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


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: file transfer (Score 2) 321

by JWSmythe (#49145089) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Old PC File Transfer Problem

The most ancient laptop I ever touched was a Compaq 386/16 with a 20MB 3.5" 1/2 height IDE drive. It sounds pretty much like the same, or probably the piece of crap I had was a predecessor. I do remember it was clearly a 20MB drive though. I swapped it for a regular desktop 40MB IDE that we had in the shop.

Everything I found about that series says it's IDE. I couldn't find anything specifically saying the physical size, but I suspect it was a 3.5" drive. I seriously doubt it was RLL, MFM, ESDI, or anything more exotic. So he's wasting everyone's time asking rather than just opening it up and seeing "ooh, a IDE drive." Even if it was, he could go find some combination of adapters to use it. Anyone who's worked with stuff long has a box full of adapters and cards for exactly this. Well, I did ditch all my ancient cards on eBay a few years ago.

I'd be surprised if the drive even spins though. Most of the time when I go to try ancient hardware, the drives don't spin, or spin enough, even though the owner remembers that it was working when they shut it off.

Comment: Re:Without estimates you can't budget... (Score 5, Funny) 269

by JWSmythe (#49142377) Attached to: The Programmers Who Want To Get Rid of Software Estimates

Lets see... What would they say? This is the one-sided conversation, since it doesn't matter what you say anyways.

"Ok, we can accept that estimate."

"Ya, ya, ya, whatever."

"We'll have that information to you by the start of the project."

"The information isn't ready yet, we'll have that by the time you need it."

"I thought we had that to you already. We'll have to check with the information source."

"The PMs have some changes."

"Here's the information, but there are some small changes."

"No, those are small changes, they won't impact the timeline."

"No, you can't have more time, we already made commitments."

"The PMs have some changes."

"What do you mean you won't have it in on schedule? You agreed with the initial estimate."

"You're going to stay here until it's done, I don't care how long it takes."

"I don't care that you've been in the office 30 hours straight, this is your fault."

"We're hiring an off-shore company to help you with the project. Get them up to speed."

"The PMs have some changes."

"Since we have the off-shore team, we need to cut your department back."

"I read an article saying Java is the future. Redo it in Java."

"What do you mean we're waiting on the off-shore company?"

"We fired the off-shore company. You're good, you can get it done in time."

"Ok, hire more people into your department, but we're only offering half the salary, and no more bodies."

"Why is this project so far behind? Don't you know what you're doing?"

"The PMs have these changes."

"Why aren't you done? We're weeks from the deadline!"

"You didn't meet the deadline. Don't you know deadlines are firm. We have commitments."

"I don't want excuses, I want results."

"You and your idiot team are fired. Get out of my building."

[2 months later]

"We need you to come back and finish the project. We need it by next Monday, that should be plenty of time."

"Here's all the new specs. They should be easy to do."

"What do you mean total rewrite, it's only a few chances. You are an idiot. Get out."

[1 month later]

"We need you to come back and finish the project. We need it by" {click}

"We need you to come back and finish the project. We need it by" {click}

"We need you to come back and finish the project. We need it by" {click}

"Why do you keep hanging up on me?" {click}

Comment: Re:Sure, some access is bad (Score 0) 46

by circletimessquare (#49142105) Attached to: Facebook's Colonies

a corporation will bust your kneecaps if you demand higher wages, and set fire to smaller competitors. and you have no recourse. this is american history

meanwhile, you can actually elect government officials, insist they pass anticorruption laws, and make them accountable to you. there is of course a brain dead cynicism that corruption is insurmountable, but the nordic countries and canada control corruption better than us. why can't we? and we can. and we shall

we just passed net neutrality, we're legalizing gay marriage and marijuana. ten years ago people would laugh at me that this was impossible with the same brain dead cynicism. we will defeat citizens united and other form of government corruption and make it more accountable

Comment: Re:Sure, some access is bad (Score 2) 46

by circletimessquare (#49141603) Attached to: Facebook's Colonies

buried in your hyperbole is a real point though: some people blindly hate government and irrationally trust corporations. other people blindly hate corporations and and irrationally trust government

why can't someone be both?

me: i don't trust government. i also don't trust corporations

is such a person possible in your world?

if i express my distrust of corporations, in your mind that means i automatically love government? why?

it's kind of like those arguments about iran and nukes: if you don't want iran to have nukes, you must love israel and the usa. no. how about i just don't trust a theorcracy with nukes, AND i dislike american and israeli policy? why i can't i do both?

why is there this irrational tribalism at work in the world where expressing an opinion against something automatically means i am for something else, as only determined by blind prejudice?

it's possible to think about the problems in the world without categorizing people according to the one dimensional antagonistic stereotypes in your head

Comment: Re:nice, now for the real fight (Score 1) 550

by circletimessquare (#49141355) Attached to: FCC Approves Net Neutrality Rules

ah the perennial "big business corrupts government so government is the evil one"

so if thieves rob your bank by blowing the door off, you scream and yell and kick at the security guards (government), leave the broken door unrepaired (regulatory capture), and let thew thieves (big business) get away without a single iota of criticism?

CORRUPTION is the problem, not government. if you attack and weaken government, the assholes corrupting it simply rape you with less interference and hassle of corrupting someone in government to do so

you want to fix your government. you want to fight corruption

if you want to fight government, and not criticize the corruptors, you're what is called a "useful fool" to plutocrats

there is no free market fairy fix here. fair regulations that keep an even playing field in fact is the only way you ever get a free market in the first place

Comment: Re:Sounds good (Score 1) 581

by circletimessquare (#49137175) Attached to: Republicans Back Down, FCC To Enforce Net Neutrality Rules

Oh, please do help me with more "basic education": explain how these strategies can possibly be stable in a free market.

okay. the large player(s) crushes the small player(s), drives them out of business, then abuse the consumer with higher prices, because the consumers have no other option

Comment: i always thought this was a good idea (Score 2) 237

by circletimessquare (#49131805) Attached to: The Peculiar Economics of Developing New Antibiotics

rather than depend upon the market to satisfy the costs of R&D, just put a bounty on drug discovery. it's cheaper for society

especially in the usa, where a new life saving drug can cost thousands a month. and even if you have insurance, that cost is being passed onto the rest of us. such that government paying a single huge bounty (to the actual discoverer and their university research dept, rather than some suit), paid for via taxes, would actually be cheaper for each of us

but there's always these hordes of morons who see taxes and government services as the ultimate evil. these fools seem to have no problem paying way more for lower quality, like american healthcare. just because it's not from the government? obviously single payer universal healthcare, without rent seeking insurance parasites, is far superior to the joke system in the USA. the ACA is a baby step in the right direction, we need to go a lot further

compare the usa to our social and economic peers in terms of quality of healthcare, and cost of healthcare, and we are getting a worse product for 10-100x the cost. all because "HURRR DURRR GUBMINT EVIL"

Comment: Re:Sounds good (Score 1) 581

by circletimessquare (#49131685) Attached to: Republicans Back Down, FCC To Enforce Net Neutrality Rules

The reason markets do not function well with broadband is its a near natural monopoly, or a natural duopoly rather. Because of the huge investments needed in the infrastructure its only possible for a few companies to be involved. So, the effect of the market is weak to non-existant, thats why regulation of these kinds of things can be beneficial.


unfortunately, it is dumbfounding the wall of prideful ignorance this simple obvious point encounters on the hordes of uneducated and stupid out there

and don't even get me started on the horrible propaganda and misinformation on the topic of natural monopolies

it's somewhat frightening how hoodwinked and brainwashed people can be

Comment: Re:Sounds good (Score 1) 581

by circletimessquare (#49129579) Attached to: Republicans Back Down, FCC To Enforce Net Neutrality Rules

Can you give actual examples of how "players cheat" in the absence of government regulation?

any other basic education in this subject matter i can help you with today?

So, how exactly to you propose to bring this "fair regulation" about?

we use legalized bribery against itself, corruption jujitsu:

"A child is a person who can't understand why someone would give away a perfectly good kitten." -- Doug Larson