Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
Take advantage of Black Friday with 15% off sitewide with coupon code "BLACKFRIDAY" on Slashdot Deals (some exclusions apply)". ×

Comment Re:Important to note (Score 1) 357

Yes, but pretty much *anything* can be psychologically addictive, so claiming it as a feature of a particular thing is a bit disingenuous. Not that some things don't have a wider or more intense appeal - I imagine far more people are addicted to chocolate or video games than horse droppings for example.

Submission + - Data Breach!

Pax681 writes: Hungryhouse take away delivery service has suffered a data breach. I was informed after receiving text message to say my password had been changed.

Your password has been updated.If you did not make this change,please contact us on 02088199778

So I checked on the website and sure enough.. I could not log in. so I phoned them and I was told that About 10,000 passswords had been reset and that it was a "minor data breach" and if i wanted my account checked i could. I then asked if anyone had ordered anything since last night as that was my last known order. All was well. They are very much playing it down ... but we shall see, there nothing on the interwebs about it yet

Comment Re:Duh (Score 1) 712

1) All the major stakeholders seem to have agreed that systemd is "good enough", that's exactly the problem, isn't it? The end users (minor stakeholders) aren't happy with the decision of the major stakeholders upstream.
2) absolutely, no argument.
3) the coupling is now between systemd and other software, where previously it was with "all the alternate implementations of the subsystems this software depends on could be implemented". I'm not seeing how the second is an advantage.
4) agreed. But we do have a pretty good idea of what a "desktop" and a "server" look like. The biggest down side I see is that a lot of those alternative modules that might be handy for random alternative hardware will lose much of their developer pools.

Comment Re:Mars isn't going anywhere. (Score 1) 173

At your destination you have plenty of rock/sand/dust to construct shielding, plus the instantaneous 50% reduction in cosmic radiation thanks to the planetary mass on landing. In transit that's not an option, it would raise the mass constraints far too much for current propulsion systems. And we're a long way away from effective magnetic shielding.

Orbital insertion requires that you be going slow enough to pull it off. Ceres low mass means you orbit it at very low speed, so you have to approach at very nearly its own orbital velocity. And you only have maybe a month to get from Earth to your destination before the travelers suffer permanent radiation damage, according to all the various Mars plans I've heard. You can do nice orbital insertions f transit time isn't an issue, with humans on board you're in too much of a hurry and have to slow down at the far end. Ceres is roughly 2.3x further than Mars at closest approach, so you need 2.3x the average speed to reach it in the same time window. Which translates to 2.3^2 = 5.3 times the kinetic energy (K=1/2mv^2). Its orbital velocity is also substantially slower than Mars, so you have to slow down further (18km/s versus 24)

If the centrifuge doesn't spin in the same plane as the surface then for the bottom half of your rotation real gravity will be pulling you "down", while for the top half it will be pulling you "up". Net effect "gravity" will the pulsing or strobing at your rotational frequency. Though at only 0.03g you might not notice the difference. What I described is pretty much the "spinning walls cylinder" or "spinning suspended chairs" carnival ride, rather than a ferris wheel spinning fast enough that your seat always points away from the axis.

I didn't say spin-stabilized concentrators would be good for Mars. Mars gets ~3x the sunlight to begin with. Freefall habitats get practically free spin-stabilized solar concentrators. Ceres gets neither.

The ocean doesn't wear sand into spheres, no. At least not as fast as new ragged sand is produced (though those tropical paradises with long stable beaches do tend to have much smoother sand than comparatively rocky ones) . But it does wear down the sharp edges it had initially. And I don't care about thrown around dust on Mars - the rovers have proven it's a non-issue. Clinging dust though is going to work its way into every seal and gasket you have, and the sharper it is the faster it will destroy them.

Comment Re:IPv6 support (Score 1) 111

IPv6 specific security features, such as not automatically assigning IP addresses to anything that may just be loitering about in the vicinity of the network?

I didn't see any mention of this being a wireless router, so I'd expect the simples way of not having random devices connect to it would be to not plug a cable into the router.

Comment Re:Mars isn't going anywhere. (Score 1) 173

Right, so long as its not my offspring that you are willing to sacrifice. And everybody has this same viewpoint for his own value of "my".

You chose to use the word "everyone" ; that is a word with only one meaning.

You are wrong. It is absolutely and incontrovertibly untrue that "everyone has this same viewpoint". I do not hold this opinion. The two-decade old receipt for my vasectomy (before having any children ; it was a bureaucratic struggle) supports my assertion that I hold a different opinion to you on this matter. I can also think of at least ten others of my friends who do not have children and who assert that they do not want to have children ; several of them are at or beyond the technical limits of child-starting age and remain child-free. This also supports my correction of your claim that "everyone" thinks like you. "Every-", "all" etc are words and prefixes that you should think several times before ever using.

Incidentally, I object to paying taxes to subsidise your children, their education and your spending on food and clothing for them. I'd rather spend the money on development of elder-care robots and extending lifespans. Robots are considerably less resource wasteful than people. Since I do get out and vote, this might be an incentive for you to do likewise.

But "Backup Earth" is not the only reason to go out colonizing.

"Backup Earth" never has been a credible reason for going out to colonise, in any sense of possibly providing a place where Earth-born humans can go to in any demographically significant numbers (for Earth ; far smaller numbers would be significant for the putative colony). The number of people who will ever die on a planet that they were not born on is always (caveat follows!) going to be far smaller than the number who die on the planet of their birth, for the same reason that today most people die in the country of their birth : transport is expensive. Colonies rarely receive more than 1% / year of their population by immigration - most of their growth is by local breeding of second and higher generation natives. Meanwhile the colony's internal growth can exceed 3% / year. Those numbers add up.

(Caveat : assuming that the currently-understood laws of physics hold, in particular the equivalence of inertial and gravitational mass, and the speed of light being an upper limit on speed. Actually, it doesn't matter that c is "legal max" ; even getting to c/10 qualifies as "expensive".)

If we (our generations) conspire with your children to fuck up the planet for their children, then it is your children's grandchildren who will suffer on Earth in consequence. The odds of your descendants including anyone who gets off planet (e.g., to the asteroids) are low (the corresponding probability for me is zero, of course).

Comment Re: Cost of access is key. (Score 1) 330

If/when survival becomes an issue, it would be nice if we already had a thriving space empire, because otherwise there's probably no way we can hope to evacuate more than a tiny fraction of the population before everyone dies, especially if we don't even have the resources to keep industry alive on Earth - what exactly will we use to build the first steps into space? Invstment is best done when you have lots of excess wealth. As for wealth - well, that remains to be determined, but several serious groups seem to think rare minerals can be returned to Earth at a profit, even with the current state of launch technology.

As for other motives - frontiers seem to be good for morale. And frankly, the expense of taking the first steps toward industrializing space pale in comparison to what we're already throwing away on pointless wars that do nothing but enrich special interests and advance the power of the authoritarian state.

Comment Re:Duh (Score 1) 712

Except the kernel really isn't that - maybe you could argue that it abstracts the CPU and some basic I/O functionality - but sound subsystems, sophisticate plug-and-play support, power management, networking, etc,etc,etc... do you really want all that rolled into the kernel? There's a LOT of stuff that gets piled on top of the kernel before you get to the desktop environment, what's wrong with putting an abstraction layer between the GUI itself and all the gooey goodness it depends on. As a developer I tend to find such abstraction layers, well positioned, can dramatically simplify the conceptual space I'm working in and let me focus on actually improving things, rather than managing the hodge-podge of modules doing the work behind the scenes. .

Comment Re:Duh (Score 1) 712

A fair point, and I do agree that systemd is likely much better suited to desktops than servers. Perhaps it's finally time to begin to fork the two at a lower level, since that very variety seems to be the source of much of the difficulty Linux has offering a competitive desktop experience. Basically consider systemd to specifically be a low-level component of desktop environments and other "shrinkwrapped" distros.

As for the smaller attack surface - as I understand it systemd is actually very modular, and you can leave out most of it in your distro if you so choose. The real problem is (I think, I'm pushing beyond the point that I've paid much attention to) is in the customizability. It seems like systemd expects its modules to operate in a very specific way, which would seem to drastically reduce the options for substantially different implementations.

Comment Re:Duh (Score 3, Interesting) 712

I would say an important question is, did the morphing happen before or after widespread adoption? And as I recall it happened well before. In which case I would argue that the starting point is really fairly irrelevant, and the actual "crimes" are:

1) calling an OS abstraction layer an init system when it clearly is far more than that (that seems to be perpetrated primarily by the detractors)
2) allowing a single party to tightly control the abstraction layer (though it does seem that such large-scale projects do need some sort of a singular "choke point" in order to ensure widespread compatability)
3) the discarding of lots of low-level components with large fan communities.
4) Having an OSAL at all? Though frankly, I think it's long overdue - one of my greatest annoyances with Linux is that practically every piece of nontrivial software seems to need to include explicit support and custom binaries for every major distro branch it runs on. That's a huge drain on developer time and energy, and one of the main reasons I've never done much Linux programming. Contrast to Windows where, with some fairly modest self restraint you can create a single binary that will run on everything from Windows95 to Windows10, and even Linux via WINE.

Frankly (2) is the only one I see as a real problem, and I'm uncertain how big of a problem it actually is. After all systemd is still fairly modular, just incompatible with most of the pre-existing modules already out there. And the individual modules are mostly under the control of other groups. And it's still GPL, so if the systemd group proves excessively abusive of their power there's nothing stopping the downstream distros from forking the project, provided they're willing to re-adopt all the maintenance headaches they adopted systemd to escape.

"Necessity is the mother of invention" is a silly proverb. "Necessity is the mother of futile dodges" is much nearer the truth. -- Alfred North Whitehead