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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Impossible with #6 or lesser shotgun shot (Score 1) 412 412

but i get to punch you in the face after you shoot me...right ?

.70 ft-lbs per pellet, and there could be more than 1 based upon spead versus apparent cross-section of the drone. All you have to do is destablize the drone to get most to automatically shut down.

As to your question - yes. From a standing position 2 yards away. (:P) Distance tables are handy.

Comment Re:Impossible with #6 or lesser shotgun shot (Score 4, Informative) 412 412

You're simply wrong.

Source: actual ballistics tables

60 yards is 180 ft -- 20 ft short of the target distance. 500 FPS will still hurt quite a bit.

Maximum range with "no" ballistic energy is 200 yards, and we're talking about smaller birdshot (#7.5-8), not #6.

Sign a liability waiver, stand 200 ft away, and allow me to blast away at you with Remington 12 guage #6 if you're so sure of yourself...

Comment The Privacy Mess is because of? (Score 3, Insightful) 483 483

[I]n this context I trust Microsoft about as far as I could throw a heavy old steel-cased 1980s PC.

Being careful with your data isn't just a Microsoft thing. My views of Microsoft and Google are pretty much diametrically opposed -- I have enormous faith in Google and Googlers doing the right thing with respect to protecting the data I share with them, but even in the case of Google -- with whom I share a great deal of data -- I'm selective about what I do share.

Anti-Microsoft, pro-Google, and no stated reason for faith in one "doing the right thing with respect to protecting the data" while the other, apparently, will not.

Except for this:

You may have heard concerns about the sharing of Wi-Fi passwords by Win10. This is largely not a problem in practice, given the details of the implementation.

How this suffices for posting on Slashdot with the headline tease "Privacy Mess" eludes me. Google = Bing. Google Drive = OneDrive. Chrome = Win 8+ windows-account-synced favorites and settings. Pot and Kettle both the same color, black or otherwise.

Comment Re:Why did it only happened on Samsung's SSDs? (Score 2) 181 181

Excellent question. My first guesses would be that either the Samsung SSDs were doing something a bit out-of-specs, or the Samsung SSDs have something that's missing from other SSDs.

From TFS: "The vendor of the drive did not matter and the previous blacklisting of Samsung drives for broken queued trim support can be most likely lifted after further tests."

If the vendor of the drive does not matter in testing, then there is no relevant difference in specification compliance or other "somethings." It's purely a matter of which anecdotes gain what traction within a small population of users using md raid with multiple SSDs in a raid 0 or 10 configuration, and which of those users circumstantially has the best contacts within the development community.

My first guess is the users trying that configuration were purchasing the fastest available SSDs, which tend to be Samsung drives (large market share) or boutique manufacturers (small market share).

Comment Re:Just another case.... (Score 2) 181 181

Devices working perfectly in other OSes is no indicator that the device is no at fault. Witness the vast amount of crap laptop hardware, whose disastrous ACPI implementations only worked because their Windows drivers were chock-full of workarounds.

It certainly is an indicator. I think you mean to say "is not conclusive evidence."

But then again, disastrous ACPI implementations are not conclusive evidence that a whole different type of device is at fault.

Your reasoning falls into the very trap GP was pointing out.

Comment Re:Just another case.... (Score 0, Flamebait) 181 181

"WALP, LINUX IS PERFECT, MUST BE THE HARDWARE GUYS, even though their devices perform perfectly on other OSes"

It was even better. The alleged reason that the hardware didn't fail on other OSes such as Microsoft Windows was that Microsoft had conspired with Samsung to cover up its hardware bugs -- i.e., Microsoft implemented both standard-TRIM support and broken-TRIM support.

No evidence whatsoever that this mechanism existed, but Microsoft engineers must have figured it out and then kept super-duper quiet about changes to their own filesystem-to-device-driver-to-SATA communications chain in order to keep the Linux plebes down.

Comment Re:Deserves the protection of law and order? (Score 2, Informative) 80 80

Yes, because an unarmed black man running *away* from you is an immediate threat requiring discharge of 8 rounds in the back

The forensic evidence showed that Brown was facing the officer when he was shot, not that he was running away. The only question is how far away he was when the shots were fired.

Not the only one. Because another question is why you're confusing a clear reference to Walter Scott with a reference to Michael Brown.

The foresic evidence showed that Scott was facing away from the officer when he was shot. The video showed that he was running away.

Try again.

Comment Re:More Sanity (Score 2) 272 272

After all, a photographer with a telephoto lens cannot sell pictures of you or post them in any publicly viewable media without your permission, but what about drone footage of you?

But what about photographs of you? After all, your premise is entirely false. A photographer can sell a picture of you, and most certainly can post them on publicly viewable media without your permission. The photographs cannot be used for commercial endorsements or in advertising without your permission, but a photograph taken as "art" can be sold and exhibited in the US without so much as a how-do-you-do. That's one hell of a peksy first amendment-related consequence that you've decided to ignore.

Comment Re:Government knows best... (Score 2) 432 432

As a society, we've gotten to the point where we tolerate zero risk in our daily lives. So much so that society wants government to decide what is good for us.

This is a terrible way to live. I want options in my life and I want the free market to create them. I don't want government restricting options available to me, or restricting those that would provide those options to me.

Your premise is that society wants this and you do not. Fine. Your options are (1) live with it and attempt to convince society to make a different choice or (2) leave society.

Your options do not include (3) do you want within society because society should be different and you'll live as if it were whether the rest of society likes it or not. That is not living with the courage of your convictions, it's dodging the sacrifices of living with the existing social contract or going to/building a free market utopia somewhere else.

I want a pony. That doesn't mean that I'm going to board it in my reserved parking spot in my downtown condominium because MINE.

Comment Re:Sure, I favor doing more of it (Score 1) 195 195

But you'd think that regulators would at least ask a few questions, llike "what happened" and "what can we do to make sure the same thing doesn't happen again".

You write as if they didn't do that several years ago.

The solution to oil spills is not: "another regulation that requires the regulated to follow the existing regulation." You develop new regulations when new processes or technology begin to fall outside existing regulations. Otherwise you enforce existing regulations, rebalance penalties, and recognize that no matter how many regulations you have, something will happen again. If you can't regulate theft and murder our of existence you sure can't regulate technological shortcutting out of existence.

Hint: when regulators determine that someone violated existing regulations and charge them billions of dollars in fines, "what can we do to make sure the same thing doesn't happen again" becomes a matter of weighing whether the fines are truly punitive versus something which might be written off as a cost of doing business. $4300/barrel of oil is still pretty punitive.

Comment Re:What is Pluto? (Score 1) 77 77

Or, Prince style: The dwarf planet formerly known as the ninth planet from the Sun.

If there are dwarves on that planet, it makes sense that they'd have a prince

A dwarf prince formerly known as the prince of the ninth planet from the Sun.

Come to think of it, the sun is a yellow dwarf star... *KAPOW*

We now return you to your formerly uncontroversial life, upon one of nine planets circling a sun, soundtracked by an artist toiling in rebellion against their record label.

let's go crazy... let's get nuts...

Comment Re:Insurance? (Score 1) 204 204

If I ship something, it is up to me to pay insurance if I wish to do so. Otherwise, I take my chances on something happening to the cargo or it getting completely lost.

Utterly true. However, your shipper is not trying to develop safer delivery trucks or airplanes so as to reduce the frequency of accidents. Those are other entities (GMC, Boeing, etc.). Your shipping may be trying to reduce driver/pilot negligence or otherwise abate other people's negligence, but those are strategies that are either well-known and probably already in use or under-development and of low marginal utility. Most importantly, what you're shipping 99 times out of 100 isn't valuable enough to justify a lawsuit.

These guys are building rockets. It is literally rocket science. While they obviously have incentives to avoid putting on impromptu fireworks shows, the government in this case is shipping items with limited immediate replacement capability (equipment, experiments, spacesuits) in addition to food, water, and the like. The government doesn't really care how much replacement would cost since it will pay for the risk one way or another -- the insurance simply becomes wrapped into the cost. It would really prefer that it not blow up. After all, ehen you have a large enough pile of cash, the smartest way to insure your risk is to self-insure.

By putting the risk of loss on the launch company, NASA would be giving them an extra incentive to become more reliable. The launch company can reduce their cost and increase profits (since they're usually bidding fixed cost to provide a package of launches, savings on insurance costs would go to the launch company). The reason for requiring insurance is that otherwise you either audit the hell out of the company, require a bond which ties up capital, or hope that they remain solvent after something goes *blam* without racking up an uncollectable debt. It'd be the Solyndra controversy in a somewhat different form.

Real Users never use the Help key.

Working...