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


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Bono is a disingenuous prick.... (Score 1) 323

by WOOFYGOOFY (#47926357) Attached to: Say Goodbye To That Unwanted U2 Album

You're so completely full of shit. What does Bono DO with that money?

He invests it in socially responsible investments, 0promotes (spends money on) pro-social causes, gives it to charity . He does what any rational person who wants to achieve a goal in this world and has access to capital- he creates it, he invests some as principle, he uses the earnings to effect change. Rinse and repeat.

I just love conservatives who attack liberals for having *anything* to do with making money. It's a completely cynical attempt to get their opponents to divest themselves of any real power.

It's also a cynical attempt to demoralize people to whom Bono et. al. are role models- "See, they're just as greedy as the Koch brothers! People are just greed machines! Get used to it... "

Ditto the attacks on Gore and his "carbon foot print".\

The facts are, if everyone were and did as Bono and Gore do, we wouldn't have crushing poverty and war. Fact. And we wouldn't be facing extinction through environmental degradation. Fact.

So shut the fuck up you little asshole. Go read some more Ayn Rand , snort some more coke and cruise some more really vile S&M porn. Those are the points of your moral compass. That's what's *real* to your reptilian brain.

Comment: But can I have a path name loner than 256? (Score 1) 545

by WOOFYGOOFY (#47926211) Attached to: What To Expect With Windows 9

All I care about is- can I finally create a path+filename+extension location longer than 256 and still have Windows Explorer work? Or is this bug still dictating the names I can give my libraries?

It's a simple question.

I am *quite* sure the answer is no, \so what do I care about Windows 9?

Answer- I don't.

Windows 7 is still humming along, thanks.

Comment: How can I get it? (Score 1) 323

by WOOFYGOOFY (#47920521) Attached to: Say Goodbye To That Unwanted U2 Album

Huge U2 fan, but not an Apple one ... with all these people "throwing away" this album that they were given (and therefore are the rightful owners of), is there any way for someone like me to legally come into possession of this thing these other people are taking to the curb? Is there an digital trash can somewhere I can go pick it out of?


Comment: Translation-"eh, can we talk this over...?" (Score 2) 243

by WOOFYGOOFY (#47918679) Attached to: AT&T Proposes Net Neutrality Compromise

"AT&T said, "Such an approach would preserve the ability of Internet service providers to engage in individualized negotiations with [content companies] for a host of services, while prohibiting the precise practice that has raised 'fast lane' concerns." It's not perfect, but it's probably the first earnest attempt at a compromise we've seen from either side, and it suggests the discussion can move forward without completely rejecting one group's wishes."

Nice try.

First, the ability to "enter into individual negotiations" for your IP packages to be treated one way (slow) or another way (fast) is ENORMOUSLY deceptive language for killing net neutrality.

To deconstruct this twaddle , the word "ability" is used so that rejecting this "offer" (snort) makes it seem like you';re turning down an ability in favor of what? a disability? Being forced to "negotiate" for your packet's speed is not an "ability" . It's the threat that, unless you pay or if you oppose us politically, we'll kneecap your packets.

Secondly, it is NOTHING but fast lane / slow lane practices repackaged into doublespeak. What are the
"individualized" (another gratuitously positive-sounding word) "negotiations" (if you call being strong armed by non- value producing, rent seeking monopolists "negotiations" ) except demands for payment for delivery of your packets at prices other than the price "negotiated" for the same delivery of other companies and individuals packets?

You know what this piece of corporate press release dressed up as a Slashdot article REALLY says? We're winning, and not by some small measure either. ATT is looking over the battle field and they see they're being completely routed. The writing is on the wall for them nad they're desperately trying to "negotiate" and "compromise" their way to a victory over a free as in freedom internet, because they're not going to carry the day using the normal mechanism of Congressional campaign bribes , er I mean support, and astroturfed "citizens movements"

Your letters to your Congressional representatives are totally and completely one sided, as was the public response to the FCC. Congress has NO WAY to give them what they want without shredding whatever credibility that institution has left as the People's House. The cost of defying the repeatedly expressed will of the American people on this issue would not just be toxic for generations to any party who gives in, it would also threaten the legitimacy of the institution itself. How much more can the American people take? No one wants to find out.

Takeaway from this piece of corporate PR trash?


So the fast lane slow lane has been broken out into "individual

Comment: Save us from speculation based on introspection (Score 1) 196

by WOOFYGOOFY (#47912277) Attached to: The Future According To Stanislaw Lem

This really irritates me. I am sure Stanislav Lem is an interesting and I am sure Stanislav Lem 's reputation in not going to be harmed by me, so I feel free to really let go on this.

The first point I'll make is this is extremely low quality speculation, and the second point I'll make is it's extremely and insidiously destructive of our own future in some very specific ways.

First, this is the rankest type of speculation; it's not even thought provoking, at least productive-thought provoking. Lem is positing to *creatures entirely unknown* preferences, goals, in fact an entire motivational system. That's OK for sci-fi, but it really exposes a lack of imagination and critical thinking skills when he attempts to apply it to actual forms of life in the real world. Here's a certainty- we know nothing about the possible biology of other forms of life elsewhere are far flung galaxies and planets and we certainly know absolutely nothing about any psychology which they may or may not have.

Other living creatures may not even think of themselves as, or be, individuals with a welfare to mind. We evolved in a competitive environs and have the struggle to maintain ourselves against that environs and other creatures worked deeply into our genes, but what if other creatures are just not that way?

The whole idea that what "feels good" is somehow necessarily insidiously destructive to the individual has it biological basis in our unique brain chemistry. Some neurotransmitters and chemical compounds make use feel really good because evolutionarily speaking, they were associated with some survival enhancing behaviors. Separation (and purification) of those chemicals from their behaviors resulted in the problem we know as addiction.

Essentially the "feel good" chemicals are purified, enhanced then introduced exogenously. The nefarious effect is twofold. One is an unnatural level of feelings of pleasure brought on by these drugs which subverts the motivational system and against which we have no (inherent) defense. Thus rats pushing levels to get brain stimulation unto death. Thus people in opium dens. Thus heroin addition.

The other nefarious effect is the reduction of the endogenous production of those same (or naturally occurring similar) chemicals by our bodies. Simply, the body sees that it has enough of this stuff and shuts down its own production Now you not only crave the feel good, you feel awful if you try to quit the exogenic source- you're dependent on the drug.

But this is all specific to our biology. Some *totally other* biology may have no correlative problem.

It's amazing to me that Lem couldn't figure this out.

The second point is this fear of populations succumbing to sloth and no-utility pleasure seeking is a thinly veiled regurgitation of the rhetoric of 19th century conservative scolds. It's the belief that the dirty unwashed masses will devolve into nothing but hedonistic pleasure seekers, dragging us back to the stone age, if left to their own devices .

Absent the imposition of stern consequences -things like workhouses, the threat of destitution, starvation and a life of grinding poverty, people and society will self destruct within a generation. The impoverished model of human beings - it's really something from the Bronze Age- that this implies flies in the face of everything we know about the effects of non-coersive reward structures, human curiosity and knowledge seeking and the inborn desire for self actualization.

People wrecked by threats abuse, torture and the threat of torture, shortages of every sort including empathic responses from others in society and locked in chronically oppositional and dirty relations with everyone around them are, indeed, robbed of their basic humanity, and with that basic humanity goes their desire to engage in produtcive work and be motivated by faint things like intellectual curiosity.
The fact that the above sentence more or less describes the World As It Has Been for the past 40,000 years explains where this belief about humans and their psychology comes from. But it's not true, it's a product of chronic shortages and the resultant need to fight for physical, intellectual and emotional needs. IF there were just magically enough of all of these, Lem's psychology of destructive self absorption would not be the result any more than the rise in people's ability to provide for families leads to over population in developed countries, as predicted by the same scolds. IN fact, just the opposite happens.

Lem's vacuous little thought experiment indirectly reinforces the highly regressive notion that if the poor aren't forced into work to avoid poverty, if all boats really were ever lifted, society will degenerate. This is, in fact, what animates Paul Ryan's views of "poor people" and he's not alone. Millions of people hold this POV more or less unconsciously and it causes them to vote in a certain way when it comes election time.

It's, at its best, a snobbish, classist, racist, ignorant argument cynically reinforced from time to time by by FauxNews and their ilk who seek out then serve up for public horror exemplars that fit the pattern. .

More cooly, it's an excuse to exploit others by arranging the system of contingencies which govern their lives to be as punitive as possible for them and as profitable as possible for yourself and your cronies.

Comment: Re:So long as it is consential (Score 1) 363

by WOOFYGOOFY (#47841035) Attached to: Bill Gates Wants To Remake the Way History Is Taught. Should We Let Him?

It is what some young people need, but it's very very expensive. If you teach 8 kids, the maximum (let's guess) you could actually give tutorial - mentor attention to over the course of 8 hours, how much does each family need to pony up to keep YOU happy?

$9,000, not including any benefits, workman's comp, administrative overhead, just here's 9k cash in your hand and thanks for teaching my kid.

Education is a loss leader for people who give it, that is, the state, the taxpayer. People just have to accept the true price of education, so we don't end up having to pay the cost of an uneducated population.

Well, perhaps Zuckerberg's idea raiding, via H1B immigration, other nation's state sponsored educational products is an alternative....

Seriously, the idea is we lose money on education but make it up having a capable citizenry.

Yes, it's unfortunate that some players attempt to maximize their profits any way they can and screw the actual effect they have on education. It's the "I'm going to get mine" mentality that American's have always had towards each other. This goes by the polite name of "ambition" in some political circles and the resultant widespread destruction and concentration of wealth is called "success".

Privatization can't work on a widespread scale for everyone, the numbers just aren't there. Only rich people can afford the 20k a year for little Jamie's education. For a lot of people, that's everything they make.

Comment: Problem already solved (Score 4, Insightful) 457

by WOOFYGOOFY (#47677143) Attached to: Web Trolls Winning As Incivility Increases

This problem is already solved. It's called the "ignore user " button. Push it and you no longer see the posts from the offending troll. Troll can see your posts, but you can't see theirs. So troll has unpleasant (for a troll) experience of seeing a conversation carried on as though what he was posting simply didn't exist, because it didn't for anyone who regarded him as a troll.

If a troll is like porn, we know it when we see it, then this solution works very well. Everyone sees and ignores the troll, depriving the troll of their motivation for trolling in the first place.

The only problem we have is sites don't use the available technology.

I have been on sites where this virtually eliminated the troll problem. Of course the automated accounts that are spamming viagra require something else, but that is not what the article was complaining about. The article was complaining about civility.

I really have to wonder if there are ulterior motivations at work here. Trolls are the new "we must save our children" rallying cry, an argument designed to force people into ID ing themselves, tagging themselves as "legitimate" so they can be better tracked and monetized. I feel like these pieces are set pieces, ready to roll out as soon as their beneficiaries and creators think their might be some temporary, rising sentiment against anonymity on the web.

Current example- Robin William's daughter's recent Twitter experience.

Sure, a troll gets one off but that is all anyone will see of him.

There is no free speech without anonymity and giving it up because some asshole made someone cry is ceding my freedom to assholes. That wont' be happening.

Comment: It makes sense. (Score 1) 120

by WOOFYGOOFY (#47555125) Attached to: When Spies and Crime-Fighters Squabble Over How They Spy On You
It makes sense, right? From the pov of the natsec people, these things help them secure the nation against potentially catastrophic attacks. From the pov of the LEOs , these represent the natural progression of tools they use to catch some pretty dangerous people, some of whom may also represent a significant danger to the nation, so why should they be deprived of their utility? Both sides can only be expected to strongly advocate for their side. You need 3rd party adjudication in this scenario. In general, we need much more serious 3rd party involvement in all of this spy tech. The FISA court really is nothing but a rubber tamp composed of people who have very narrow real world experience but for whom 'the system' has never given the slightest hiccup on their , largely unearned rise to power. They're political hacks, appointees lifted into place because, well, someone has to be so lifted and they never rendered any offense and they expressed the right political opinions to the right people at the right time. They think the system is just dandy- worked for them! We desperately need the NSA and the FBI to be doing their jobs with all the tech we can give them. Turf and tech wars WILL happen between well intentioned parties. That's a given. What we're missing is real, wise oversight and refereeing such that the public and both parties ultimately have real faith in the reasoning by those overseers. Really, the NSA scandal is scandal of the FISA court process. It's composed of intellectual lightweights and cowards and a few rich little girls whose chief unconscious guiding principle is they want BigMen to protect them so they can go on living their posh lives, feted and paid attention to by the powerful at clinking cocktail parties because, hey, that's what civilization is about. Get judge Richard Posner in there. Get some people who have well considered povs and a well developed sense of statesmanship and what it means to be a nation of people, rights, laws, threats and tradeoffs needed to make it all work. Of course LE grabs for everything it can. If it were your job, so would 99,999 out of 100,000 of you too. The kind of reticence and carefulness to maximizing your own advantage at the cost of some encroachment of an abstraction like civil liberties does not exist in enough people to populate the NSA so that the jobs get done. It's just not many hmans are. Thats why we have to look to oversight. Get some hardcore civil libertarians and hardcore natsec hawks into the process. It will work itself out. The civil libertarians will come to see that the worst form of civil rights violation is everyone is dead, and the natsecs will come to see that a nation that devoles into a version of 1984 is not a goal worth protecting, in fact, just the opposite. As it is, the executive looks for every fakey boo hoo slip of the tongue reason to jail or administratively silence just the people whose pov we need as input in oversight and the civil libertarians are just clueless wrt to the seriouness of the threats we face and conclude , wrongly, that the NSA has gone mad with power and has installed the Constitution as toilet paper in their bathrooms. It's a failure to maintain the necessary diversity of opinions and a failure of wise adjudication of those opinions. That's our problem.

Comment: Software patents (Score 1) 818

by WOOFYGOOFY (#46776021) Attached to: Study Finds US Is an Oligarchy, Not a Democracy

`Software patents are a near perfect example of what this paper is talking about. Few, if any, programmers want them. These are "the people" who best understand the issue and are most strongly (and detrimentally) effected by it.

The elites at the top of the corporate hierarchy have another view on the matter, and are able to press their POV through lobbying Congress, printing articles, hobnobbing with justices and paying for lawyers, which has created a ton of case law favoring their position.

Established players, the billionaire set, want them to use as a club against any upstarts who presume to enter the market their class's permission; without the financial backing of the elites - the investor class, the "angel investors" or the name brand investment capital groups.

Software patents are nothing more than a modern ofrm of feudalism, where the rich create the laws which protect and legitimize their power positions.

I am afraid that SCOTUS is not giving any signals that it's going to really decide the issue broadly. All signs are for a narrow ruling, which would leave the current system intact.

But this issue is EXACTLY what the paper is talking about. Decissions that are 1) bad for society broadly 2) bad for the average working person 3) hold an outsized benefit for the elites and also works to consolidate and legitimate their power and wealth.

So its not even an abstract thing in our own little world, It's completely in-your-face, a straight up fuck you.

Comment: Re:Oh shuit up you just hate frreedom (Score 1) 290

You're so fucking stupid and disengaged that you don't know the difference between the carbon cycle of living animals and plants and the mega tons of carbon that we're exhuming and igniting into the atmosphere, carbon which has been buried for millions of years . You don't know this because you could give a shit about even the most basic facts about which you boldly (AC) hold forth and in which hangs the balance of mere survival for all future generations and civilization itself. And I'm a troll.

Comment: Re:Not even close to the worst. (Score 0, Troll) 290

Yeah you don't see one and you've been looking so hard and evaluating all the options. Here's a hint ANY option beats extinction.

Look up the "princeton wedges" concept. A combination of extant technologies and policies can stop us, right now, from the point of no return. It's not a technological question looking for a fix, it's a socio-political blockage on the part of American / Australian and UK conservatives all fueled by the denial industry which is funded by Exxon, the Koch brothers and the rest of the oil and gas industry.

BTW, each and every member of their boards might want to look over the Nuremberg trials to see what civilization DOES to people who think that 1) they're beyond the law or 2) since no law currently explicitly prevents them from doing what they're doing, they're forever beyond the reach of justice.

America will dissolve your assets. We'll seize your assets from your heirs and assignees. We'll nationalize your companies and plow the profits into doing whatever we need to do to survive. You're nothing,and America and her people are everything. In fact, you're less than nothing.

As for the mouthpieces of denial, the "think tanks" and "scientists" and PR firms don't kid yourselves. We'll hunt each and every one of you down to the ends of the earth, no matter how long it takes, no matter the cost. Rest assured the thoughts and beliefs you have which cause you to think that you'll never be brought to justice, because "you're entitled to your opinion" , because you "really believed it" because you still "really believe it", rest assured that all of that will be swept aside in a torrent of rage and justice seeking and that loophole in the law you think will save from justice will turniinto a noose just like it did at Nuremberg.

Hear my voice Exxon board? This is the first few faint strains of all that the future holds for you, your heirs, your power and your wealth, your influence and lifestyle. This is just the first tiniest brush stroke of what the future looks like for each of you personally. This is just the smallest , faintest sampling of THE RAGE.

Guess what happens when civilization starts to collapse first for a few small countries, then poor people in cities, then millions in larger cities and the countryside then tens of millions then billions of people? Guess what happens when you and the cock sucking sycophants you've populated Washington with *no longer hold any power* ? Guess that's pretty much a mere fiction , an impossibility to you.

The way Nuremberg was to that other group of mass murderers.

If I were a lawyer, PR agent, accountant , printer, developer, manager, or donation taker I'd start now , today to make pains to put on a VERY public display that you strongly disapprove the Koch - Exxon denial machine and YOU aren't taking money from them in ANY form. Yeah, I'd be thinking hard about whether I wanted to be associated however faintly, with the Great American Denial Machine. I'd be thinking about my future and what my family thinks of me, and what I was doing to them, in, and to you know, reality and the earth where they're going to have to spend the rest of their time.

Comment: Re:Not even close to the worst. (Score -1, Flamebait) 290

ah fucking men. Lioterlaly, American conservatives are en route to murdering more people than Hitler Stalin Pol Pot and Mao put together. Oh, but they don't believe it. So that makes it alright. Because if I walk into a crowded burning theater of 7 billion people and shout "no fire" it's OK... because I really believe it. The way Manson really believed it was his destiny to start an American race war by slaughtering innocent people and making it look like black people did it. That's OK, because, you know he really believed it. Like Jim Jones really believed it.

This THIS is what you get when you tell people that the surest way to evaluate reality is to look inside your own heart and pray for guidance. Because, you know, what's in your own "heart" is not a bunch of projections of your own egotism, fears and greedy impulses, oh hell no, if you're pure, that's where God lives and it's God's voice that's talking to you, not all that unconscious stuff left over from evolution, which isn't real anyways.

Comment: Oh shuit up you just hate frreedom (Score 4, Insightful) 290

You just hate freedom. You want to take away my right to pollute the atmosphere so badly that it causes massive socio-political upheaval s around the world completely re-ordering the geopolitical landscape , uniting our enemies and making new ones under a unified belief that THIS is what America did to us, unleashing waves of suicide terrorism both abroad and domestically, all fueled by the deaths of hundreds of millions of innocent people, and unified by the theme that "this (desertification, devastating ocean rise unsurvivable heat waves, crop failures and finally, the death of large ocean life as the acidification takes out the lowest levels of the oceanic food pyramid, causing all above to collapse - THIS is what America did to us".

You just hate America and you're against freedom. That's all.

Comment: This is the whole thing with GMO (Score 1) 259

by WOOFYGOOFY (#46523933) Attached to: Overuse of Bioengineered Corn Gives Rise To Resistant Pests

It doesn't exempt itself from evolution. So the question we need to be asking ourselves is, WHEN pests evolve to thwart GMO "innovations" what might those pests be able to DO how BAD will THAT be and how are we going to deal with it and how quickly can we react what happens to the food supply if we CAN'T?

The life of a repo man is always intense.