Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Obligatory (Score 3, Informative) 662

People act like there's only one problem, that is, political correctness or whatever name it has this week which prevents people from expressing themselves, but the other very large issue is the crazy notion that everybody deserves equal air time, equal coverage, etc. no matter the ignorance or illogicality of their words and ideas.

Comment Some decisions have huge effects (Score 2) 164 the long run. No cable company should ever have paid anything for any channel or broadcast that carried advertising. Either ordinary (ad supported) channels or premium (no ads) channels. Period. Now look what a mess we have. Cable companies caused this, and when they first did, they weren't even competing with anyone.

Comment Opportunity, maybe (Score 1) 276

There are some fairly inexpensive efficient V6s around now that could easily double the power. Unfortunately it's a rear-engine car. There wasn't a lot of bad news before because with limited power there weren't that many issues, but double the power and some people will be bitten, hard. DMC-12s are best for just cruising and looking cool. I'm sure some knee-jerk 911 owners will, well, jerk their knees, but they won't be buying DeLoreans anyhow. Rear engine designs with powerful engines are generally not compatible staying on the road pointed forward.

Comment inertia (Score 1) 311

Why are there a few high-quality news sources still around while a number of others have come and gone? Because the fairly small audience remembers and depends on those long-lived sources. Staying power is all-important. The longer you stay the more solid and loyal the audience. (Though SlashDot is obviously not paying for investigative journalism) why am I here and not in a dozen other forums with similar content? Because this one has been around a long time and hasn't changed all that much over the years and hasn't had any (IMHO) serious lapses in integrity, at least none that weren't mostly fixed in response to user outcry. I can concentrate on the content and comments without having to think about the structure.

That said, how do we finance such organizations when click-bait-infested sites return greater short-term profits? For public goods like roads, we usually have the government provide financing, but that wouldn't work so well for an organization reporting on government affairs. A quasi-independent agency like the US Federal Reserve Bank? Regardless of the conspiracy theories out the wazoo, there's a very high level of professionalism within. But still... board members are appointed by government officials. And part of the secret to the Fed's success has been that they can't be defunded at the whim of Congress or a pissed-off Executive. How would a news organization be funded without the shadow of government or corporate interference?

Comment single-solution ideologues (Score 1) 645

Some years back a few researchers assembled a paper outlining how all sorts of technologies and measures could reduce CO2 output, referring to each as a wedge (slice of the reduction pie). That remains the ONLY study I've seen that realistically included all feasible options without venturing into blue-sky speculation and handwaving arguments.

Comment Perfect Forward Secrecy? (Score 1) 78

Seems to me there's no such thing. Everything may be logged. Soviet Venona messages were eventually cracked due to one-time pads not being used only one time, but that wouldn't have happened without the traffic having been logged and kept for years. If quantum computers are created that can crack encryption we've used up until now, there's not much hope for anything used up to the present except true one-time pads. Perfect forward secrecy is when everybody who saw the message has died.

Slashdot Top Deals

There is very little future in being right when your boss is wrong.