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


Forgot your password?

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:How many minutes until this is mandatory? (Score 1) 271

by ToasterMonkey (#49333465) Attached to: Ford's New Car Tech Prevents You From Accidentally Speeding

Problem also when passing another car - especially when the other car accelerates a bit at that moment. Sometimes you just need to be able to gain a few mph quickly and with no condition.

"The driver can override the speed limit by pressing "firmly" on the accelerator."
That's what you already have to do to make an automatic downshift. Have you driven one lately that didn't do this?

If there's multiple lanes, I have NO problem leaving the cruise control on, sliding over, and letting them fiddle with their speed for a minute.
I wouldn't use this tech in the left lane though, unless it had configurable +10ish offset at highway speeds at least. And if anyone really must go variable 15+ over the posted limit, either put the siren on or add passing someone on the right to that list.

Comment: Re:Sort of redundant (Score 1) 107

This is a common, but flawed, response to many types of privacy invasion. The thing is, scale matters. The aggregation of lots of data that could otherwise only be had by exerting effort (following someone, staking out a home, etc.) reduces the level of effort required to infringe someone's privacy, and greatly increases the chances that someone's privacy will be infringed. This is why forcing cops to get warrants is considered a good part of the justice system, while the mass "perusal" of aggregated information is considered bad (for privacy).

Aggregation of data is an invasion of privacy because it lowers the level of effort and increases the chances of an invasion of privacy? Nobody is going to test that tortured logic? You're fighting a losing battle against time and technology with this thinking.

Nobody needs a warrant or special permission to tail someone in public. Intuition is not a violation of privacy. Anyone can aggregate this information, and anyone can collect it. A single smartphone could sweep up thousands of plates a day, and anyone can do it.

I'm not concerned about it, because what can you do? There'll be a day when everybody's watch or glasses could do this.

Comment: Re:Hilarious (Score 3, Insightful) 207

by ToasterMonkey (#49311311) Attached to: For Boot Camp Users, New Macs Require Windows 8 Or Newer

I love how Mac and Linux users are constantly trying to figure out ways to make their computers run Windows applications, if not Windows itself.

Why not just run Windows, period?

If you could flip a switch and turn your commuter car into a truck to haul a couch home, why WOULDN'T you?

Take your Us vs. Them ONE OS stuff back to the 90's please. We have computers coming out our butts now, and more platforms, more competition, is welcome.

Comment: Re:so, the key to amnesty... (Score 1) 322

by ToasterMonkey (#49287421) Attached to: Microsoft Offers Pirates Amnesty and Free Windows 10 Upgrades

The goal is strictly marketing - if you convince people to use Windows, they'll probably stick with Windows. You may not get much money out of them, but there are long term issues to worry about - namely, platform support. If you want developers to write for your platform, you need to convince them that your platform is worth writing for. If a Chinese user is forced to choose between Windows and Linux, and they start going Linux, it hurts Windows because developers might start writing for Linux instead.

Linux distros are free because.... They also happen to need developers, users and have bills to pay, it's just totally not a marketing gimmick? The most popular distros are run by non-profits?

I see this as fair competition. We've got companies bundling every piece of software they can with their system in these enormous OS repositories, and giving it away for free, while Microsoft almost got broken up over shipping a web browser. Yup, they abused a monopoly, and hurt the software market. Look at Linux today, WHAT software "market"? MySQL gets snubbed for MariaDB, OpenOffice for LibreOffice. Microsoft has to use a browser ballot?

When will Microsoft be allowed to operate just like everybody else, bundling and dumping like they couldn't have dreamed of twenty years ago?


Proxima Centauri Might Not Be the Closest Star To Earth 98

Posted by samzenpus
from the hiding-behind-the-shine dept.
StartsWithABang writes The Alpha Centauri system consists of three stars, including Proxima Centauri, the closest star to Earth. But while main-sequence, hydrogen-burning stars are easy to find due to their visible light output, brown dwarfs — which only fuse the small amounts of deuterium they're born with — often emit no visible light at all, and can only be seen in the infrared. In 2013, WISE discovered a binary pair of brown dwarfs just 6.5 light years away, making them the third-closest star system to Earth, and leaving open the possibility that there may yet be brown dwarfs closer to us than any star, a question that it will take the James Webb Space Telescope to answer.

Comment: Re: Enlighten me please (Score 1) 450

by ToasterMonkey (#49231425) Attached to: Reactions to the New MacBook and Apple Watch

You mean you do exactly what the rest of the working world does with their laptop docking station?

I have an hp one at work, and a Lenovo one at home. Both have power and peripherals plugged in and I just drop my laptop into place for it all to spring to life.

Yes, a single wire is exactly what a docking station should be distilled down to. Really, screw wires.

Comment: Re:Enlighten me please (Score 1) 450

by ToasterMonkey (#49230995) Attached to: Reactions to the New MacBook and Apple Watch

for hd video, wifi is NO SUBSTITUTE for wired enet.


And it's not necessarily the speed (bit rate) but the inherent instability and susceptibility to interference that really makes it unstable. If my wireless connection drops momentarily whilst I'm browsing /. I'm not going to notice, if it drops whilst streaming a HD video, chances are I'll notice (even buffering the video wont help too much).

If you want to send video over a network you use wires. If you're really serious or going long distances, you go straight to fibre.

No, it IS about bitrate. I'm getting ~580 Mbps over 802.11ac two rooms over right now, that's ten times the maximum bitrate of Blu-ray, or enough to buffer one at 10x. I would have to use a player that did't buffer at all, or suffer seconds of outage to have a problem.

Good AV playback is ALL about throughput, and has nothing to do with latency. Wifi isn't your problem, you're doing Wifi wrong.

If Wifi was't good enough for video, it absolutely would not be good enough for networked games, and then you're talking to a lot of people who don't have any problems...

Comment: Re:Enlighten me please (Score 1) 450

by ToasterMonkey (#49230943) Attached to: Reactions to the New MacBook and Apple Watch

for hd video, wifi is NO SUBSTITUTE for wired enet.

try an mkv file; oftentimes it takes 2 or even 3 minutes before vlc (on win7 ultimate) begins to play, and that is with the very latest media bridge of ac to ac wireless (2 asus routers). this is as good as wireless gets for consumers and yet I have a several minute wait time.

why? I think the protocol sucks and there is a lot of seeking or indexing on some mkv's and with wifi latency, small packets take forever (when there are lots of them needed). plug into wired enet and the video plays almost instantly.

do a backup over the net? not likely! yes, I can. but its painful.

wireless also is quite insecure. a lot of people think its ok. many of us don't trust it.

so, anyone saying 'wired is dead for end stations' knows nothing about the vast number of use-cases where wifi falls flat on its arse.

(and try running nfs over wifi. good luck with that!)

That does't make any sense, what kind of video playback is sensitive to latency - at all? You're probably not getting the throughput you think you are supposed to be getting. Go back to the drawing board and fix your network man, Wifi is plenty fast for several HD streams.

Comment: Re:Yet another reason to abandon physical media. (Score 2) 107

by ToasterMonkey (#49155811) Attached to: Blu-Ray Players Hackable Via Malicious Discs

> If you watch your movies via streaming, this is not an issue. 2015 people, 2015.

Yes. In 2015 there's still plenty of stuff that's not available via streaming or is only available at a price that most people aren't interested in paying.

Some us actually use this stuff and don't merely talk about it.

The movie I was streaming just flaked out, that's why I came over here to make sure the Internet connection was still up and say hi.

Comment: Re:As a Developer of Heuristic AI ... (Score 1) 531

by ToasterMonkey (#49144495) Attached to: Machine Intelligence and Religion

Glad to be of service. The more we hamper idiots trying to make self-improving intelligence without precautions the better. And yes, once neurosurgeons can use their intelligence to produce indefinite increases in intelligence in their subjects, the same danger applies to them./p>

Where do people think this property of intelligence comes from?

WE are only THEORETICALLY capable of making something more intelligent than ourselves. Increasing relative intelligence might be an exponentially difficult task. It's obviously not easy. It may take the same amount of work * time for something more intelligent than us to make the same relative advancement. It may take MORE work * time to improve by the same amount.

We don't even know how much effort it will take us to make the first step.

Comment: Re:The banned weapons (Score 2) 318

From your own source:

There has been much debate of the allegedly poor performance of the bullet on target, especially the first-shot kill rate when the muzzle velocity of the firearms used and the downrange bullet deceleration do not achieve the minimally required terminal velocity of over 750 m/s (2,500 ft/s) at the target to cause fragmentation.

Not only are you wrong, you are so wrong that the round is actually criticized for not causing enough damage.

From what I was told in the service the round was designed to wound not to kill on purpose. If you wound someone, one of their comrades has to drag them back to cover. You thereby take two enemies out of the fight. But hell, what would the armorer know.

I think "designed to wound" is a reassuring way to say "technically not as lethal". We switched to smaller ammo for logistical reasons, to carry more ammo, and statistically less lethality is not a bad thing for the reason you mentioned, it's just not the real reason we switched to 5.56. Way I look at it is, without increasing the weight or cost, is there any obvious thing you can do to make a 5.56 nato round more lethal? The FMJ is for penetrating body armor, and only increases the chances of having exit wounds. So it was light, cheap, and "lethal enough" - not designed to be less lethal, in my opinion.

Comment: Re:Google don't care about you (Score 1) 51

You don't have to like or trust Google(and you shouldn't) to agree that "Hey, let's quietly change rule 41 so that all you need to 'remote search'(by means tactfully unspecified) a computer anywhere is the approval of a judge, doesn't much matter which, from one of the 94 federal districts, rather than one at least vaguely related to the matter at hand!" is...perhaps...a bad move.

I was always told the Internet didn't have borders, and an IP isn't a person, blah blah blah... now people want to somehow pin their citizenship and legal jurisdictions to their IP when it suits them.

Reality is catching up to the Internet, and it's free spirited nature isn't going to be a legal smoke screen much longer.