Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:"That can be reversed on request" (Score 1) 111

by gweihir (#49565939) Attached to: New Privacy Threat: Automated Vehicle Occupancy Detection

So it's not really redacted. It's like all those PDF's that redact text with a black box.

True, but it is easier this way than to store non-redacted copies on the side when you want to use them in court later. (They are not letting go of that data. No government agency ever will unless forced to in a way they cannot ignore...) And most of the general public will be too stupid to know or understand.

Comment: Re:Easy fix (Score 2) 193

by gweihir (#49565753) Attached to: The Engineer's Lament -- Prioritizing Car Safety Issues

Well, it says there was no reduction of fatalities from requiring gas-tanks to survive impacts up to 30mph (the pinto failed at 25mph, while others failed at 27-28mph). Assuming that the "fix" was installed (which is sensible, as there was a recall), it did indeed made no discernible difference.

The thing that the public needs to learn is to trust engineers. Sure, engineers are subject to political pressure, so have the public bring in their own engineers. But they _must_ be engineers. Anybody else will get it wrong and do (sometimes far) more harm than good.

Comment: Re:My summary on systemd (Score 1) 422

by gweihir (#49565547) Attached to: Debian 8 Jessie Released

Really, stay away from process management. You do not have what it takes to get it right. And your desire for the respective systemd-functionality now becomes abundantly clear: You want it to do things that you are not smart enough to do yourself. That is not good engineering at all.

I re-iterate: Process management is not the task of an init-system. It can only suck at it. The sysV-init designers realized that and only provided the bare minimum, leaving the actual service designers to do their own that does it right. Systemd instead tries to solve a problem it has no business solving. That is not good at all.

Comment: Re:My summary on systemd (Score 1) 422

by gweihir (#49560271) Attached to: Debian 8 Jessie Released

You seem to have trouble understanding text. Re-read what I wrote. Hint: I never claimed they do not exist. And second hint (since you seem to need it): The "bullshit" may have referred to something else than the "existence".

As to your example: That is contrived. Of course what to do depends on the concrete details, not some abstract and artificial situation. In a concrete situation it turns out that it is the task of a service depending on another one to be able to handle it going down. It is decidedly not the task of a generic reliability-wrapper. That is just abysmally bad design.

Comment: Re:Sounds like Hugo Gernsback's "teleducation" (Score 1) 336

by gweihir (#49557423) Attached to: The Future Deconstruction of the K-12 Teacher

Which failed. All attempts using more modern technology have also failed. I can conclude conclude that some group of educators is insane: They are trying the same thing over and over again and expect a different outcome. It may also be a factor, that the "Peter principle" was discovered in the educational field and only latter found to apply elsewhere as well.

Comment: Still nonsense (Score 2) 336

by gweihir (#49557409) Attached to: The Future Deconstruction of the K-12 Teacher

This has been "envisioned" time and again for at least half a century. It always fails. Sure, most teachers are not really good, but as it turns out, they are a lot better than a good one on a TV screen. Distance education works only for those that can also self-learn. That experience has been made by distance educators time and again, whether snail-mail and paper, email, TV, videos or interactive virtual classrooms were used. For most peoples, an educator that is not physically there does not cut it.

This whole thing is only intended to make education a lot cheaper, not better. And it fails at that.

The moving cursor writes, and having written, blinks on.

Working...