Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



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:This is no moral decision (Score 1) 129

Humans are unable to make moral decisions in a few miliseconds. They would either freeze for a least one second and hit the next car or pedestrian depending on which comes first. If they have more time, they would try to avoid collision with the human and hit the car, because you cannot really see other people in there and you do not know how many persons are in there. Also people in the car are better protected. So the safest thing is hit the car. But beside that people know when approaching an truck trailer and they cannot stop, they should aim for the wheels and not the section in the middle. However, most people are unable to implement that so why should be cars be able to do these things?

You have hit on one of the key reasons why trying to implement human reasoning in an emergency; especially since it's usually a subconscious reaction to avoid hitting the bigger, scarier thing. yo can train people to make calm decisions in an emergency situation but that takes a lot of simulator time and practice; something most drivers sorely lack before getting a license. If you wanted to follow the human reasoning it would simply be "CRAAAP.... AVOID HITTING THE BIG THING...DAMN... A PEDESTRIAN ... OH WELL IT ISN'T THE BIG THING...."

Comment: Re:Need Computers? (Score 1) 151

by Registered Coward v2 (#49347669) Attached to: NJ School District Hit With Ransomware-For-Bitcoins Scheme

It's funny that schools got along without computers for thousands of years, now all of a sudden they're required. Well how about going the non electronic route until the problem is solved...... not that hard to figure out.

They can and will. The issue is not the current ability to keep track of things but having to update the electronic records once the system is back. The electronic record is used to compile transcript, verify required attendance, select valedictorians, etc. Depending on how long it takes to restore from a backup it will take a while to catchup. Now, if the system lost the master records then they have a much bigger problem but even then a proper backup scheme would minimize the impact of such a loss.

Comment: Re:Good points, bad points (Score 5, Insightful) 271

While I appreciate your point of view I also think that having drivers maintain some sembelance of situational awareness is worthwhile. I can fairly accurately guage my speed and inly occasionally need to look at the speedometer to validate my assessment. However, as drivers turn over more functions to automation they become less aware of what is happening around them as the come to rely on the automation to take care of things. As a result when things go wrong they may not realize it in time to take effective corrective action. In essence, automation can lull them into a sense that all is well when in reality it is not. Automation should assist, not replace, human actions.

Comment: Pretty neat pictures (Score 1) 56

by Registered Coward v2 (#49322665) Attached to: NASA's Abandoned Launch Facilities
Some really nice photos. Hard to believe their still was an A4 on a stand in 1996; it looks like it was kept up as a display. This also brings up my frustration with Kickstarter. There a lot of cool projects I'd back if only I could find out about them in time; usually I find out about them when I read a 'Kickstarter funded" tag line in an article and the funding period is over.

Comment: Re:Unintended consequences (Score 1) 336

Your argument is the moral equivalent of saying Stalin is a good guy because he wasn't as bad as Hitler. If that's your position, then fine, we simply disagree.

As a side note, I never criticized Putin for what he did but rather said he is acting in his own interests and that once Snowden ceases to be useful Snowden may find himself out in the cold.

Comment: Re:"smoking, drinking, or tattoos"? (Score 5, Funny) 568

Brenda Willson, says her son is innocent and does not smoke, drink or have tattoos

WTF? What do smoking, drinking, and tattoos have to do with calling the freakin' SWAT in on some poor gamer? Is this some correlation I had previous not heard about?

SWAT: Smokes Whiskey and Tattoos

Comment: Re:Unintended consequences (Score 1) 336

Sergei Magnitsky Pussy Riot Alexander Litvinenko Stanislav Markelov Anastasia Baburova

The list goes on and on...

Free press? Human rights? Rule of law? Only as long as it doesn't threaten his position.

Ask yourself this, if the rule of law was so strong why do oligarchs move as much cash as possible out of Russia? What do they fear?

I'm not sure why you are a Putin apologist but his actions speak volumes about him. Then again, as a KGB officer he learned a thing or two about survival.

So, my conclusion is he only will care about Snowden as long as Snowden is useful, and afterwards Snowden will simply be a pawn to sacrifice for some new advantage or benefit.

Comment: Re:Unintended consequences (Score 1) 336

It does not matter what I do believe and that is precisely the point I was making. We can only judge by actions taken. The fact that you continue argue your assumptions means you've failed to grasp the point.

Putin's actions to date in many areas have shown him to look after Putin first; thus it is reasonable to assume he is acting, in Snowden's case, in the same manner. So yes, I agree you judge on actions and am doing so in this case. You appear to judge based on a single action, i.e. He gave Snowden temporary permission to remain in Russia, while I prefer to judge what he does in the larger context of how he has acted in many situations. Thus I think it is naive to think, or believe, he is acting out of some desire to help, or cares for, Snowden beyond how he useful to advance Putin's agenda. So let me ask the question differently since you seem to be hung up on the word believe: What in Putin's actions makes you conclude Putin is not acting in his best interests but out of some great concern for Snowden?

Comment: Re:Unintended consequences (Score 0) 336

I wish, Sir, you stopped living in a fantasy world of conclusions reached based on assumptions and joined us in evidence based reality.

Do you really believe that Putin let Snowden in for any other reason other than he could be useful to Putin and that when he is no longer useful to Putin he'll be unceremoniously tossed aside and used to get something else Putin wants?

Comment: Re:Unintended consequences (Score 3, Insightful) 336

By trying to prevent its allies from giving Snowden asylum, the USA has forced him to take asylum with a relatively unfriendly nation, Russia.

Not really. Russia's leadership doesn't really have to worry about public perception of how Snowden is treated and Putin can be relied upon to do what is best for Putin, not Snowden, Russia or anyone else unless doing so advances Putin. Once Snowden is no longer useful he can swap him for something he wants without worrying about the reaction in Russia. In addition, Snowden is much more likely to get tired of Russia than Germany and thus may eventually decide to return to the US without preconditions. Thus, the US is more likely to get Snowden back from Russia than Germany and so Russia may be a more desirable option for the US.

Comment: Service backdoors (Score 4, Interesting) 96

Having been a field engineer, where I had to fix and make work the stuff the idiots who called them selves engineers doing the design, having a backdoor to access systems was very useful. Customer didn't remember the password? No problem, I still had a way into the control system. I did, however, wonder what other equipment had the same "feature?" My stuff had no public facing interface no network connection so illicit access was not an issue except maybe if a disgruntled employee decided to have some fun; but the general design approach was "we need backdoors for support reasons" and that mentality carried over as equipment became more connected and no one ever seems 2015-03-20o question it or assess the risks vs reward for such a design philosophy. Of course, no one would ever access the proprietary "Company Confidential" engineering support documentation, right? It's kept safe right here on our internal document so no one weill ever know our backdoor user is "admin" with a password of "Pass1234" and thus we can make them easy for our field support staff, who we at HQ all know are dumb knuckle dragging mouth breathers anyway, to remember.

The major difference between bonds and bond traders is that the bonds will eventually mature.

Working...