Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Do you have any idea how you all sound? (Score 1) 462

What, I think, is telling is not that they're just making these somewhat dumb comments, it's how effing angry they are, as if Cortana not putting up with simulated harassment is in some way taking something valuable away from them.

Ever since, well, just before this GG nonsense started, Slashdot's readership has been really circling the toilet. I wonder how these people have jobs given their anger issues with women.

Comment Re:hyperloop without the hyper or loop (Score 1) 175

Kinda true, kinda not. The idea was to replace CAHSR, but CAHSR is itself billed as a replacement for flying.

Personally I think the Hyperloop proposal is done in bad faith - the system Musk proposed was supposedly substantially cheaper, but only served two of the four cities joined by CAHSR, was something in the region of a hundred miles away from those two cities, couldn't carry anything like the same number of passengers, and Musk hand waved quite a bit about costs (did he really think the CAHSR people hadn't considered viaducts? And in what world does a viaduct - even for a single pipe stuck up on stilts - cost only a quarter of a million dollars a mile?) suggesting it would probably cost several times the amount Musk proposed.

And, I'll be honest, I think travel in those things will be a nightmare. But I'd expect nothing less from anyone in the car industry - these are people who have never "got" public transportation, largely because they love driving so much they can't imagine anyone else wouldn't.

Comment Re:Surprise (Score 1) 223

It's actually kinda awkward to draw any conclusions from that as adjusting for other factors isn't trivial.

Imagine, for a second, if A causes B, but only when combined with C, D or E. (And C, D, and E don't cause anything on their own, only when combined with A)

A is going to look like a cause of B, but C, D, or E will be relatively difficult to correlate with B, especially if they're common. That may result in people assuming that, say, C had nothing to do with B simply because A was present.

I know, I know, basic stats and all of that, and I doubt video games are causing (much) harm (nothing's completely harmless ;-)) but I'd be more comfortable with more studies.

Comment Re:Unearned Platforms Given to Moral Guardians (Score 2) 223

For the most part I'd agree with this, but you might be underplaying her skepticism a little by saying she isn't arguing "poor representations of women in games make people harm women in real life".

She certainly is arguing that poor representations of women in games contributes to general atmosphere that ends up resulting in tox... uh, I better avoid academic jargon that's widely (deliberately?) misunderstood here.. behaviors by many that are harmful to women. She also points out I believe that such tropes tend to put off many women, who would otherwise be much more confortable dropping $60 on your latest blockbuster, but feel excluded from the non-casual space as a result.

But Sarkeesian is also clear that a few sexist tropes in games are not solely responsible for harm done to women, that they don't exist in a vaccuum, and that it's entirely possible to enjoy a game and find a few tropes in it a little dubious.

The biggest point I'd make to people who think, after being told by numerous YouTube "personalities" that Sarkeesian is an advocate of censorship, is that Sarkeesian's criticisms are constructive criticisms. She's not demanding bans or boycotts, she's saying "Hey, game developers, here's a few things you might want to avoid", and telling players "Listen, I know you love this game, just be aware of these issues when you play it."

(Game developers actually love her videos in my experience, which tells you all you need to know.)

Unfortunately, we don't live in a world where nuanced comments that are neither "BAN THIS!" nor "WE WANT MORE OF THIS!!" are understood. Most people seem to think that every argument has two sides, no more, no less.

Comment Re:Cores Schmores (Score 3, Informative) 121

The Thunderbird was nice, but it was more of a price/performance winner than overall performance. A 1GHz Thunderbird ran stable at 1.3GHz and was similar performance to a 2GHz Pentium 4 at a fraction of the cost (particularly as the P4 required RAMBUS DRAM, so you could stick twice as much DDR in Athlon for the same money). It wasn't until the Opteron that AMD really started winning on performance. The integrated DRAM controller was a big win and being first to 64 bits (which, on x86, means more GPRs, sane floating point ISA, and PC-relative addressing) gave them a huge advantage. Unfortunately, they haven't really been competitive since the Core 2, except in market segments where Intel intentionally cripples their offerings (e.g. no more than 2 SATA ports on the Atom Mini-ITX boards to avoid competition with the i3 boards, making AMD the only viable option).

Comment Re: All I know is that this: (Score 2) 264

It's about both cost and risk analysis. If you've got a lot of infrastructure, then you've probably already got a team of decent admins. Adding another server has a very small marginal cost. If you haven't, then the cost is basically the cost of hiring a sysadmin. Even the cheapest full-time sysadmin costs a lot more than you can easily spend with GitHub. Alternatively, you get one of your devs to run it. Now you have a service that is only understood well by one person, where installing security updates (let alone testing them first) is nowhere near that top priority in that person's professional life, and where at even one hour a week spent on sysadmin tasks you're still spending a lot more than an equivalent service from GitHub would cost.

In both of the latter cases, the competition for GitHub isn't a competent and motivated in-house team. It is almost certainly better to run your own infrastructure well, but the competition for GitHub is running your own infrastructure badly and they're a very attractive proposition in that comparison.

Outsourcing things that are not your core competency is not intrinsically bad, the problem is when people outsource things that are their core competency (e.g. software companies deciding to outsource all of the development - it's not a huge step from there to the people working for the outsourcing company to decide to also handle outsourcing management and start up a competitor, with all of the expertise that should be yours), or outsourcing without doing a proper cost-benefit analysis (other than 'oh, look, it's cheaper this quarter!').

If you think outsourcing storage of documents is bad remember that, legal companies, hospitals and so on have been doing this for decades without issues - storing large quantities of paper / microfiche is not their core competency and there are companies that can, due to economies of scale, do it much cheaper. Oh, and if that still scares you, remember that most companies outsource storing all of their money as well...

Comment Not like the other ELTs. (Score 1) 104

GMT's approach of using a small number of very large round mirrors, instead of a large number of small hexagonal ones, is very different from the path chosen by E-ELT and TMT (and GTC, and SALT, and HET, and Keck I and II)... in fact, other than possibly the original design of the MMT, I'm unsure whether anyone's done this before. (And of course the original design of the MMT was chosen because nobody knew how to make a 6.5-meter mirror at that point in time.) It will be very interesting to see how well it works, particular in comparison to the (by now well-established) practice of using lots of small hexagons.

Comment Re:Social Justice Twitter (Score -1) 99

Typical SJWNPAT (my acronym for SJW Normal Person Anti-Terrorist), all Twitter is doing is censoring people for criticizing Ethics in Western society. Sure, some people have claimed in ISIL's name to have murdered a few people here and there, but first of all THOSE people they supposedly "murdered" are professional victims and their claims of being murdered are highly suspect no matter how many videos we produced of them being beheaded and threads on /r/WesternSocietyInAction you can point at where every laughed at the Beta Cuck Infidels. And secondly, just because they said they were ISIS doesn't mean they were, I mean, it's a hashtag, you can't police that. You can't blame some guy on Twitter who is just concerned with Ethics and sends a few rape threats to Hillary Clinton THAT ARE CLEARLY NOT SERIOUS with some other guy who murders people because that's totally unfair. And also (continued on thread 94)

Comment Re:Oh good, a reason (Score 1) 346

What are Trump and Cruz's views on NSA mass surveillance? I doubt that either oppose it but I'm happy to be proven wrong. Rubio's comments don't seem, on the surface, to be out of whack with 99% of Republicans. I'd be surprised if other current candidates considered by most to not be insane strongly disagree with him on this. (Yeah, Rand Paul might, but he's already dropped out, and in any case...)

What makes Rubio more attractive than those two are that he's not on the theocratic wing, unlike Cruz, and... well, he's not Trump.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Consequences, Schmonsequences, as long as I'm rich." -- "Ali Baba Bunny" [1957, Chuck Jones]

Working...