Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:All bullshit (Score 1) 265

The guy is a scumbag objectifying sexual predator and possibly did rape her but the whole point of "innocent until proven guilty" means that I'm obliged to believe him until proven otherwise. In my mind it is better that some bad guys get away, to get caught another day, than to ruin the lives of innocent people.

If I'm obliged to believe that he's innocent then logically I have to consider that her claim might not be provable. That obviously doesn't mean she has to be lying but it doesn't mean I should flat out believe her either. At least until I hear about convincing evidence otherwise.

Hell, it's the same reason I'm against the death penalty. I don't have an issue with, given current technological limits, killing murderers who can't be rehabilitated.
I do have an issue with the fact that we can't be certain that said murderer isn't actually innocent because time and evidence have proven that sometimes we fuck up and get it wrong and put innocent people to death.

That seems to be pretty much what the jury and prosecution were saying here when they found him guilty of "lesser" crimes that will still probably see his life ruined (sex offender registration, prison time, being a convicted felon.)
It seems to me they basically said, "Well, we can't find him guilty of rape but if I any adult exhibited this behavior then we'd obviously call him a sexual predator and we can use the same laws we would for that."

Now, I could see an argument that teenagers shouldn't be held to the same standards as adults because hormones, brain development, and a lack of experience make them into irrational sexual predators but, personally, I don't buy that.
These kids were systematically luring younger people to have sex with them as part of a competition. At some level they had to know that was wrong.
You don't use people like that and you don't facilitate others to use people like that.
I think everyone proven to be involved in that scheme needs mandatory therapy.

In a perfect world we would wipe the event from the victim's mind and wipe the guy's mind of his behavior and rehabilitate him so that he wouldn't be an objectifying sexual predator and could continue on to be a contributing member of society.
We can't do that though so I don't really know what the right answer is. It seems to me like everyone loses: the victim, the scumbag, and society.

Comment Re:I've had this as a plug-in. (Score 1) 190

Chrome dev doesn't autoplay videos that are in the background unless they have already been rendered once. See this commit

I'm sure if you really want to stop autoplay that you can find a userscript or extension out there or make your own that stops it on youtube (or even all websites that use html5.)
Sadly chrome devs seem to think that user configurability like Firefox has is a bad thing and so I doubt you'll ever see a default option for it.

Comment Re:Call me a Luddite... (Score 1) 14

Your kid forgot his key and he doesn't have a phone or he lost it and he usually calls you when he gets home from school (because you require that) so you're worried that he's locked out of the house and you remotely unlock your back door for fifteen minutes so he can get in.
Maybe it can warn you that someone tried the lock or the doorknob when you weren't home? Or maybe having an eletronic lock means carrying around less stuff because you could just use your phone or the same "key fob" you use for your car.
I dunno, tbh, electronic locks seem weird to me given that house locks in general are just there to make you Feel Good(TM) and don't really provide much security.

You (your phone) can tell your thermostat that you're on the way home so your house can start cooling down. Or that you're not going home so your house can stay warm and save energy. It can track statistics and you can see if there's a problem before you're even home and you can call someone to fix it while you're out, etc.
It can remind you to change the filter. It can look up the temperature and humidity online without needing an outdoor thermostat to help it figure out complicated thermostat things.

Your fridge could track what food is actually in it and when it's going to spoil and what you need to buy and that could all sync with your phone with an automated grocery list when you go to the grocery store. Or it could automatically buy the food online and save you man hours of effort over your lifespan increasing the time you have to do other things. It can remind you to buy a water filter. It can automatically buy a new water filter.

There's no reason most connected devices need to expose anything to bored script kiddies because as long as your router has a stateful firewall for IPv6 then it will effectively be the same result as when everything was hidden behind NAT and so it would need a grossly incompetent programmer to make your device vulnerable.
And, honestly, everything you do is already tracked by marketers anyway. Hell, Target knows when women are pregnant before the women do based on purchasing habits.

Comment Re: Cool (Score 1) 363

Not that I'm advocating killing babies (for the same reason that I wouldn't advocate killings dogs) but even a living, breathing baby isn't a "person" by any objective measurement.

An adult dog, on average, has more intelligence and personality than a one year old human baby -- let alone a newborn. And that's plainly obvious to anyone who has been around babies. So, if we apply that morality/logic equally then killing a dog, or an ape, or a dolphin should be considered murder.
The only difference is that a human baby has the potential to be more than said dogs, apes, and dolphins.
But if loss of potential is the moral issue then all sorts of choices, even in ignorance, would effectively be murder before conception actually begins!

As an aside, I personally think it's wrong to bring intelligent life into the world at all. My reason for that opinion is that being a conscious, thinking creature can be a pretty heavy burden for some people and we can't exactly ask our kids ahead of time if they want to exist or not.
And most countries in the world don't allow for comfortable, legal avenues for people to choose if they want to live either, so it's not like our kids can kindly opt-out.

Procreation in general seems arrogant to me. People talk about scientists playing god but they seem to have no issue with doing it themselves...
But if I were going to procreate then I would do the best that I could. It would be planned. Money would be saved ahead of time. Parenting classes would be taken.
And if I were unsure then I would abort at the earliest possible point in the process. Abortion is not perfect but the world isn't.

What someone does with the tissue afterwards is completely irrelevant. The moral trap there would be people getting pregnant specifically to have abortions and "donate" tissue but, see, that can be wrong without even considering the morality of abortion itself.
Thus the issue is the same as selling human organs -- which is obviously wrong as patients shouldn't be allowed to damage themselves for profit.

Comment Re:Whistle blower (Score 5, Informative) 608

You do remember that Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated, right? He was under surveillance by the FBI, the NSA, and police in order to undermine his civil rights movement -- as he was killed.

A 1999 civil court case decided that government agencies were liable for participation in the conspiracy to assassinate him.

Sure, that's not proof but the fact that the guy died standing up for what he believes in kind of says that the danger was as real as it is for Snowden...

Comment Re: Like the nazi used to say (Score 4, Insightful) 431

In some ways, biologically, he is still a kid. The part of your brain that does risk management doesn't mature for most people until around 25.
You'll notice your car insurance rates went down a lot around that age.

Just because there's some arbitrary legal age for adulthood doesn't mean reality actually reflects that.

Comment Re:Put some content in your damn game (Score 2) 126

I think the refund system will actually drive more sales -- even for small games because it might reduce risk enough for people to be willing to try games that they wouldn't otherwise buy.

Making a game interesting enough for 2 hours of gameplay really isn't that hard. That's a VERY low bar.

Comment Re:Not the Issue (Score 4, Insightful) 164

It's not like convicts get out of prison and they're reset to a neutral state and can try hard and do ok in life.

Ex-convicts are actively persecuted by society. It'd be like if you fell off the wagon and then a buffalo decided to sit on you.
It's not just "on you" to get back on the wagon.

And a significant portion of the population is now an ex-prisoner or ex-felon. "In 2008, about one in 33 working-age adults was an ex-prisoner, and about one in 15 working-age adults was an ex-felon. Among working-age men in that same year, about one in 17 was an ex-prisoner and one in eight was an ex-felon."

Millions of people. Your short sighted "I personally don't care about your well being because you fucked up and I'm scared of you" mentality would be like saying, "Why should I pay taxes for public schools if I don't have kids?"

Comment Re:Not convinced (Score 1) 408

But see the thing is that it doesn't have to be perfect (though people have the unreasonable expectation that it should be.)
Autonomous cars just have to be safer than people driving cars... which is a pretty low standard.

And it's not like people can't take over driving the car for edge cases. They're supposed to be paying attention the whole time they're driving anyway (even though humans suck at focused attention.)
Planes have autopilot but pilots are still responsible for staying in the cockpit and monitoring so that they can take over as needed.

Comment Re:I call BS (Score 5, Informative) 184

I might be wrong but isn't it also when the SSD is stored at 55C AFTER having been stress tested at 55C to their endurance rating in terabytes written (page 39) under a given workload?
And even then the cherry picked value was in example data submitted by Intel for unknown hardware and very likely extrapolated and quite possibly meaningless because it wasn't part of the chart targeted for the standard.

The article seems to have totally misrepresented the presentation's purpose: which is to lay out endurance testing methodology/standards.

The only important values were on page 26 where they set the minimum requirements of 40C 8hr/day load/30C 1 year retention for consumer (with a higher error ratio) and 55C 24hr/day load/40C 3 months retention for enterprise (with a lower error ratio.)
And it looks like they haven't actually worked out the consumer workload for testing yet.

Feel disillusioned? I've got some great new illusions, right here!