouble with their OWN brains. -- Walt Kelly

Working...