Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Can a Hillary supporter step up and explain? (Score 1) 634

Given the way you stated your question, I know you're not actually looking for an answer. But I'll give you mine anyway. I've been torn for a while until the Sanders supporters convinced me that he really isn't a serious candidate, and so have naturally gravitated toward her.

Here is what I like about her:

  • Her proposals are reforms that actually get the support of the business community. I fail to understand how my fellow Democrats can say "Not all Muslims are evil terrorists!" and then turn about and say "All people on Wall Street are evil!!!1!!1!". Yes, there are reforms that need to be made, but setting the rules to separate the good actors from the bad actors is going to not only have a chance of getting enacted, but actually work as well.
  • I love the fact that she pisses off both the extreme right and extreme left. You know. The morons who make up bullshit because they want it to be true.
  • Both the extreme right and left, but mostly the extreme right, like to lie out of their asses about her. Obama's "death panels" and "birth certifits"? Bitch, please. She's been accused of running cocaine flights out of little rock and personally murdering one of her best work friends, Vince Foster. It's all lies, and I'd support her just for that alone.
  • All the personal reports say that she has an absurdly loyal staff. That doesn't come from being "power-mad". It means that she's an excellent boss. Judge the character of someone by the way they treat the help.
  • The standoffishness you see in her is her being only barely tolerant of all these asshole shit-flingers. I like that. Maybe Obama can smile at those sorts of people, but personally I like that look of disdain she gets when some idiot starts quoting Rush or Beck or Hannity at her.
  • She's succeeded at basically everything she's ever tried. They can only admit it anonymously, but as a senator, she got along quite well with Republicans. As a Secretary of State, she was even more effective in representing US interests.
  • She makes it a point, when campaigning, not to overpromise to voters. This costs her in popularity. Who doesn't want to be promised rainbows and unicorns? But it's fundamentally more honest to say, "Given the views of the country right now, that just ain't gonna happen".
  • Yeah, she's a woman. But there's more than just symbolism at play here. In a business study, women CEOs have been found to be more effective than men are. Especially past the age of 40. That's just the facts.

You want to disagree? Fine. But if you do, please make it interesting. I'm tired of all the "bros" of various stripes parroting what they read, and arguing based on emotionalism. How much you "hate" someone. It's not so much annoying as it is uninteresting.

Comment Re:malware block plus is what I want (Score 4, Informative) 442

This is what AdBlock plus is. They're not against advertising. They're against intrusive advertising. Websites can apply to get their non-intrusive ads whitelisted from the program, so that they show up anyway. (Note: the criteria being used is much akin to the way ads were displayed in newspapers and print magazines.) An overwhelming majority of AdBlock users who responded to their survey said that this was the way to go, because everyone knows the content needs to be paid for.

Comment Argumentum ad lapidem (Score 5, Interesting) 311

Also called "Proof by assertion", or as Steven Colbert defined it colloquially, "Truthiness". You see this absolutely everywhere. It's where people don't even bother to try to make an argument, much less one that is correct and founded in fact. They just declare whatever they're feeling at the moment to be "true", because they want it to be.

We make fun of more sophisticated logical fallacies, but at least those who use them actually get to the "because" part. "Obama is worse than Hilter... because Hitler took away everyone's guns.." The justification isn't at all true, but at least it's an attempt. More typically all you see is this: "Obama is worse than Hitler". End of sentence and thought, as if the writer didn't have any. Which in all fairness, in these sorts of situations is probably true.

Comment Re: SAFe (Score 1) 210

The problem with Agile is that it effectively does away with estimates for when things will get done. Now this is fine for developing a running website, in which development velocity is king, and it's simply better to delay a feature rather than write throw-away code to make it work for a demo. However, it works very poorly for anything hardware related, or in which there are shows to make, or where there is a marketing roadmap, or senior management is impatient, or basically anything in the real world.

So instead what happens is that many companies do quote "Agile" unquote, in which an Agile process is a synonym for no process. Generally engineering is running along happily using Agile to stack rank things, but overall estimation of when this stuff is getting done is done at a higher level by people who are often relying on pure guesswork. Furthermore, in such a system, it invariably ends up that delays are not accounted for. Stack ranking one thing as your #1 item absolutely means that some other item isn't being worked on, but that rarely makes it back up the management chain.

Program Management is the discipline required to fix this, to insure that the waterfall-esque marketing roadmap and the engineering development stack rank is in alignment. However it also requires senior management buy-in, and talented program management, neither of which is common.

I guess the only think you can really say is that everyone is in the same boat. There are no companies run absolutely perfectly. And if they are, they grow so much that they can no longer be.

Comment Re:State doing the CYA thing (Score 3, Insightful) 261

Clinton knowingly had classified information on a server that was not secured. If you can't understand that, you're either a moron or a hyperpartisan loon.

Clinton's private email server was set up to receive mail from the State Department's UNCLASSIFIED email system. That State Department network was: 1) Not encrypted, 2) Had been hacked multiple times (including during the 1990s when Bush was in office), and 3) Not supposed to have classified information on it in any way.

There actually is a scandal here, but it's not the one morons like you think it is. The scandal is how so much classified information was being put onto the unclassified State Department servers in the first place, long before it got copied to, and the lax attitude that many State Department employees had in regards to handling such classified information.

So in short, if you want to bash Secretary Clinton for failing to recognize that the Department of State had a serious cultural attitude problem in properly handling classified information, and failing to fix it by directing her staff to find the people who were putting classified information onto the unclassified State Department server system - well, be my guest. That's a fair critique. (Though one, Secretary Powell would also have to cop to, and he was a general, so my assumption is that he should have been more aware of this than Clinton.)

If, on the other hand, you want to act like some sort of typical hyperpartisan loon and try to accuse her of some sort of crime, by making up complete bullshit about the system or her private server, well then I can't exactly stop you - I can only laugh at your idiocy, as common as it is. I understand that we're fully into silly season by now, with basically half the country acting sounding like the Cobert Report's Steven Colbert, except actually being serious about it.

Comment Taking risks guarantees failure (Score 5, Insightful) 139

In addition to all the other comments about $231 million being chump-change, recognize something else about advanced technological research: sometimes it doesn't pan out.

That doesn't mean that we should never try to research new things though. Not everything can be discovered the way the Japanese like to do it, through hundreds of small polishes to an existing working design. Sometimes you need to think big to make a real breakthrough.

I would also put this story and some of the kneejerk responses to it in the category of "why the US isn't as successful as it once was". If the 60s were like today, with anti-science teabaggers controlling half of congress, would we have made a manned mission to the moon? Especially given that every one of those missions could easily have ended in disaster?

No people. Even the vaunted Solyndra failure came out of a program that overall had a better success rate than most private funding, and in the end, not only advanced technology, it made a considerable profit for the taxpayer. The willingness to scream and cry and throw tantrums by the anti-technology/pro-fundamentalist haters, every time some risk doesn't come out out 100% perfectly, is a cancer on the body politic. And we're sinking due to the over caution that results.

Comment Re:It depends where you live in the world (Score 4, Informative) 210

Well, right now "this world is more peaceful" it depends where you live: Go to south america like Venezuela, Brasil, Colombia, Salvador, Mexico see the world there or go to Middle East, specially Siria and around there and see there. Go to africa and visit some countries there and see too. It isn't a "World Peaceful" there too.

This is true when compared to the first world, but untrue compared to the way things were even a couple hundred years ago. Dozens of people killed in rioting is not the same thing as one tribe systematically conquering another tribe, killing all the men, adult women, and boys, and taking the girls as sex slaves -- the sort of practice you can read all about (and apparently God approves of, according to ancient Israelite priests) in the Bible (Torah).

Comment Re:SJWdot. (Score 1) 182

While I agree with most everything you're saying here, I've begun to notice that just like the term "Race Card", the far right is beginning to use "SJW" to shut down serious discussion over real issues - or any topic that might lead to the conclusion that a extreme right wing ethos might not be for the best. This news in this article here shows that Microsoft largely is not hiring women in the U.S., but only for low paying, rote phone manufacturing work overseas, which they've been recently laying off. Personally, I don't know if this is execrable of them, but given that they have a General Manager of diversity and inclusion, I can't help but believe that Microsoft is failing to meets its own goals in this regard.

If people want to call that "SJW", they're turning the term into a meaningless epithet to use as an ad hominem attack when they have nothing worthwhile to say. Ironic, since that kind of behavior is typical of SJWs.

Comment Re:under budget, about same $ as environmental (Score 1) 305

I am surprised they don't just put another pipe right next to the existing one, but I guess it is a waste of materials due to the longer path.

They have. There are dozens of much more low-key pipelines. The difference is, they're not transporting bitumen, which is particularly noxious stuff - terrible if it leaks into the water supply.

But mostly, have you seen the price of gas lately? Frankly, at this point, it's more a point of conservative political pride to whine about Keystone-XL, than it has anything to do with economics. The numbers simply don't justify it. And that's not even pointing out that abusing eminent domain to force US land owners to sell, almost purely for the benefit of a foreign corporation and foreign customers (TransCanada and Canada respectively) - is absolutely odious. And frankly should be ruled unconstitutional, because that is not "private property taken for public use", it's private property taken for private use.

Comment Ummmm... about that linux "ransomware" (Score 4, Funny) 128

Now that we've decided to help bug-fix ransomware, anyone consider its usability?

"Once launched with administrator privileges, the Trojan loads into the memory of its process files containing cybercriminals' demands:"

In other words, it probably goes something like this:

% tar -xf "ransomware-dontrunme-whatareyouanidiot?.tar"
% cd ransomware-dontrunme
% ./configure > /dev/null 2>&1
% make > /dev/null 2>&1
% make install > /dev/null 2>&1
Error: Permission denied. Please run as root.
% sudo ./runransomware
Segfault in Please reinstall.

Followed by much sighing, and trying to google what the problem is.

See, this is the problem with the Linux desktop. Even installing malware is just too darned complicated.

Comment This is the threat...? (Score 5, Insightful) 213

"Well if you're not going to take this seriously, we'll have to start using another project."

I've never exactly gotten this. Why does anyone who is giving something away particularly care if someone who is getting it for free uses it or not?

This guy clearly doesn't understand that Open Source means "Free to Use" not "Free Beer", and that most corporations (the executives, not the software engineers or managers) are plenty happy to pay for support from the subject matter experts in it, so long as it saves them overall money. In fact, many corporation's resistance to OSS is due to the lack of such support - because their customers aren't so understanding..

This is the very business model that Red Hat uses. All this guy needs to do is put up a "priority payment" system for bug fixes, and post it publicly. Done and done.

Slashdot Top Deals

We all like praise, but a hike in our pay is the best kind of ways.