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


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Sort of dumb. (Score 2) 520

by IamTheRealMike (#49615521) Attached to: Recruiters Use 'Digital Native' As Code For 'No Old Folks'

The hardware knowledge argument has become virtually irrelevant in the EC2-world where you can spawn VM pretty much transparently

Right, we forgot, Amazon VMs are magical devices powered by hopes and dreams, rather than CPU cycles like old fashioned "computers" are.

Back here in reality cloud virtual machines are just a shitty containment mechanism that's sort of like an operating system process, only dramatically less efficient. Did you know that Google, not a company exactly famous for lacking clue, doesn't use VMs internally at all? Every internal program runs as a regular operating system process on top of a patched Linux kernel. The system is called Borg and they published a paper on it recently.

Why don't they use VMs, Amazon style? Because VMs suck. Running an entire OS inside another OS just to provide isolation is a great way to waste vast amounts of money and resources. It means sysadmins get to reuse their existing skillset instead of learning some new way of managing software, but that's about it as far as advantages are concerned.

Certainly your Amazon VM will suffer from cache line interference, limited resources, and other things that plague physical devices.

Comment: Re:Who will win? (Score 1) 174

Hardly. AirBnb and PayPal are both good examples of this sort of thing. PayPal got raided a lot and got sent C&D letters by various state regulators when they were rolling out across the USA. Eventually they had to sell to eBay (their primary competitor) to get enough money and political immunity to survive. There's a book about it called the PayPal Wars that goes into more detail on this.

Comment: Re:tip of the iceberg (Score 2) 1032

by JaredOfEuropa (#49609929) Attached to: Two Gunman Killed Outside "Draw the Prophet" Event In Texas
Did Charlie Hebdo engage in deliberately pissing on someone's beliefs? It's called satire, and those guys were taking the piss out of everyone who even remotely deserved it. Still, only one of the subjects of their cartoons got a response of lethal fire. That is no coincidence; most religious people are sensitive about their beliefs, but some a lot more strongly than others.

We had protests when "Life of Brian" was released, and the creators of that movie even received some death threats, but can you imagine the mayhem that a similar movie showing the life of the prophet would cause? It's unthinkable. And what I am seeing here (in Europe) is that many mainstream and influential politicians are doing exactly what you are suggesting: making sure that anything offensive to religion (yes, that means muslims) takes place out of sight "to maintain public order", and finally to simply ban offensive speech. In the UK, Labour leader Tony Blair has tried to get "religious hatred" speech banned, but succeeded only in banning actual threats, not insults. Their new leader Ed Miliband has vowed to succeed where Blair failed. Think about that. A criminal record for voicing critique on islam. In Europe, similar proposals have been made. Thankfully, support for "global blasphemy laws" that come up in the UN every so often seem to be running out of steam.

Religious sensitivities and public order should not play second fiddle to free speech.

Comment: Re: Why is is the material support provision bad? (Score 1) 121

lol. This is an administration that defines the word "militant" as meaning any male that isn't a child or pensioner. "Material support for terrorism" doesn't mean anything at all, given that the last 15 years have shown governments will happily label anything they don't like as terrorism. Bear in mind the primary roadblock that prevents the UN agreeing on a definition of terrorism is western nations (i.e. America's) insistence that people who resist foreign occupation of their countries must be considered terrorists, and Arab nations insistence that they mustn't.

Comment: idiotic prudeness (Score 1) 608

by l3v1 (#49603903) Attached to: My High School CS Homework Is the Centerfold
"Zug, a student at the top-ranked Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology, argues that a centerfold does not belong in the classroom"

So, I always knew the average american to be fairly prude - well, unless they are tweeting their nude behinds on a daily basis, 'cause that doesn't count, obviously - but this is crazy nuts. I've been in image processing research for the 15th year now, and Lena's face was among the very first test images I've ever saw. It was about 2 years later I found out where it's coming from, I smiled a bit, and went on with my work. As did hundreds and thousands of other image processing students before ad after me.

Well, until the the top-ranked Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology came along, 'cause well, there we can't tolerate such heresy. Heresy, I tell you! This just can't be! How dare one use the image of anice face as a test image, for decades nonetheless. Outrage, man, outrage.

Well, [most] idiots are funny :)

Comment: many recruiters are hired off the street (Score 1) 226

by davecb (#49598115) Attached to: Want 30 Job Offers a Month? It's Not As Great As You Think
A sister company did recruiting, and a then colleague said "I asked for a MVS and Unix person in a particular state with experience in a package", and got hundreds of names, none of whom knew all those things". The didn't know the difference between "and" (3 candidates) and "or" (3000 unqualified candidates). I still get requests for things I only ever did once, with co-requisites of things I've never done...

Comment: No, it won't (Score 4, Interesting) 105

by 0xdeadbeef (#49596355) Attached to: Climatologist Speaks On the Effects of Geoengineering

Right winger before denial became untenable: you can't trust the models! Climate change is a hoax!

Right winger after denial became untenable: our models say geo-engineering is safe and will work! Trust us!

If you can't get the political will to do the simple safe thing, you won't get it to do the complex reckless thing.

Comment: Re:The FAA Tried to Study This (Score 1) 36

by JaredOfEuropa (#49583717) Attached to: World-First Remote Air Traffic Control System Lands In Sweden
Maybe they were afraid that small airports that do have controllers would start replacing those people with the remote setup. If those airports only get infrequent traffic, a couple of guys in a remote control tower can probaby handle dozens of them.

What surprises me is that the union actually has the clout to stop this.

Comment: How we do it in Canada (Score 5, Informative) 36

by spaceyhackerlady (#49581061) Attached to: World-First Remote Air Traffic Control System Lands In Sweden

In Canada we have an intermediate step between untowered uncontrolled airports and controlled airports with towers, Mandatory Frequency airports. They have a ground station with whom you must communicate for arrival and departure. They dispense information and coordinate activities, but do not give clearances. As pilot you make those decisions.

An example MF airport I've flown to is Kamloops, BC (CYKA). On initial contact the ground station told me the wind, altimeter setting and active runway, but also advised me of skydiving activity north of the airport. Since this might conflict on the usual left-hand circuit pattern, they suggested I fly a right hand circuit on approach. I did, and landed. This wasn't binding on me - the decision and responsibility were mine - but it was a good idea.


Comment: Before we start blaming or laughing at Apple... (Score 5, Interesting) 263

by JaredOfEuropa (#49576373) Attached to: Crashing iPad App Grounds Dozens of American Airline Flights
Let's see these AA iPads and the software for what they really are: pieces of business-critical software / hardware. Which means that they have to treat it like any other combination of business critical software and hardware. The entire configuration is frozen, software, OS, patches and all, and any change is thoroughly tested before it is pushed to the production devices.

So what happened? One news item hints at a recent update causing the issue. Where did the update come from? Was iOS updated, or the app? Was this update tested before being rolled out?

It's currently a problem of access to gigabits through punybaud. -- J. C. R. Licklider