Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Hope and change (Score 1) 83

by ZenDragon (#48554925) Attached to: FISA Court Extends Section 215 Bulk Surveillance For 90 Days

...all governments ultimately depend on the consent of the people. When that consent is withdrawn, the government collapses.

I've always believed that if something like this did happen, the majority of the folks in the armed forces would defect and join the people, because they would otherwise be fighting their family and friends. I am hoping we never have to find out. That said, when the armed forces is a fleet of drones only the consent of the few that control them is needed.

Comment: Re:Hope and change (Score 2) 83

by ZenDragon (#48551347) Attached to: FISA Court Extends Section 215 Bulk Surveillance For 90 Days
Not sure what you're getting at there. But, I will say that I own a hand gun and have a concealed carry permit, so no I don't think it only applies to militias. That said, if it ever came down to it; a million citizens revolting against their government with hand guns and rifles isn't even going to make a dent in armor of a fleet of tanks, jets, drones, long range missiles, lasers, rail guns, and whatever else they have cooking up at DARPA. I have no illusions about it... I'm glad to have the right to do so, but don't pretend that it makes any difference in regards to what was probably the original intent of the second amendment.

Comment: Re:Hope and change (Score 3, Insightful) 83

by ZenDragon (#48551167) Attached to: FISA Court Extends Section 215 Bulk Surveillance For 90 Days
The patriot act was passed under Bush's watch, and is partially what has enabled this mess in the first place. I'm not defending Obama, he officially became a scum bag in my book after he campaigned on the premise that he would get rid the Patriot Act, but renewed it shortly after taking office. My point is, they are both equally responsible, and equally douchey.

Comment: Re: Surprise? (Score 5, Insightful) 579

by ZenDragon (#47699313) Attached to: Munich Reverses Course, May Ditch Linux For Microsoft
Maybe its a queue for Linux developers to pull their heads out of their asses and start collaborating a little better for a easier user experience. Don't get me wrong, I use both OSs for different things, each on its own merits. But despite what the FOSS crowd seems to want to believe, most users aren't as smart (and masochistic), they don't want to use the command line, or have to wade through clunky confusing dialogs to do simple things. They don't care about customizing their window manager, or their boot process, they just want to get their work done and gtfo. Despite its aging and buggy code base Windows is just simply easier to use for the non tech savvy crowd, and until Linux devs stop trying to over engineer everything and give it funky names that make no sense, then linux will never be successful on at scale on the desktop. Its really not that complicated, and nerd raging on slashdot doesn't help the case (not speaking to you, but the guy a few threads up).

Comment: Re:What I want from movies is value for money (Score 1) 214

by ZenDragon (#47449041) Attached to: Economist: File Sharing's Impact On Movies Is Modest At Most

I'm with you. I will almost ALWAYS to see a movie in a theater first if it interests me, otherwise I might try do download it. If it sucks (i.e. Grown Ups 2), I would have neither bought it, nor gone to the theater to see it, no money lost no money gained for either party involved. However when I do go to the theater, I specifically go to the dinner theater, usually with my girlfriend, and order $50 dollars+ worth of food and drinks. I go there for the experience, of the theater; the nice big cushy comfortable reclining chairs with foot rests, and to have somebody wait on me quietly while I enjoy the movie. And I do this quite often, sometimes 2-3 times a month because its fun. I realize this is the theater, not the studios doing this, and getting profits from it, but I assure you I would not be going so much if the theater didn't give me a reason to.

I do my part to support the studios bottom line despite the fact that I haven't purchased a movie on disk for several years. On that note however, if a studio offered a free digital download for a movie after watching it in a theater, say for an extra $5 dollars, even if it I cant download it for a couple months, I would most likely be willing to do that. But, I refuse to pay $20+ dollars for a blueray, just to have it sit around and collect dust. I run all my media off an HTPC and I don't want a bunch of movies taking up space on a shelf somewhere.

Comment: Re:Bad idea (Score 1) 190

by ZenDragon (#47258231) Attached to: U.S. Democrats Propose Legislation To Ban Internet Fast Lanes
I agree with you for the most part. If a content provider wants to pay the ISP for some "peering" agreement, they should be allowed to do so. However I take issue with the ability of the ISP to regulate what happens outside of the bounds of that agreement. If it begins to affect the bandwidth that I pay for even if I am not using that service then I would have a problem with it, Im sure most people would share that sentiment.

Having not read the proposed bill itself; it seems to me that all it is trying to do is prevent ISPs from discriminating on the connection to the consumer, and is not necessarily preventing peering.

Comment: Hmm (Score 4, Informative) 442

by ZenDragon (#44154457) Attached to: More Details Emerge On How the US Is Bugging Its European Allies
What really irks me is shit like this: Whereby we now have US Trade Representatives considering revoking trade privileges of an entire country (Ecuador) because the administration has a personal vendetta against Snowden. It is really sickening what our government is willing to do to cover its own ass.

Comment: LEARN (Score 1) 509

We have a huge problem with this in my office. A couple of us are working on a new application that utilizes MVC, and a heavy javascript front end which includes Knockout.js. Since this project started I have re-factored this thing 3 times the first because I was told to keep the JS limited to just pure js and jQuery, so I did. However it got complicated and I got to the point where implementing SPA made sense, my manager seemed supportive so I went about the first re-factor. On one point another developer that has not kept his skills current started pitching a fit, at which point my manager who has also not kept his skills current started taking a deeper look at the project, together they claimed it got too "complicated," and at that point I was asked to revert back to page per view, with simple js, so I spent a couple weeks doing that. This eventually created MORE complications due to the nature of the application, rather than storing data in local variables I had to persist through cookies and all kinds of shenanigans. Short of going back and implementing the entire thing in with razor and persisting in session state, which I could have done but given the work I had done thus far was mostly on the client, this would have basically been a re-write of the entire front end. I talked to my managers boss about my frustrations with the indecision of my manager and she said that she absolutely wanted me to do it in SPA as that best represented the vision that she had for the project. So I went and re-factored it AGAIN using knockout, although to be honest this is the way I wanted to do it in the first place so I am happy with the outcome.

In any case, my point is that just a couple developers that have not kept their skills up to date have caused a lot of frustration for the department. The rest of us are all on board with this new way of doing things, why should we cater to the lowest common denominator? In my opinion if these guys doing want to keep their skills up to date they should be relegated to maintenance and legacy applications. We shouldn't hold the rest of the department back because two guys don't want to learn new things, one of which happens to be my manager unfortunately (but doesn't really have the authority to let me go, more like a team lead I guess). As far as I am concerned, you either get with the program or get out of the way and fortunately for me my bosses boss (the VP of IT) is on board with this so I've at least gotten my way in this case lol.

Comment: We all know... (Score 1) 175

by ZenDragon (#43044591) Attached to: US Wins Appeal In Battle To Extradite Kim Dotcom
We all know this is coming from the pestering and/or financial contributions of industry lobbyists. It is so blatantly and sickeningly obvious at this point. I've all but lost any hope that things will change. I will be creating my own island with my own laws, in the middle of the pacific, anybody care to join me? :) lol

Comment: Revenge? (Score 1) 491

by ZenDragon (#43044409) Attached to: Bradley Manning Pleads Guilty To 10 Charges
Fact of the matter is, he did something illegal. It's irrelevant whether we agree with him, are on his side, or not, he should expect some punishment for his actions. Although I am somewhat glad the blew the top off of this one because it is at least a start to holding the government accountable for some of their actions. However, I think the espionage and aiding the enemy charges are complete bull shit. It is blatantly clear that was not the intent. That is just some embarrassed politician taking out some deep seeded need for revenge on him to set some kind of example. I'm not trying to defend the guy, but come on, don't let them start making shit up to make it look worse than it was.

"Well I don't see why I have to make one man miserable when I can make so many men happy." -- Ellyn Mustard, about marriage