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


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Re:People who are offended (Score 1) 765

by bsolar (#49315751) Attached to: A Software Project Full of "Male Anatomy" Jokes Causes Controversy

Of course they might be immature, since what they might consider "sexually inappropriate" might be perfectly fine within that specific working environment, making them the problem. If you want to work as a waitress in a topless bar and consider working topless "sexually inappropriate" the problem is yours: nobody forces you to work there as nobody forces you to contribute to this specific project.

Basically "inappropriate" sometimes just means "I personally don't like it so it should not exist at all".

Comment: Re:Simple methodology (Score 1) 347

by bsolar (#49145069) Attached to: The Programmers Who Want To Get Rid of Software Estimates
Even with bridges you might have to show a preliminary to-scale model which gets discussed and iterated upon. The difference is that with bridges there is a fundamental difference and a huge delta in costs between building a to-scale model and building the real thing. So you don't build a bridge that way because you don't have the same capabilities as with software.

Comment: Re:Last week ... (Score 1) 290

by bsolar (#49110035) Attached to: How Walking With Smartphones May Have Changed Pedestrian Etiquette

You're still missing the point. The amount of sheet metal surrounding you doesn't determine your worth but it surely determines the outcome of a collision with something else, be it your fault or not or even without a fault at all. A pedestrian has to accept reality: if he gets hit by a car he easily risks injury or death, which means that for him being careless when crossing is much more dangerous.

Common advice for "soft" street users, be it pedestrian, cyclist or motocyclists, is to assume that everyone else is either completely incompetent or actively trying to kill you since in case of accident you dont want to be right but dead, you want to avoid the accident in the first place.

You cannot force other drivers to always pay attention or always "do their jobs": it would be nice but reality begs to differ. Being defensive is the best survival strategy.

Comment: Re:Last week ... (Score 1) 290

by bsolar (#49107283) Attached to: How Walking With Smartphones May Have Changed Pedestrian Etiquette
You are missing the point. This time this pedestrian met a responsible driver who noticed him and anticipated his careless crossing but next time he might meet a distracted or intoxicated or incompetent driver and get hit: then of course the driver would be in the wrong for not "doing his job", but it would be a pretty meager consolation for the pedestrian who would be dead.

Comment: Re:Is Obama stupid? (Score 2) 562

by bsolar (#48841335) Attached to: Obama: Gov't Shouldn't Be Hampered By Encrypted Communications
Not to mention that if US companies are supposed to "patriotically" enable and support access to encrypted communications to US officials the same goes for other countries. I'm sure he would not be ok at all with China stating that all Chinese hardware manufacturers should "patriotically" implement some solution to allow the Chinese government access.

Comment: Re:"Just" four million? (Score 4, Insightful) 117

It might not make a difference to you but it evidently made a difference for Sony, otherwise they would have just publicised the correct amount. Since Sony decided to publicise a higher amount it's clear they somehow believed the correct amount was too low for the press release.

Comment: Re:The important unanswered question (Score 3, Informative) 105

As far as I know it's impossible to do in KSP. This is due to KSP not simulating gravitation effects from multiple bodies: you get only the gravitation effect from a single celestial body depending on which "sphere of influence" you are in. This is also why you don't have Lagrange points in KSP.

Comment: Re:Is this a bad thing? (Score 1) 285

by bsolar (#48645669) Attached to: Study: Red Light Cameras Don't Improve Safety
Why the false dichotomy? You can have a reduction in both kinds of incidents simply by having the correct yellow light duration. 3 seconds is even too short unless we're talking about a very low speed residential road: normal roads should have around 5 seconds yellow duration to accommodate for reaction time and stop distance with normal braking force.

Nobody's gonna believe that computers are intelligent until they start coming in late and lying about it.