Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment Re: A Porsche Self-Drive? (Score 1) 207

This is a silly fallacy. It's a statistical manipulation to hide information by mashing disparate groups together, like saying half the world's population has ovaries.

The most egregious one I've seen was someone trying to explain technology didn't cut down the amount of time we spend collecting food because some 20% of the earth's population are farmers. In developed countries where agriculture uses advanced farm management techniques and powered machinery, we expend under 2% of our labor time producing food, including the cost of all that machinery and the fuel for it; low-development countries with subsistence farming tend to expend 18% or more. Taken as a whole, the statistic of how many farmers are working to feed 100% of the earth's population drastically weakens my argument; examined as developed vs developing, we see the countries using developed technology expend *much* less labor per unit food, which firmly supports my argument.

Your argument paints the world as one socio-economic unit. It's the kind of argument people use for pulling away from China, citing low pay and poor working conditions, while ignoring the low cost-of-living and the bare fact that a loss of jobs means more starving, homeless Chinese people. Treating Burkina Faso as if it's America with some people's rights getting infringed is a grand delusion.

Comment Re:APorsche Self-Drive? (Score 1) 207

Ridiculously inflated? I've looked at buying myself a Porsche. It's a little more than my standard fare, but nowhere near the nuttery of Ferrari's barely-functional, glass-construction shit boxes. Not only does a Porsche only cost a few tens of thousands instead of a few hundreds of thousands, but you can hit potholes without incurring maintenance costs exceeding the MSRP of a brand new Porsche.

Comment Re: Well, he did admit to breaking Swedish law... (Score 1) 323

The charge has never been rape. That's just the way it has been reported in the media. The "crime" he is charged with in Sweden has no equivalent in the UK or US and the woman was pressured into making it by the police once they figured out who the complaint was against. She only wanted a STD test done.

You keep saying this, and people keep pointing out that penetrating a sleeping woman without her consent, after she's told you "no", is rape in not just Sweden, but both the UK, and the US (not that the latter is relevant). At some point will you admit that fact?

Comment Re:should be interesting (Score 2) 323

Ok, I keep hearing "rape" being brought up but, the charge is not quite what it seems. The women in question did not go to the police with charges of sexual assault. One of them discovered that the condom came off, during consensual sex, and after she was unable to locate him, went to the police to locate him for the purpose of taking a STD test.

That'd be the sexual assault charge. The rape charge is from the other situation where he penetrated a woman while she was sleeping, knowing she did not consent, having been explicitly told "no" before she went to sleep. That's the one that the UK courts said "yes, that's rape, even under British law."

Comment Re:Oh those poor hackers! (Score 3, Informative) 83

On one hand, it's not a lot of money. A decent job pays more.

On the other, apparently it's $29,000 for like two days of work.

I quit playing the stock market because it was hard. I averaged 1% per day on 3-5 day holdings (swing trading; day trading would be attractive if I had a large portfolio), but that was with 18 hours per day of research, waking at 4am to examine news and foreign markets, with loads of analysis of technicals and some fundamentals. It was technically sustainable, if I didn't go insane first.

Those two days of work for a hacker are followed by months or years of worrying which of the 40 odd jobs the FBI is investigating. I'd imagine an honest job provides a more enjoyable income than one in which you spend the following 7 years hoping the SWAT team doesn't boot your door in.

Comment Re:Yeah, but... (Score 1) 120

Because it makes heavy use of features inside the Linux kernel which isolate applications from the rest of the operating system. To make Docker work on OSX, you'd have to modify the OS kernel to dramatically change the way it handles system calls and application spaces. Essentially, it groups processes together as if they're running on different kernels, but runs them all in the same kernel.

Run a docker container that only runs the command 'ps -e' and it will tell you 'ps' is PID 1. The nginx container has nginx as pid 1, and 'kill -9 1' kills nginx; if you do 'ps -e' on the host, it tells you nginx is process 3719, and killing that process ends the same program. This is not standard behavior.

Comment Re:the point (Score 1) 120

It's actually kind of an inversion.

Docker base images for Debian, CentOS, and Ubuntu are typically 50-100 megabytes. Shrinking down that "base image" doesn't really make sense; instead shrunk down images for things like PHP, Node, and Ruby.

Even then, you have two main issues.

Firstly, if you have something stupid like e.g. PHP not coming with ANYTHING installed (no php-pdo, no php-ldap, etc.), you have to write your own Dockerfile to install PHP. Typically, you can just put "image: php/5.6-fpm" in your docker-compose.yml and mount your application as a volume, and it'll work; if you need additional php modules, you have to make docker-compose build a Dockerfile opening with "FROM php/5.6-fpm", running a bunch of install commands to compile and build stuff.

Second, that causes bloat.

Docker reuses base images. PHP comes from debian/jessie, so you download the 60MB debian/jessie image and then an additional 150MB php image which doesn't include any of the stuff in Debian/jessie, and you get 210MB of space usage. The same goes with Java: it mounts its 100MB image on top debian/jessie. Install php (210MB) and Java (160MB) and you're only using 310MB, instead of 360MB.

So now you have 11 PHP applications installed. Each uses a 30MB base image instead of a 150MB base image, so installing iron/php only requires 90MB of space instead of 210MB. Each of your 11 PHP applications needs a different set of PHP extensions, which each need a set of base libraries.

In the most optimal case, you install all of the PHP extensions and use the resulting image, which gets you back to where you started with that hulking 150MB PHP image. 11 separate applications all use the same image, no duplication.

In the less-optimal case, every one of your PHP applications installs all the compiler toolchain and *-dev packages to build the PHP extensions that image needs, then removes the toolchain and *-dev packages in the same RUN line so they don't get stored in any Docker image along the way. Every different combination of tools (or, really, any application not built with *exactly* the same commands in RUN, right down to the white space) creates a new Docker image containing all of the necessary libraries and other files.

Installed php-ldap and php-mysql in one container? That container contains libldap, libmysql, php-ldap, php-mysql, and all other required files. Installed php-ldap and php-postgresql in another container? That container contains A DIFFERENT COPY of the same libldap and php-ldap files, plus php-postgresql and all the required libraries to back it. Etc. etc.

You get to say, "Ah, my images are all tiny! ... why do they take up so much disk space in total?"

Comment Re:Censor the censors? (Score 1) 662

It depends on the triggers in question. Trigger warnings about rapes and such - yes, they're a good thing. Trigger warnings about things like mentioning slavery, because supposedly someone is "forced to relive the suffering of their ancestors" and is "traumatized" by it, are bullshit.

Why is that bullshit? Not that I think that situation has ever actually happened, but you don't believe in educating people? You think kids should sign up for a class and not be given a syllabus, and have no idea what they're going to learn? Why is it 'bullshit' to give people more information?

In many cases, those trigger warnings are also implicit. In a sense that if you're going to go to a history class, then, yeah, you can be expected to deal with historical topics such as slavery or treating women as property - this shouldn't require a trigger warning.

My music history class never touched on either of those. Perhaps not every history class is the same, and people should know in advance what the class will cover?

Similarly, if you're going to a stand-up comedy, you can expect to hear jokes involving ethnic stereotypes and gender roles, for example - and this shouldn't require a trigger warning, either.

Not that it has. Cleese was complaining about colleges, not stand-up comedy shows. Which is like a college professor complaining about stand-up shows. Maybe they should stick to worrying about their own jobs?

Either way, college kids who want their university to shut down an event because they dislike an invited guest is a situation where we can assume that they know what they expect to hear (and be offended by) in advance. If they don't actually know but still want to shut it down because they don't like the person specifically, then it's pure ad hominem on their part, and should be dismissed with prejudice without wasting any time on it.

And they have been, and what's your point? Cleese was saying that they shouldn't even be allowed to ask for it to be shut down, because the very idea of shutting things down is so offensive to him that he needs a blanket and nice cup of tea. He's asking for them to be censored because they asked for other events to be censored. How about just saying "no, you can hold your own event?" Why does everyone, on both sides immediately jump to "we cannot allow them to speak"?

Slashdot Top Deals

Disc space -- the final frontier!