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


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:But they're not white, so it's OK (Score 1) 338

It's a shame the term is so meaningless that you probably believe it as strongly as someone who believes that you are an SJW (after all, you advocate for transgender people) believes that you are one too.

Be honest: it's a meaningless term, usually applied by anyone who feels uncomfortable about their own racism or sexism (or other prejudices), applied to anyone who made them uncomfortable in any way. If I say "Isn't it a shame the average, well qualified, woman is going to have to fight harder than the average, average qualified, man to get and hold on to a job in IT", it's a simple observation, but I'll get labelled an SJW as a result.

And you? Well, you personally might not. I don't know. You know I'm fairly left wing, and sympathetic to the plight of minorities, but I'm also happy to say when I think people are unfairly demonized, such as Pax Dickinson or the parents of Leelah Alcorn (and to a certain extent you and I had disagreements on the latter, which doesn't surprise me.)

So, given that, what's the point of using the term? Is it used, in practice, for any real life use other than shutting down debate? "OMG! This person suggested I might have certain advantages in life that aren't available to black people, let's call him an SJW and then nobody will take him seriously!"

'cos that's how I see it used. It might, once, by some people, have been used to denote a particular type of over-zealous and highly obnoxious troll who used social justice issues as their weapon, but it doesn't today, and when you use it on Slashdot, you use it in an environment where virtually nobody is referring to those trolls. You're using it in an environment in which it'll be read, and understood, as referring to feminists, civil rights activists, LGB(T*) activists, and, transgender activists, regardless of whether they're hysterical, or just do passive, entirely optional, advocacy, say, in the forms of videos explaining carefully how they feel movies or video games could be improved so that they're not unintentionally a problem for many women.

Comment Re:Gas (Score 1) 61

OPEC has been surprisingly stable compared to historic cartels, largely due to the Saudi dominance and willingness to bear the brunt when the inevitable cheating occurred.

They're playing a different game now, though: that shale isn't going away, and the price of producing it is a ceiling on the cartel price.

*All* cartels eventually end by cheating; some just get there faster than others . . .

(And the *real* key to the Debars cartel was somehow convincing people that the least desirable gemstone, the plain white wine, was the most desirable and only thing to put in an engagement ring . . . before that, diamonds were *less* valuable than rubies, sapphires, etc. . . .)


Comment Re:Gas (Score 1) 61

But you see, it isn't even "oversupply."

Rather, it's "decreasing but not eliminating the artificial supply constraint."

Even today's prices are higher than they would be without the cartel.

That said, the world changed with the Saudi policy of letting prices go below our production cost.

Oh, dear, they'll sell us their oil for less than it costs to produce our own. I'm terrified.

And don't throw me in the briar patch, either . . .


Comment Re:Tell that to Bejing (Score 1) 61

I think you mean India.

Car sales are up 4000 percent in India, and as a result, you can't see a thing.

Time to end all fossil fuel subsidies and exemptions, including depreciation and fleet discounts.

That said, hybrids don't help if you drive further distances, or burn up fuel while not moving.

Comment Re:Sure, why not? (Score 1) 282

Actually, in many countries, the pager infrastructure has been shut down. Where I live, the pager infrastructure was turned off around ten years ago. Nobody cared.

Are you sure you're not confusing that with analog cell service? That has indeed been shut down in most places, with very, very few exceptions globally (mostly in extremely rural areas where people haven't wanted to go to satellite service). Pager frequencies in a lot of places is still going very strong, for precisely the reasons indicated in the discussion.

That's even moreso the case depending on government needs in your jurisdiction. If there are Important Civilian Responsibilities, then the pager network likely still works, since they're probably not using milcom but may need to function when the cell towers are out.

Comment Re:Pagers shared in work group for emergency conta (Score 1) 282

You can have a single contact phone number that forwards to the persons on call cell phone based on the time of day, day of the week, or whenever you switch shifts.

And that's why you don't work in emergency services. Reliability Engineering is a thing, and every additional link in the chain adds additional failure points.

I like Google Voice, and Skype forwarding, and VOIP conference switches, and all that too... But a physical hand-off is much more reliable.


iPhones Bricked By Setting Date To Jan 1, 1970 ( 162

lightbox32 writes: Beware of a hoax circling the interwebs, which can be seen by setting your iPhone's date to January 1, 1970. Many people are reporting that doing so will brick the device. It's unclear what exactly causes the issue, but could be related to how iOS stores date and time formats. Jan. 1, 1970 is a value of zero or less than zero, which would make any process that uses a time stamp to fail. Apple is aware of the issue and is looking into it.

UK GHCQ Is Allowed To Hack ( 70

An anonymous reader writes: A security tribunal has just decreed that hacking by the UK security agency GCHQ is legal. [The case was launched after revelations by Edward Snowden about the extent of US and UK spying. Campaigners Privacy International claimed GCHQ's hacking operations were too intrusive]. The legal challenge that they were violating European law was rejected.

Comment Re:Great (Score 2) 44

How's this, in the last 10 years, what if instead you didn't have 4G / LTE etc, instead you just still had "inefficient EDGE" BUT unlimited data, all month long, endlessly?

You mean... what if the cellphone carriers didn't take advantage of any of the advances in technology that had happened, and just gave us the same shit sandwich they were giving us 11 years ago?

I'd be pretty pissed about that completely different situation too. I'd say to them "Look, why not use the new spectrum the government is opening up for you, use something really efficient like LTE, and offer us more bandwidth for the same cost given we're paying you the same amount of money now as we were when you were still upgrading your network?"

Technology has improved. You'd expect that to result in actual improvements beyond being able to see a web page render more quickly on your mobile. We know capacity has improved, so why can't we access it?

Slashdot Top Deals

Support Mental Health. Or I'll kill you.