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


Forgot your password?
Back for a limited time - Get 15% off sitewide on Slashdot Deals with coupon code "BLACKFRIDAY" (some exclusions apply)". ×

Comment dear national security personnel: (Score 5, Insightful) 259

do your fucking job. spying on suspects

not hoovering everything from everyone and thinking a search query will give you magic intelligence. intelligence work is *work*

the encryption is not important. your gumshoe work is. get out of your fucking cubicle you lardass and find these dirtbags

and if you can't do that maybe your useless security theatre job should be axed

Comment Re:Doublethink (Score 1) 190

...which is that some people in the U.S. legitimately believe that the 2nd Amendment is archaic and needs to be restricted a bit more... ...and I respect people who think we should make some changes...

The same polls also show that the majority of the US is willing to be under surveillance for a promise of fighting terrorist, pedophiles, etc...

What I do NOT respect are people who think we should just "reinterpret" the plain text to mean something new and different from the original

You mean like the 2nd amendment? You do realize, that the founding fathers would have thought that the "liberal" interpretation of the 2nd amendment to restrict INDIVIDUAL rights, was the definition of the government overstepping its bounds and exactly what they were TRYING to prevent.

If you're willing to lose one right for the promise of safety, you should be willing (and you will) lose them all.

Comment Doublethink (Score 5, Insightful) 190

And why is it that you yourself, while acting as if you care about constitutional rights, disparage those who support the right to be armed? I don't want a random person deciding which of my rights I should or shouldn't have based on their individual biases. I want them all.

Those who support infringing your right to privacy while supporting the 2nd amendment are making a terrible mistake. But by directing your anger towards them and supporting infringing on the right they hold dear, you are not only making the same mistake, but you are also playing into the hands of those who are perfectly happy taking our rights away a little bit at a time.

Don't fall into the trap of thinking that your ACLU card can't live next to an NRA one, or that the EFF membership depends on you having a specific political allowance as opposed to being committed to preserving as many rights as we can.

It's good to have different opinions and a debate... But once you say that you're okay sacrificing one right for the false hope of security, just because you don't care to exercise it, you don't get to argue for preservation of others against a similar promise of safety.

Comment Re:Your Data is worthless (Score 1) 220

No, you're wrong. Look at Cryptolocker and all the other random ransomware/malware/spyware. Lots of easy money out there going after consumer-grade "security". Heck, Synology had a huge ransomware scandal because of lax security. Do you really think the average guy who clicks on all the attachments to his emails is not going to get rooted and punted?

Comment And since the CIA created ISIS (Score 1) 289

CIA, Saudis To Give "Select" Syrian Militants Weapons Capable Of Downing Commercial Airliners (link below). And we know all the arm drops the CIA has done hoping they get in the "right" hands has never landed in ISIS hands. Proxy war anyone? CIA payback for Ukraine or making the US look bad in Syria or.... http://www.zerohedge.com/news/...

Comment Re:Why the hell would anyone use Go? (Score 2) 185

Why the hell would anyone use Go?

(Serious question, since our editors didn't tell us why Go was created, what Go's intended purpose was and whether or not anyone is actually using Go.)

As a software developer here that likes to fiddle with all languages, the second paragraph from Wikipedia seems to answer your question nicely: "It is a statically typed language with syntax loosely derived from that of C, adding garbage collection, type safety, some structural typing capabilities,[2] additional built-in types such as variable-length arrays and key-value maps, and a large standard library."

So from the first few words someone might know C and desire garbage collection to be handled for them? Golang might be a better selection for them than Java.

Personally for me, the built-in primitives for concurrency make it a great language for tinkering in realms of software design that were once onerous to me. But that's only one of a few of the language's goals.

Maybe a better set of questions would be for an elevator pitch on why someone should use golang? Or perhaps if they have dropped some goals of golang for others as development went forward?

Comment Re:Wisdom of naming it "Go" (Score 2) 185

There's already a game called Go, which has about a gazillion articles on how to program it. Couldn't you come up with a name that would be less ambiguous? Now, when you see a user group for "Go programming", you have no clue which one it is.

In conversation, I refer to it as golang. You are right on your point about potential for confusion but I don't think your example is apt anymore. Googling for programming go appears to yield only results about golang. Also, it is not without tangential benefits like being able to call Go developers "gophers."

I think when I first started programming Groovy long ago I stumbled upon a website promising that software development was groovy ... that's no longer the case when I google for groovy programming resources.

In short the success of your language is a big enough concern than the name of your language is negligible (with the exception of negative words). The search results will follow.

Comment there should be many easy fail safes (Score 1) 97

input or output from any part of the system should conform to narrow parameters, or the entire communication is disregarded, and the fail safe implemented. so falling back to the fail safe should be frequent, not rare and alarming. it could be a hack, it could also just be network or equipment issues, either way

for example, the data: distance to car in front of you

the data should be of rigorously correct format, received in the correct and expected small time frame, and the source must be locked to certain trust indicators (which would be another entire laundry list of overlapping qualifications)

if there is any failure, no matter how slight, the data should be considered tainted and incorrect, and back up redundant systems (lidar, whatever) or even fail over to manual control should be implemented

Comment Re:Drunks don't make the best decisions (Score 1) 327

because you drink and drive and don't think it's a problem

this makes you a fucking piece of shit

not a baseless insult, but objectively speaking: your irresponsibility is dangerous to the people you share the road with. by your choice. it's not your culture, asswipe, that's a lame dodge. you're just an immature irresponsible asshole who will kill someone, and seems happy about it

Comment Re:Drunks don't make the best decisions (Score 1) 327

basically you're saying your culture is ignorant and stupid. when the truth is only you are ignorant and stupid

your attitude obviously sucks, and you are an accident waiting to happen. when it does happen, please do us the favor and only kill yourself

and thanks for insulting the south in an attempt to mitigate your douchebag character, you irresponsible fuck

you will of course go "he hates the south"

no, i love the south, i have old family roots there. i only hate you, shitbag, because your attitude is clearly somebody's death by automobile waiting to happen

Comment Re:Drunks don't make the best decisions (Score 1) 327

people like you, who argue that police should be allowed to ignore the law

so this has absolutely nothing to do with what i said, not even remotely

nothing i said anywhere would remotely lead you to believe that this statement has anything to do with the content of my comment

it goes without saying i don't believe anything remotely like that

either you are

1. purposefully lying for the sake of trolling, badly. or you

2. genuinely lack the social and cognitive abilities necessary to carry on a coherent conversation

in fact, your comment is kind of a microcosm of much of what goes on in many arguments in the world

1. me: someone says something

2. you: some malicious asshole or social retard grossly twists the meaning to an unrelated fearmongering smear

and then pointless useless drama results

congratulations: you are a useless toxic shitbag. not a baseless insult. an objectively valid description of your contribution to this thread

Comment Re:Drunks don't make the best decisions (Score 1) 327

ah yes, my narrow minded attitude that drinking and driving is wrong

how shallowly judgmental of me

actual narrow minded righteousness is about finding people wrong for arbitrary things

like fashion or sexuality or... swearing

do you know anyone who would judge someone for swearing, you hypocritical shitbag?

Nobody said computers were going to be polite.