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


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Why all the desktop stuff? (Score 1) 103

And while we are at it: illumos on intel is as fast or faster than GNU/Linux on identical hardware.

This is not about performance. This is about Solaris x86 or or that matter OI hardware support, which is a pathetic joke, and anyone who says otherwise is also a pathetic joke.

Comment Re:Vitality is defined by users, not developers. (Score 1) 103

Many desktops, like Motif, took weeks to learn in comparison.

What? Motif didn't have a desktop. It only had a window manager and a session manager, and some libraries. Did you mean CDE? That was Motif-based. However, it only took a few minutes to learn, because it was very simple to use. It included a dock and a file manager.

SCO and Caldera both shipped Motif-based desktops, but neither one was part of Motif. I don't know if they have any relation, or not.

Comment Re:Why all the desktop stuff? (Score 1) 103

Solaris had been running on x86 since about 1990.

Solaris for x86 was a pathetic joke, Linux was already becoming a thing (and you could get Motif for it) and anyone who spent money on Solaris for x86 was making a grave mistake as hardware support was never any better than piss-poor.

Comment Re:Expect drama (Score 1) 115

Sheesh. A Social Justice Warrior is someone who fights for social justice. It's really not that complicated.

The people using SJW as a pejorative are not, as far as I can tell, against social justice. They just a) have a different idea of what it is and b) relentlessly mock and troll anyone with whom they disagree. They seem to be mostly the same crowd that called any attempt to move society forward "politically correct" in the last decade. Now instead of PC it's SJW. A little catchier, but it's hard to make traction with society when one names one's enemies Social Justice Warrior. It implies that one is fighting against social justice, which is not a good way to make friends and influence people.

Comment Re: The new normal for Android (Score 1) 127

Boy, anyone who has hung around Mac-oriented Forums knows what a larf-riot THAT comment is! Apple Users are some of the pickiest mofos you'll EVER see!

Nonsense. They will cry about things they don't like, like the Macintosh developers of old complaining about every little change Apple made, but they won't actually do something about it and leave the platform. They're not picky at all, they're just whiny.

Meh, I will admit I never was interested enough to really know what Cydia was, and wasn't.

But you were happy to present incorrect information about it as if you knew what you were talking about anyway. One button 4 life!

Comment Re:Not wasted (Score 1) 127

The only real value of this is saving a graphics card, or CPU some effort in converting 8k down to 4k or 1080p.

There's no value in that, because scalers are very good now. But the human eye can tell the difference between 300 and say 600 dpi, to which 550 is close enough, especially when viewing images with a lot of stippling. For photographs, the difference will be imperceptible.

Comment Colocate and Encrypt (Score 1) 96

You need to host, you haven't explained why, but let's take it as a given and not suggest you host from home. I don't have enough bandwidth to do that myself, so I wouldn't do it either.

You can't trust any service.

Whether you run your own server or use another server, you can encrypt data before you upload it.

Otherwise, you can run your own server, encrypt the storage volume and log in to supply the key so you can unlock and mount it. Disable all the ports on the machine. Have another machine at home, the colo facility can mail you the disks for maintenance if something goes wrong if you're not close enough to go pick them up. It would take someone with a substantial clue to compromise that even with physical access, especially if you use the built-in full-disk encryption. Assuming you trust that :)

Comment Re: fair competition (Score 1) 190

Funnily enough, in some places in Europe there are different driving license requirements for the cab drivers and the bus drivers. Because they tend to drive 8+ hours a day and clock insane mileage in a year, unlike the average driver.

We are not talking about a strenuous job. We're talking about sitting on ass and swearing. But let me pick this apart point by point.

Annual full medical checkup

Here's the thing, this is equally valid no matter how much you drive. If you have a health condition like to cause problems while you're driving, you've no business driving a taxi or driving to the shops.

Annual driving test

Because you're going to forget how to drive? Now a vision test, that's apt. But that's part of automobile licensing already, which ought to be on a schedule that makes it meaningful for all drivers for the safety of all drivers.

Regular inspection of the vehicle (time-based or mileage based, whichever is reached first)

This in particular should be applied to all vehicles, regardless of purpose. When they reach certain mileage targets they should be inspected, period. It shouldn't matter if they are a taxi or not. There is no reason for these targets to differ. There's also not much sense in having time-based targets, because time is not equal. How a vehicle is used (or not used!) determines how it wears, not the amount of time which passes. Miles are the best surrogate which can reasonably be logged.

Comment Re:fair competition (Score 1) 190

You might say pretty much exactly the same about cooking, but I still think it's fair to hold professional food serving businesses to a different standard than me inviting a friend over for dinner.

Right, the way it works is that if you run a restaurant you need to be licensed, and the city or county will become cross with you if you feed many people anywhere but inside of a restaurant. So if you feed enough of your friends at your house on a regular basis, the city is going to want you to get inspected and licensed. The premise is public safety.

But wait, taxi drivers are at more risk from their fares than the other way around! Arguably, it's passengers who should have to pass a background check, and have their identity logged. If we're talking about vehicle safety, shouldn't all vehicles be getting inspected, especially if they have many miles put on them? Shouldn't all drivers be responsible drivers who are familiar with the rules of the road?

As for insurance, the rates reflect the risk and letting commercially operated cars pool with your average commuter unfairly shoves their risk over on us.

Uber provides additional insurance while carrying a passenger, and the driver's ordinary insurance premiums are already based on mileage, so if they put more miles on their car in between passengers that's also already accounted for by their insurance. Their risk is already being accounted for without you having to pay for it.

This isn't a phone book, Uber is taking a cut for every ride.

What does that have to do with anything?

Imagine a P2P program with a central server that charged you to pair up, if you want to download game of thrones season one that'll be $0.50 of which we'll take $0.10 and the uploader $0.40. Oh and the peers are legally responsible for whether the files are legal, we're only a matchmaker. How long do you think they'd be in business?

Not very long, because they would be knowingly enabling illegal activity. Nobody is arguing about how legal Uber is. The argument is about how legal Uber should be. It's notable that if any of us tried this as an individual they would just take our car and put us in jail, but as a corporation Uber is able to mount a meaningful defense, and actually go to court and make their own arguments. Corporations are the only entities with meaningful legal rights any more, because they can afford them.

But more to the point, in your supposedly congruent example they are helping to resell someone else's "property". That example is only applicable here if you assume that the monopoly that the entrenched taxi operators and services have purchased legitimately best serves the public interest, and many of us do not.

Comment Re:Cabs (Score 1) 190

If the laws aren't making taxi's you like, then, again.. Why is this so hard to understand... HAVE THE LAW CHANGED.

So if the people propping up the bad law have more money and influence, then it just never gets changed, and society never moves forwards, that's your plan? That's a shit plan. It's way worse than civil disobedience.

Comment Re:Expect drama (Score 2) 115

Merely disagreeing with Thunderf00t or Sargon makes you a target of them and their followers. Does that mean they are SJWs? That term seems rather ill defined.

SJW just means anyone who cares about anything that the person using the term SJW thinks is stupid, or bad, or wrong. If you have the gall to care, even though they are apathetic fuckheads, then you're a SJW. They have to deprecate you because they know they're shitbags and you're making them feel like what they are. And they will happily lump people with sensible ideas in with assholes.

We want to create puppets that pull their own strings. - Ann Marion