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: easy (Score 1) 250

by Tom (#49144853) Attached to: The Programmers Who Want To Get Rid of Software Estimates

But it's so easy to make a good estimate, takes less than 10 seconds:

Take your instinctive estimate.
Double it.
Increase units by one (if you think "hours", make it days. If you think "weeks" make it months, etc.)

So if you think it'll take 2-3 days, tell your manager it'll be ready in 4-6 weeks. Don't forget that in management school, they teach these fuckers to under-promise and over-deliver. He understands.

Comment: Re:Tilting at Windmills (Score 1) 250

by Tom (#49144837) Attached to: The Programmers Who Want To Get Rid of Software Estimates

From a human psychology standpoint he would rather know that it will be done in 3 days, barring delays, than not know when it will be done and have it in two hours. I personally think that is a dumb way of doing things, but I am the outlier, not the director.

The psychological issue is that you don't know, but you have a hunch, you have some insight. You know it's probably going to be a few hours.

But for non-techies, all this stuff is a total blackbox. When you say "I don't know" they panic, because for them that means anything from a day to a month or maybe infinity. Uncertainty is a horrible psychological state and people try to avoid it. It's an instinct. When you don't know if that shadow is a monkey or a lion, it's better to panic just in case.

By saying "three days", you give him certainty. Now he knows the shadow isn't a lion.

Comment: Re:Not surprised (Score 2) 293

by Tom (#49134931) Attached to: Reddit Imposes Ban On Sexual Content Posted Without Permission

Some people will applaud this action, saying that no one should have their private pictures posted without their consent. Some people will call this an issue of right to privacy. Those people are misguided.

Explain how, exactly.

There are things that you just don't do (like, say hitting a woman).

Unfortunately, if the population is large and anonymous enough, you always have someone who does something that you shouldn't do. That's when we need a law. You understand these laws don't fall from the sky, yes? They're the written down rules of society. And society needs rules, otherwise it's not a society, it's just a mob.

And posting sex pictures of other people without their consent is just the kind of stuff that you don't do. And if people don't get it, you have to tell them.

Comment: Re:git blame (Score 4, Insightful) 276

by Tom (#49127323) Attached to: Moxie Marlinspike: GPG Has Run Its Course

Blame the users mostly for not giving a fuck about encryption.

That is stupid. It's like saying blame the drivers for not giving a fuck about fuel injection. Users should not have to care about encryption. They should care about having secure and private communication, and how to make that happen is our job, it's why we are being paid more than burger flippers.

Comment: Re:Let me explain.... :-) (Score 1) 276

by Tom (#49127289) Attached to: Moxie Marlinspike: GPG Has Run Its Course

- Crypto doesn't play well with webmail

But you've heard of Hushmail, yes?

We have the technology. If we want, we can make strong crypto work. Problem is that most of the big players with the money to make it happen don't want, and the small guys either don't understand the technology and complexity (users) or are incapable of making it actually usable (techies).

Comment: Re:Hello, search fragmentation (Score 1) 284

by Tom (#49125285) Attached to: Google Knocks Explicit Adult Content On Blogger From Public View

If we suddenly are no longer able to google one particular kind of content, someone will offer their own search engine, supported by specialized advertising, for it.

Welcome to the Internet, great to have you here. When you hang around for a bit, you will notice that there are search engines beside Google, especially for adult content.

the half-mystical "deep Web"

Has nothing to do with porn sites. There's very little about porn that's deep, or hidden, except maybe a few very, very extreme fetishes, but unless it's illegal in 120 countries, you are very likely to be no more than five minutes away from it as soon as you open a browser.

Comment: Re:Not Censorship (Score 1) 284

by Tom (#49125271) Attached to: Google Knocks Explicit Adult Content On Blogger From Public View

People keep using that word but do not really seem to know what it means.

True, but the "it's just free market" screams also obscure and important point: It's not censorship when one store, newspaper or company does it. But what if everyone does it? If thanks to pressure from certain interest groups, your particular topic vanishes not from one store and newspaper, but from all of them?

When a story cannot be published even though both supply and demand exist, is that not censorship?

That is why it's right to question such changes when big companies do it. I'm not worried for porn, it'll always exist. But asking Google the simple question "why" is not wrong.

Comment: Re:Not Censorship (Score 1) 284

by Tom (#49125257) Attached to: Google Knocks Explicit Adult Content On Blogger From Public View

because not everyone on the internet can discern between what they click on... (like kids

Little kids are not at all interested in porn. There've been very few studies on this, due to the obvious difficulties of getting the ethics board to approve, but from what I've read about it, their primary reaction is boredom. Like "what is this shit and how do I get back to what I wanted?".

Teens are interested in porn. And short of locking them all up in isolation cells, they will get it, because they're ready to dedicate even more time and effort to the task than the puritans do to "protect" them.

Comment: Re:The Feds (Score 3, Informative) 284

by Tom (#49125249) Attached to: Google Knocks Explicit Adult Content On Blogger From Public View

to make the internet as tame as American TV

"Tame" for very specific definitions of that word. As many comedians here in Europe have said in one way or the other: American movies is where children are protected from seing the nipple they suckled on some years ago, but hacking people into pieces is perfectly fine.

Comment: Re:Copyright issue? (Score 1) 284

by Tom (#49125237) Attached to: Google Knocks Explicit Adult Content On Blogger From Public View

Remember when Apple was forced to remove all porn apps from the App Store? I'm sure it wasn't because they wanted to, but there's a group of dedicated social conservatives who do nothing but complain about anything even remotely explicit.

This. The democracy we live in is highly vulnerable to dedicated groups or particulate interests. I've seen it up close when the Pirate Party here in Germany imploded (and went back from 4-7% of votes to 1-2% in one legislation period) because it had been infiltrated by too many people pushing their agendas in topics such as drugs, womens rights, public transport and such.

Small groups of people fanatically dedicated to one narrow interest can deliver a tremendeous amount of force, because they are focussed, unwavering and never stop to even consider compromises. They will always push over any moderate opponents.

Think back to the superbowl "wardrobe malfunction" - it probably wouldn't have gotten anywhere

All of Europe and probably most of the rest of the world was shaking its head over that one and wondering if someone had forgotten to tell you guys that it's the 20th century, not the 12th.

Comment: Re:war (Score 1) 94

by Tom (#49123637) Attached to: Advertising Tool PrivDog Compromises HTTPS Security

You don't have to wait for another major Firefox release

I agree in principle, but this is ludicrous. Firefox releases seem to be twice a week now, and we'll probably all live to see the version number overflow.

Yeah, there should be several competing plugins. But maybe FF can ask you which one you want after install, assuming that anyone with three working brain cells wants an adblocker.

Comment: Re: Umm... Lulz.... (Score 1) 253

by Tom (#49123589) Attached to: Will Greek Finance Minister Varoufakis Support Cryptocurrency In Greece?

discussions with communists

Americans. Everyone who disagrees with them or who thinks that letting people starve on the streets might be unbecoming of a civilized nation must be a communist.

You're not very different from ISIS. For them everyone who disagrees with them is a to-be-slaughtered satan worshipper. Different words and details, same approach. Bush Jr. summed the american mindset up very good: If you're not with us, you are against us. In the small box that is your world, there is only space for two opinions, and nothing inbetween or to the sides.

I would pity you, but ignorance is a choice and not an accident, and I never pity people for self-inflicted misery.

Comment: Re:Boring (Score 1) 286

by Tom (#49118131) Attached to: An Evidence-Based Approach To Online Dating

The main problem we have is the default assumption.

From my perspective, anything that everyone involved is happy with is fine. Hetero- or homosexual, two, three or however many partners - it may not be for me, but who am I to judge the happiness of other people?

Society as a whole, however, has a concept in its mind, and even with a stronger tolerance for variety, it still very strongly sets this concept as the default assumption, and everything that deviates from the norm needs to justify itself.

All of this is true outside of sex and relationships, btw. -- there are also default concepts of a man and a woman, of a couple and a household. How you should be, what you should do. There are acceptable and "strange" hobbies, interests, professions, lifestyles, homes.

Comment: Re: Umm... Lulz.... (Score 1) 253

by Tom (#49118113) Attached to: Will Greek Finance Minister Varoufakis Support Cryptocurrency In Greece?

The Greeks can build their socialist utopia if they like

Are you retarded or what? The plans of the new greece government are as far away from "socialist utopia" as a Ford Model T from a flying car.

All sustainable advancements towards more participation and social insurance in Europe have been made from a position of economic strength

Not really, no. But don't let facts spoil your ranting. Especially social changes often came about in times of crisis, because it is then that the ugly truth of the current system shows itself in full splendor.

If you can't even see how competitive economies are far preferable to economies which create all the "right" disincentives,

If you don't understand that all extremist positions are evil, you've not paid attention in history class. Competition is good, but hypercompetitive environments are disasters to physical and mental health, society, culture and every aspect of humanity other than profit, profit, profit. On the opposite end, social security is good, but nanny-states (the real ones, not the "omg, the government actually moved a finger" hyperbole of american right-wingers) cut into innovation, progress and motivation to do anything at all.

Dreams are free, but you get soaked on the connect time.