Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Advice? give up. (Score 2) 478

by dAzED1 (#46277461) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Anti-Camera Device For Use In a Small Bus?
I don't know why you're the only poster that seems to understand why the subby wants this. He's basically trying to get slashdot to crowd-think for him, to solve a technical "problem" - allowing them to charge $10 each for crappy pictures instead of letting passengers take their own damn pictures. Just drive the damn limo and stop being a dick. If people want the photo service, offer it - but don't break their cameras just to force them to buy your pictures. And I hope the passengers of the limo are all made very well aware of the presence of your cameras is well - else you're in for some serious issues.

Comment: why not the new thing? (Score 5, Insightful) 279

by dAzED1 (#46247423) Attached to: Ubuntu To Switch To systemd

There's this new thing called "init.d" which makes things really simple - you can start a system up and step through things, and though the boot takes 5 seconds instead of 1 second, that isn't really a problem.

Once I read the original post about systemd, and all the other let's-invent-a-problem-to-fix nonsense surrounding init.d, I literally hung up my hat and stopped being a syseng. I was a unix guy starting in 93, so it was probably time anyway, but it was the straw that broke my back, as it were.As mentioned, the central responsibility of an init system is to bring up userspace. And a good init system does that fast. I especially "loved" this line: As mentioned, the central responsibility of an init system is to bring up userspace. And a good init system does that fast. No. A good init system does it reliably, with no drama and no politics. A good init system allows one to easily determine the state of a system, and doesn't assume things like GUIs and such. A good unix init system does all this with commands which can be piped and parsed easily with grep and awk - two things the original post about systemd actually complains about. The idea that a unix person would complain about grep and awk was so mind-boggling to me that...well, I just hung up the hat. You did all this nonsense, just to save a few seconds? Because what, the only thing linux is used for, is laptops? Meh.

Comment: Re:Pipe-dream Utopia (Score 2) 888

by dAzED1 (#46247011) Attached to: Star Trek Economics
How about, whatever income allows you to have enough in savings/retirement such that you can have a $70k lifestyle during said retirement, yet still retire before you're too old to enjoy the retirement? Which is to say, if you want more than $70k/y, maybe it's so that later on you can have $70k/y without working, and are then free to pursue creative goals while your mind still works. You know, the sort of works you'd be free to pursue at age 18 in a post-scarcity world.

Comment: Re:Pipe-dream Utopia (Score 1) 888

by dAzED1 (#46246951) Attached to: Star Trek Economics

"no one would need to work, yes, but more importantly, no one would *want* to"

Such a boring argument. Are you not aware there are already people who do precisely that? Volunteerism, the OSS community, people who make a very deliberate decision to work a more altruistic job at 1/10th the pay, turning down full-paying jobs (yes yes, they get paid...only because we don't have a society where food/shelter/energy are given away). It's the core argument to capitalism - that without money to encourage productivity, no one would work - and it ignores the fact that for all but a very brief blip in the history of our species, that is precisely what happened - people worked without being paid money. They worked as a community, to accomplish collective goals.

Comment: Re:and the TSA exists because... (Score 1) 393

by dAzED1 (#46125655) Attached to: Confessions Of an Ex-TSA Agent: Secrets Of the I.O. Room
so you want me to quit my job for 3 months? I already scaled back flying as much as possible, riding my harley for any trip under 400 miles (regardless the time of year, or the weather). Yes, I could get another job...guess what though - someone else would take my place, and still be flying.

Comment: Re:I'm an open society guy, but... (Score 1) 166

by dAzED1 (#46103141) Attached to: Quentin Tarantino Vs. Gawker: When Is Linking Illegal For Journalists?
are you serious? That's not even in dispute. They offered a bounty for it - like they have for many other things. Leaks about ipad pre-launch, private photos of celebrities, etc - their entire business model is doing exactly that. Convincing other people to do morally questionable, if not outright illegal, activities - then making profit from ad views from those who come to look at the story. That is the entirety of their business model.

Comment: Re:i don't get it (Score 2, Insightful) 141

by dAzED1 (#46096451) Attached to: New 3D Printer Can Print With Carbon Fiber
First result from me when I google "useful things with a 3d printer" is an article which includes a garlic press, cherry pit remover, and door hook. All these things require more strength than what consumer-level 3d printers can actually muster. Getting more strength in the process is indeed an issue, so...permit me to disagree that there isn't someplace worthwhile between ABS and true carbon-fiber...

Comment: I'm an open society guy, but... (Score 5, Insightful) 166

by dAzED1 (#46096317) Attached to: Quentin Tarantino Vs. Gawker: When Is Linking Illegal For Journalists?

" I'm just saying that there's a journalistic reason for Gawker to do what it did"

Err...what "journalistic reason" could there possibly be for offering a ransom for an illegal activity, then publishing the results of that activity, for the sole purpose of generating adview/click revenue? Aside from gawker not even having any journalistic content, what in the world is the "journalistic reason" for that?

Now that said, I think there's a moral/ethical reason for creators to willingly do it - and somewhat for the consumers to share it even if it is against the will of the one who created it - but that's because I'm a biased open society guy, and a complete nutjob. I can't though, in all my madness, envision a world/perspective/banana in which there is a "journalistic reason" for this. Someone help me here?

Comment: Re:Every utopian prediction (Score 1) 96

by dAzED1 (#46093965) Attached to: Device Mines Precious Phosphorus From Sewage

but it's not some intelligent entity that's "better" at it than us

are you so afraid of religion that even science scares you? Over the course of billions of years, systems which fail will cease, and systems which work will succeed. A working system is/was present; saying we could be "learning from nature" means little more than being observant and realizing that many of our problems have already been solved in the system (aka Nature). Where the system has a solution which is too slow, or has a few steps we don't like per se, maybe we tweak it a little...but when you learn from someone you don't simply mimic them - that's not learning. When you learn from someone, you take what they are showing you and adjust it to fit your experiences. Like we can, with Nature.

"some intelligent entity..." - yeesh! Lighten up, Francis!

UNIX is hot. It's more than hot. It's steaming. It's quicksilver lightning with a laserbeam kicker. -- Michael Jay Tucker