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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

Comment: Re:Wrong advice for nuclear weapons too (Score 1) 24

by mi (#49202293) Attached to: Is Cyber Arms Control a Lost Cause?

We had enough to destroy them 10x over. Being able to do it 20x over doesn't make us any more powerful.

Of course, it does. Your logic only works, if all missiles available will remain operational and reach their targets if launched.

But that's not a valid assumption. Consider, for example, the possibility of one side's launchers — submarines, bombers, mobile launchers, or stationary silos — being disabled and/or taken-over somehow. They aren't run always by the best, unfortunately...

If a mere handful of such installations need to survive for us to remain capable of annihilating the enemy, they would not risk it. But, if our counter-attack requires, say, 50% of them to be operational, the enemy might attempt such an action.

Similar arithmetic applies, if the target's defenses are deemed capable of destroying a significant fraction of incoming missiles. Russia already fears our interception technology, for example, and has its own. If such defenses can take out 90% of the incoming, you do need to fire 10x more. And you better use 20x more to be sure...

Comment: Wrong advice for nuclear weapons too (Score 2) 24

by mi (#49201951) Attached to: Is Cyber Arms Control a Lost Cause?

While such advice is by all means well-intentioned

Well-intentioned, but still wrong — even in the case of nuclear weapons. For all the treaties, both USA and USSR retained enough nukes to destroy each other (and, probably, the rest of the planet) many times over — officially.

Unofficially it put the US, where the government is (somewhat) accountable to citizens, at a disadvantage — we had to abide by the agreements, while the rulers of USSR — unafraid of inquisitive lawmakers and "nosy" journalists — did not.

Cyber-weapons are even worse in this regard, because their use and development can be delegated to a nominally private organization or even a person — the way Russia's propaganda war is already delegated too.

Comment: Re:Looks like Windows 3 [flat look] (Score 1) 69

by Tablizer (#49201909) Attached to: Hands-On With the Vivaldi Browser

It's not just eye-candy, 3D effects can convey info. For example, having buttons look 3D helps to visually distinguish them from other boxy things. Same with tabs that cast shadows. Such cues are generally good (if done right).

Why not give people a choice in the OS? Have "flat", "3D", and maybe "Jewel" for those who really do want eye-candy.

Comment: Re:How did they notice that? (Score 1) 75

On February 8, after crossing the French border patrol agents of the National Police (CNP) was stopped at the toll Jonquera. "They told me it was a search routine, but it was very strange for an hour and a half because the vehicle was out of my field of vision, an agent took it and then came back to me" claims without understanding the reason for this police action.

I'm going to guess, this was when police installed the tracker.

On March 1, in the city of Valencia, where he traveled to participate in the Circumvention Tech Festival , the second incident occurred.

And this was, when they first checked-up on her.

Perhaps, the lady is suspected of being a Basque separatist or some such...

... I decided to inspect the car

Don't know about Spain, but the fun and friendly Canada might charge someone with "Obstruction of Justice" in similar circumstances...

Comment: Pretty amazing (Score 4, Interesting) 25

by argStyopa (#49201293) Attached to: NASA's Dawn Spacecraft Becomes First To Orbit a Dwarf Planet

Ceres gravity is 0.27 m/s2 (Earth's is 9.8, Luna is a hefty 1.6)

So 'going into orbit' of something so vanishingly weak is really an amazing accomplishment, discussed in their blog at http://www.planetary.org/blogs....

(Amusing point of reference, with 3 ion engines, Dawn's 0-60 speed is 11 days. Take that, Jeremy Clarkson!)

Congrats all.

Comment: Re:"Conservatives" hating neutrality baffles me (Score 1) 420

ok, I'll bite. I understand how the internet works as well as most people who don't spend most of their time writing RFCs (I owned an ISP back in the dial-up days and I've configured BGP as a network admin).

However, I also understand public choice economics and the fact that once the FCC begins to regulate the Internet (in the name of Net Neutrality), their incentives are driven by the politics of the commissioners (hence why this decision was 3 Dems vs. 2 Reps) and by the companies they regulate. It's nice when that sometimes coincides with the interests of the "regular guy", but it typically doesn't over time. Examples from history abound. See Baptists and Bootleggers.

I also understand that Comcast vs. Netflix was about contractual rights and was solved by the various parties making private agreements for bandwidth and transit usage, not by government regulation.

The supposed "reason" for the FCC regulations (prioritizing content providers by ISPs) isn't something that is actually happening in a widespread manner nor negatively affecting consumers, so why give a small government body control over the Internet so that they can over time regulate it pretty much however they want to.... and by want to, I mean how their political and embedded corporate interests want them to.

Comment: Slow boo boo versus fast boo boo (Score 1) 25

by Tablizer (#49201059) Attached to: NASA's Dawn Spacecraft Becomes First To Orbit a Dwarf Planet

My understanding is that the ion engine acts quite slowly. It seems that the "news" of an orbit failure would be a matter of not being where it's expected to be, and there should be a period of uncertainty when the "error" is within expected measurement noise range such that "orbit failure" would be a slowly increasing probability value instead of a one-time confirmation. I don't get the "news point" thing of today.

Comment: Re:Well done, smart guy (Score 1) 230

by argStyopa (#49200635) Attached to: How Activists Tried To Destroy GPS With Axes

I absolutely didn't shout "Democrats did it first!".

Hell no, I was complaining about the former guy (nbauman's) assertion that it was ONLY Republicans to blame.

They are both absolutely the same basement of the outhouse. The Huffpost article mentioned only talks about 2014 donations being led by Dems. 2012 was Republicans.

Science is to computer science as hydrodynamics is to plumbing.

Working...