Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Why? (Score 1) 144 144

Point taken. But to my defense, this assumption is firmly grounded in the summary speaking of a Windows XP based device and not an XP embedded based device.

I still doubt if Windows based OS was a good design descision, but if all you have is a bunch of windows developers, you tend to solve every problem with a hammer.

Comment Re:Why? (Score 1) 144 144

As I'm earning my living with software development I'm quite aware that there is no bug free software (beyond "hello world"). But I'm also aware that the number of bugs correlates with the software's size and complexity.

That's why you don't use a more complex OS then required. That you mention XP embedded is making it much better, but the summary mentioned a plain XP only.

Comment Why? (Score 5, Insightful) 144 144

Why does a safe need an operating system?

And then why for heavens sake has it to be a desktop operating system? Does it need to run MS Office or what was the design idea here? It's not like there are especially hardened OSses out there for embedded devices. (Not to mention that this means we have a safe that's running on a x86 architecture)

And after having such a terrible design idea, why have it implemented by a moron using an out of date, unsupported, and buggy OS?

Comment Re:Clearly a shoo-in (Score 1) 633 633

Fooor sure! Any woman who doesn't look good in a dress and expect a slap on the ass once in a while is trouble! Maybe if she'd put on some makeup and hike those little tits up a bit she'd get hired, amirite?

Having nothing to do with ass-slapping or makeup: "Dress for the job you want" is relevant to men, too.

Who cares that she was educated at Cornell and Harvard and is a crazy entrepreneur? If she doesn't learn to stop being so uppity and stop trying to outshine men she'll never make it and really, has only herself to blame!

Well, they either cared enough to interview her despite that picture or (more likely) she had a different profile picture two years ago (or whenever those other 3 times were when she was recruited)

Comment All other implications aside, but... (Score 2) 312 312

how secure could that actually be as an access control?

I mean, the access control isn't checking your DNA. It is checking if you have access to a genetic profile of someone with matching criteria. Or, as a completly different attack vector: access to body fluids of someone matching the allowed filters. ("whitelisting" gets a whole new meaning here....)

Comment Re:Holy shit, this is some wank. (Score 1) 165 165

Leaving aside the completely ridiculous assertion that a system composed of people can be debugged in the same manner as code simply because it happens to be called a "code" of law,.

It's not because both is called code. It is because both legal and computer code are both nothing more than a set of rules. And the more complex such sets become, the more unwanted side effects you have. People try to find loopholes in those rules for personal gain are either called lawyers or hackers and for both, best practice of avoiding such loopholes is to keep the rules as simple and exactly worded as possible.

Code injection is a bit of a stretch, though, but in general, programs and laws have a lot in common.

Comment Re:Haven't you guys see the *TRUE* picture yet? (Score 1) 173 173

So your solution is NOT to "learn to code" and start with the burger flipping job right away? Any other idea where to get a "sweet 32k/year gig" without college?

Doesn't change anything about you being spot-on right.

But I wish I could give my kids some more reliable career advice than "Drop out of school and become the next Mark Zuckerberg". Well, I know the American Dream where anyone can make it from rags to riches with hard work, but so could anyone get struck by lightning or anyone could win the lottery.

Comment Re: Never heard that one before (Score 1) 504 504

But that's Star Trek TOS you're talking about.

First of all, old SF stuff tell us more about the time they were written in than about the actual future. And with Star Trek, We're talking about about Space race and cold war here.References and stereotypes from those subjects are kind at least understandable, like Stepin Fetchit movies (heard the first time of him today) told us about the actual racism in his time.

But episode one is a piece from the late 90s. If a cartoon character is shown with some possibly racist traits, this is simply sloppiness. Laziness to invent some actual accent, unthoughtfullness of noticing it how the characterizatzon and accent match a stereotype (it probably would have been noted if the role was casted with an actual black actor instead of blue-greyish a computer animation) and general cluelessnes of pushing that lazy, clumsy nuisance into the viewers field of vision at all.

OK, now back to Star Trek and why it can't be compared: The stereotypes in ST aren't (usually...) not Stereotypes used as a lazy way to make easy characterizations (see: James Bond: blonde guy with german accent --> evil, eyepatch: evil or a fake italian accent to depict some guy as 'funny') They're rather allegorys. Yes, Romulans are space russians, but if you want to tell about an utopia about all space races living happily federated together, you need someone to symbolize the warmongering people that has to be coped with, too.

And please note while the Romulans symbolize Cold war russia, it was poor Chekov who had all the stereotypical russian stuff!

And while Star Wars did their happy Science Fiction Fairy Tale, ST actually went onto the subject of racism (Let that be your last battlefield) - in al allegorical way with all stereotypical dead weight removed. So if someone in ST is symbolizing someone back here on earth, it can be done that it is on purpose.

And still my final point stands: If seeing a non-human character with some negative traits triggers some black/white stereotypes, it tells a lot about how deeply rooted these prejudices are within the recipient. (...maybe: too..)

But as a conclusion, I'd like to say the the whole Jar Jar character is SO annoying, and as a whole is a result of bad and uninspired writing, that perceived racist stereotype don't make the top ten on my list of reasons to wish him some unpleasant veneral diseases.

Comment Re: Never heard that one before (Score 2, Interesting) 504 504

You're intentionally missing the point. there's a cultural history found in movies, tv and books that portray black people as subservient and uneducated stereotypes. This portrayal reinfoced class and racial structures of the day that served to keep black people "in their place". Long tradition of this. summary mentions stepin fetchet. uncle remus. blackface comedy. jar jar is a direct decendent of this line of humor. either you're being purposefully obtuse, or maybe you're from iceland or something and completely unexposed to american culture and history.

So, if you see a subservient and uneducated non-human character on screen, that makes you think of black people?

Interesting. But with such a mindest, I wouldn't complain about other peoples "racism".

Comment Re:Never heard that one before (Score 1) 504 504

the whole Ewok concept, cute funny talking things that can be made into toys that say things like "E-chooda!", because in Lucas's mind, the kids love them.

Intresting coincidence: That's exactly the same what Joghurt says about "Spaceballs - the flame thrower"

The brain is a wonderful organ; it starts working the moment you get up in the morning, and does not stop until you get to work.