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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Lift? (Score 5, Insightful) 76

by OzPeter (#48898343) Attached to: NASA Considers Autonomous Martian Helicopter To Augment Future Rovers

Atmospheric pressure on Mars is 1% that of Earth. How're you going to get any lift?

Gee I dunno .. why not watch TFV and see what the experts say. You know .. the video where they talk about needed to spin the blades at 2400 rpm, and shows the drone mockups being tested in a chamber that they pump down to Mars conditions.

Comment: Re:Why oh Why (Score 4, Funny) 94

Why good things are always acquired by douchebag companies and ruined to the ground? First Java, now this.

Shouldn't you also direct your ire at the people from R who decide that selling the company was a good idea. Do you really think that MS went to them and said

That's a nice company you have there. It'd be a shame if you didn't sell it to us

Comment: Better Link (Score 2, Insightful) 185

by OzPeter (#48893107) Attached to: WhatsApp vs. WhatsApp Plus Fight Gets Ugly For Users

WhatsApp issues 24 hour ban for WhatsApp Plus users

I'm not sure that WhatsApp has a leg to stand on as reverse engineering is allowed, and could be opening themselves up to legal action. What I do find amusing is this classic FUD argument:

Why am I banned for using WhatsApp Plus and how do I get unbanned?

WhatsApp Plus is an application that was not developed by WhatsApp, nor is it authorized by WhatsApp. The developers of WhatsApp Plus have no relationship to WhatsApp, and we do not support WhatsApp Plus. Please be aware that WhatsApp Plus contains source code which WhatsApp cannot guarantee as safe and that your private information is potentially being passed to 3rd parties without your knowledge or authorization.

Comment: Re:The "what?!" is reaction time (Score 1) 287

by OzPeter (#48892755) Attached to: Government Recommends Cars With Smarter Brakes

I drive about 150mi per week on highways, not freeways, and watch as dozens and dozens of people text. They're easy to spot.

2 weeks ago I followed a local cop for several miles and counted 7 times that he made lane changes and merged onto and off the freeway without using his indicators. He was also slowly weaving from side to side to just outside the left and right sides of his lane. All classic symptoms of distracted driving. This cop suffered no penalty, yet I bet if the cop was following me and I exhibited the same behavior then I would have been pulled over (assuming of course that the cop would actually have been paying attention)

Comment: Re:clarification of certain situations (Score 1) 287

by OzPeter (#48892691) Attached to: Government Recommends Cars With Smarter Brakes

simply were not aware of imminent danger like a big fuckoff lump of iron in front of them... BAM! 70+mph right up some poor bastard's arse.

Last week there was an accident in Virginia where a minivan ran off the freeway. Several firetrucks attended the scene, and camped out in the lane next to where the car ran off the road. Some idiot managed to run himself into the back of one of the firetrucks at speed and kill himself. I still can't understand how you can't see the lights of a firetruck in the middle of the lane you are driving in, and not think to slow down or change lanes. And with this accident occurring on a freeway, its not as if the previous accident scene was hidden around a bend.

For bonus points, all 6 people in the minivan were wearing seat belts, and all survived with non-life threatening injuries. The driver of the car that ran into the firetruck was not wearing a seatbelt - and died. (of course a seatbelt won't help you if you run into a fixed object at high speed)

Police ID driver killed after crashing into Henrico fire truck

Comment: Re:Not a fan (Score 4, Insightful) 287

by OzPeter (#48892581) Attached to: Government Recommends Cars With Smarter Brakes

If the safety feature enables the brakes when a crash is 'imminent', it takes away the driver's discretion during the times braking is not advisable.

And if you look at the stats, about 1/3 of crashes are rear end accidents, and within that group a significant number of drivers didn't even attempt to apply the brakes. That last part was even in TFS!

You can't take away something that doesn't exist.

Comment: Re:If Only the Article Addressed That ... (Score 1) 359

by OzPeter (#48888279) Attached to: Behind the MOOC Harassment Charges That Stunned MIT

Then he should have left the "women" part out of it.

Given that the case in question revolves around a guy supposedly manipulating women, I don't think it's unreasonable for the OP to frame the statement in terms of female victims. But I agree that abuse in general needs to be prevented.

Comment: Re:Not trying to excuse what he did (Score 1, Insightful) 359

by OzPeter (#48888233) Attached to: Behind the MOOC Harassment Charges That Stunned MIT

Or do you have to asssume each time you engage a conversation with someone he/she is not responsible for what he/she says?

There is a big difference between having a conversation with someone that touches on things vs actively seeking out and exploiting those things.

Lewin was an idiot and was framed.

Lewin was an idiot, but if he actively groomed these victims, then he was not framed.

Comment: Re:Not trying to excuse what he did (Score 5, Insightful) 359

by OzPeter (#48888167) Attached to: Behind the MOOC Harassment Charges That Stunned MIT

And they could have stopped it immediately by blocking him on FB and/or just stopped the course they paid a whole $0 for.

In the whole history of people being psychologically manipulated and abused, they *all* could have stopped it simply by saying no, and walking away. Yet they don't. Kinda suggests that doing so is very difficult to do, and that there are things in play that you are not crediting.

Comment: Re:Not trying to excuse what he did (Score 4, Informative) 359

by OzPeter (#48887941) Attached to: Behind the MOOC Harassment Charges That Stunned MIT

But how exactly did he force them to do what they did *Over the internet*

If you read the full article, towards the end it talks about this particular woman having various emotion issues including abandonment. It would seem that the prof in question exploited theses weaknesses in order to groom the woman into sending the naked pics etc.

In addition the article talks about various victims being from cultures where speaking out is not the done thing.

So while no-one was physically compelled to send anything, it sure sounds as if they were psychologically compelled.

"Don't think; let the machine do it for you!" -- E. C. Berkeley

Working...