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


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Uh? (Score 1) 223

It's strictly about the number of transistors on a chip.


Just because clock speeds won't go up much more with silicon technology, it doesn't mean that going from a 2D plane to 3D assemblies (with the associated heat problems, but this "low power" stuff helps with that) won't happen.

It will happen. It's "merely" an engineering and geometry problem rather than a physics problem requiring new science.


Comment Re:cost and benifit (Score 1) 74

I assume therefore that if the people using the machines are not in the habit of visiting certain types of website,

Which type of website would that be?

Years ago, when Investor Village was still young, they had a problem with an advertiser serving up malware.

Just the other day, Forbes was caught serving up malware in their ads after telling people to whitelist them.

Various other web pages not affiliated with what you might call the "seedy underbelly" of the Internet have been caught serving up malware in their ads.

So tell me, which "certain type of website" might I avoid?

If it's any help

No, your statement here is not of any help.


Comment Re:Editorial echo chamber (Score 1) 406

This means people will end up sucked into the echo chamber of one single publication's editorial bias.

They don't now?

To say that having to pay for content causes siloing is nonsense in the light of the current system of 'free' echo chambers.

On the subject of ad-blocking itself, I block on the hosts file level and whitelist js per site *because serving up malware with ads has gone on for over a decade* and the advertising 'community' (such as it is) refuses to clean up its act and has thumbed its nose at users ever since the NSF AUP was removed from the 'net.


Comment Re:Why the fuzz? (Score 3, Interesting) 420

However, nobody ever speaks much about the horrible attrocities (sic) the other countries commited (sic) during the war: [list]

Really? Fucking Really?

The fact that you were able to rattle examples of other atrocities right off the top of your head means that yes, there are a /lot/ of books and other media about the other atrocities since you have read them.

Let's see, what can I find on just one atrocity done by the Japanese during WWII

1-12 of 4,299 results for Books :
"bataan death march"

On Amazon alone.

>unfair to the nazis

Please. Fuck. Off. And. Go. Back. To. Stormfront.



Comment Re:Just in time (Score 1) 420

"Mein Kampf" was arguably a derivative work itself.

Not "arguably" but actually was.

It plagiarized The International Jew (in Germany The Eternal Jew) and The Protocols of the Elders of Zion (which itself is a plagiarized work), the former written by Henry Ford (yes, that one) and the latter funded by Ford in its first widespread US publication.

To say that it's a derivative document is an understatement.


Comment Re:im sure its a riveting discussion (Score 1) 349

>Everything looks blurry and makes my eyes water

I think that can be said for Windows font rendering.

What, exactly, is wrong with this: https://i.imgur.com/L5qoElU.pn...

That's what I see at 94dpi.

I think that's a lot clearer than "clear type" and a lot less fuzzy than Apple fonts on a standard monitor (I can't say anything about Retina displays as I don't own one, but higher /should/ be less fuzzy)

And that's with KDE. KDE used to be notorious for bad font rendering and ridiculously bad kerning. Now I prefer it over all other "standard-def" anti-aliased font rendering.

BTW, the font is Aller.


And my monospace font is Adobe's Source Code Pro


Comment Re:Cooking, genius... (Score 1) 481

Napalm is an incendiary, not an explosive, i.e., not a bomb.

Fuel-fertilizer bombs /are/ explosives, however. They do indeed go "boom". I first learned about these from an online friend in Appalachia who related the story that among his friends, one of the things to "do" for fun was to make one, drive into a disused mine, drop it off, and let it go boom. This was years /before/ the Oklahoma City bombing. Yee-haw.

Mix Styrofoam and gasoline (as much as you can dissolve), however, and you do get a sticky burning substance - good enough for most campfire lighting purposes (summer-camp way - a can of spray wax and a match) or self-immolation (someone actually did this in Wakefield RI, for really stupid reasons). Add elemental phosphorous for extra fun.

One of Fieser's colleagues suggested adding phosphorus to the mix which increased the "ability to penetrate deeply...into the musculature, where it would continue to burn day after day."[5]

"Napalm sticks to kids"

I cannot find any chemistry (from something /not/ related to the Anarchist's Cookbook or some-such Darwin-event inducing text) related to easily making a bomb out of TSP, so unless you have a reliable reference for your just-so-story, I have to call [citation needed] on this.


Comment Re:Low opinion of ESA? (Score 1) 74

The moment you start dehumanizing people who haven't committed a crime, deciding that it's OK to do bad things to them just because you disagree with them, and they're not worthy of the same rights and protections you give to people you agree with, you've started using the same reasoning ISIS uses to justify what they do.

So you mean that TRUMP saying that we should "take out" the families of suspected terrorists is a bad thing, right?

"I would do my best, absolute best â" I mean, one of the problems we have or one of the reasons we're so ineffective, you know, they're trying to, they're using them as shields. It's a horrible thing," the real estate tycoon said.

"But we're fighting a very politically correct war. And the other thing is with the terrorists, you have to take out their families," Trump added.

"When you get these terrorists, you have to take out their families. They care about their lives, don't kid yourself. But they say they don't care about their lives. You have to take out their families."

Yeah, promoting war crimes is defensible.... not.



Comment Re:Whiners, LISTEN UP: (Score 1) 533

Being a responsible operator means you know what to do when your aircraft loses RF control, meaning that you also know the limits of combined RF and computer control of your particular aircraft.

If all of these operators had paid attention and learned the limits of their aircraft beforehand, they would have never flown them where they did and they wouldn't have had their faces on the boob-tube as a result.

And we wouldn't be here discussing whether or not a token 5 dollar registration fee is onerous or not (it's not).

The responsibility lies /solely/ with the operator.


Comment Re:So basically (Score 5, Insightful) 358

Corporate douchebags never learn from history. They think that /they/ are special and are going to be able to pull it off, speculating that nobody will catch on and that their product is /so special/ that it can't be changed out for something else, that their company, and their company alone, is the sole innovator in the market.

It's a blinkered thought process only that sociopaths would find attractive. You know, the Carly Fiorina types.

Meanwhile this brain-dead transparent effort to boost stock price only does the opposite.


Comment Re:Whiners, LISTEN UP: (Score 1) 533

There's a big fat IF in that rule and a whole huge NOTWITHSTANDING.

The context of "drones" these days is that of mass-market computerized hobby aircraft - with the computerization removing all the skill needed to fly and land a drone without crashing it on the first try, leading to too many operators being careless with them because they are no longer punished by the Universe in their wallets. This is unlike the "old days" of half-a-decade ago when even the most advanced hobby aircraft were a handful to fly - to the point that if you really didn't want to crash your expensive toy on your first flight, you used a flight simulator to reduce the chances and you joined an AMA RC club and had someone teach you.

The idiots that kheldan are talking about are Joe "Hold My Beer And Watch This" Operator who has gone to Wally World and bought hisself a drone (WOOWOO!) and decided to take it for a spin without so much as glancing at anything online or on dead tree related to the hobbyist aircraft community and safety recommendations. Computerized RC aircraft have led to a kind of Eternal September in the RC aircraft community - but unlike the original Eternal September, there are real meatspace consequences for careless operation instead of AOL "me too" posts in usenet.

So here's the actual law. Let's see if Joe "Hold My Beer And Watch This" Operator who bought an unmanned hobby aircraft needs to be regulated - registration being the least onerous of types of regulation

a) IN GENERAL - Notwithstanding any other provision of law
relating to the incorporation of unmanned aircraft systems into
Federal Aviation Administration plans and policies, including this
subtitle, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration
may not promulgate any rule or regulation regarding a model
aircraft, or an aircraft being developed as a model aircraft, if -

(1) the aircraft is flown strictly for hobby or recreational


(2) the aircraft is operated in accordance with a community based
set of safety guidelines and within the programming
of a nationwide community-based organization;

Fail on "safety guidelines and within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization"

(3) the aircraft is limited to not more than 55 pounds
unless otherwise certified through a design, construction,
inspection, flight test, and operational safety program administered
by a community-based organization;

Fail on "operational safety program administered by a community-based organization"

(4) the aircraft is operated in a manner that does not
interfere with and gives way to any manned aircraft; and

Fail on interference and does not give way to manned aircraft.

(5) when flown within 5 miles of an airport, the operator
of the aircraft provides the airport operator and the airport
air traffic control tower (when an air traffic facility is located
at the airport) with prior notice of the operation (model aircraft
operators flying from a permanent location within 5 miles of
an airport should establish a mutually-agreed upon operating
procedure with the airport operator and the airport air traffic
control tower (when an air traffic facility is located at the

Fail on cooperating with any of this.

Joe "Hold My Beer And Watch This" Operator fails on all criteria except one.

His aircraft needs to be regulated. Indeed, I believe such mass-market computerized aircraft should have code embedded in the firmware disallowing flight until it is registered with the FAA online, with such a website introducing Joe Operator to the standards of the RC aircraft community, impressing upon him that irresponsible operation will bring down the wrath of fines if he's lucky. "Ordinary" "dumb" RC hobby aircraft need not be registered because such things are self-limiting when it comes to whether or not the operator is skilled - he is punished by the Universe in his wallet if he insists on being uneducated in this area, which is why the FAA didn't regulate hobbyist RC aircraft previously. And frankly, it's impossible to get one of these off the ground successfully without having someone teach you.

Responsible hobbyists will gladly pay their token five bucks, especially if asshole drone operators are smacked with fines for irresponsible control. Irresponsible Joes might not, but I expect fines for careless operation in the future to take into account whether or not the aircraft was registered, and thusly re-introduce the wallet-biting punishment inflicted by the Universe.


Slashdot Top Deals

You can bring any calculator you like to the midterm, as long as it doesn't dim the lights when you turn it on. -- Hepler, Systems Design 182