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


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Who? (Score 1) 370

I am not forking the kernel out of a sense of entitlement. Nor am I offended or angry at any of my co-workers though we have had actual shouting matches that got personal on more than one occasion. On the contrary, I feel like my co-workers are family.

My list of accomplishments is very very short and none of them weighty or important.

But all of that is completely irrelevant to the point that I was making. AC GP, what you just did was nothing more than an ad hominem attack.

Comment Re:Who? (Score 5, Insightful) 370

What talent? The SJWs are all pretty talented at being hypocritical and shedding crocodile tears at the UN, but they don't seem to be any good at actually writing code.

If they were then Zoe Quinn's "game" would have been more than reams of self-pitying text and some multiple-choice. A teenage script kiddie could do better.
Sarkeesian would have several AAA titles under her belt instead of just talking about how everyone else should make games to suit her.
That female kernel dev from yesterday would have forked the kernel herself or done something really impressive if she had the chops-- instead she apparently couldn't hang with the real bad asses and tried to make it sound like it was everyone being mean to poor little her. But as far as I can tell she butted into some good-natured ribbing between friends on the mailing list and got all offended at remarks that had absolutely nothing to do with her.
Ellen Pao is precisely the same way: lots of talk and being offended but has never actually accomplished anything aside from ruining Reddit (love it or hate it).

Poetering is the only programmer target of persecution I've ever heard of that actually doesn't deserve the hatred and who has actually accomplished something. But, oh, look: he's not a SJW and he doesn't make a living from being permanently offended; he makes a living writing code and gettin' stuff done (regardless of whether you hate systemd).

The FOSS community will be much better off without the SJW "contributions". Kernel development should be done by programmers not by self-righteous whiners who complain on twitter about how offended they always feel instead of fixing bugs. We'll never hear of this fork of the kernel ever again because the people behind it are not trying to make good software. I'm not saying that Linus' methods are efficient or effective, just that the goals are different.

Comment Re:Of course if you crack an encryption system (Score 1) 122

We'll know which depending on what happens to the underpaid crackers.
If the underpaid crackers are arrested and disappeared then we know they failed.
If the underpaid crackers are able to finagle their legal way to getting out of the contract yet continue to bring in more government contracts then we know they succeeded and that their "failure" was a lie.

Comment Re:so nasa is really a pr machine? (Score 1) 58

Thank you for being deep and insightful, doublebackslash.

My specific criticism is that it always seems like /. takes the side of NASA (and science/scientists in general) every time on every issue and treats it all like its some kind of democratic process. Then when anyone dares to question "what 99.99% of scientists say" they're modded into oblivion. A key example: climate change. Another one: systemd. Another one: leftist/socialist ideas of economics and social governance.

I'm not necessarily opposed to coming to a consensus if that consensus is reached through a careful, rigorous, and tested and reproduced approach. But that never seems to be the case with the institution of science itself and scientists themselves. It's always assumed by the crowd that they "did the research" and did it correctly.

Yet almost every day on /. I see articles about how medical research can't be replicated, popular governmental regulations backfiring, public healthcare falling far short and far over budget, anyone who questions the "scientific consensus" being modded down (but not for any real reason), slashdotters getting shrill and calling for blood if anyone dares to cut funding to this or that program which would ultimately just give us more pictures of places that we'll never see etc.

At times I feel like one should be required to post a three-point essay with citations in order to mod others down lest dissenting opinions be trashed for no other reason than that they're speaking an unpopular opinion.

I guess really what I want is a good system to filter merely unpopular (and potentially golden) opinion from plain garden variety trolling, off-topic stupidity, and trash.
I'm not a profound fellow, though I wish I was, and I need clarity to think and to reason about a subject. I can't get that if dissent is squashed mercilessly. And I think a lot of babies are and have been thrown out with the bathwater so to speak.

Comment Re:Banning features on the S3 in 2015? (Score 1) 69

I was about to post the same observation.

At the time all I could think of was how asinine the suit was and what a pretentious jerk Apple was being.

Now I think that Samsung was never worried either way because they could just continue business as usual and by the time the suit actually caught up (whether you agree with the ruling or not) it would already be way too late to actually affect Samsung. Brilliant, if this was the plan of some bean-counter all along.

Comment Re:so nasa is really a pr machine? (Score 1) 58

You're 100% right and yet /. will flame you for saying anything bad about their precious messiah. Really slashdotters truly do worship science and scientists. I can't tell if it's pure narcissism (especially for those slashdotters that are themselves scientists and indulge in science worship) or just because we're losers that hope that science will save us... from ourselves.

And now they'll mod me down. Thus proving my point.

Comment Re:So much idiocy (Score 1) 591

Seventh, to refute your point about sperm and egg cells dying and those deaths not being denounced:

Neither sperm nor egg cells have the complete DNA nor other structures to become a human being if left alone. In the same way that a chicken egg is made of the same elements that are in dirt. Dirt won't become a chicken if left to follow the natural course of events. A chicken egg does become a chicken if its natural progress isn't interrupted.

A zygote naturally and normally becomes a fetus which becomes a baby and so on. A sperm cell on its own doesn't and neither does an egg cell.

My position isn't that every single atom in the universe which could be used to produce a human must be used in such a fashion.
My position is that every innocent human life is precious. Including people when they are asleep. Including old men and old women. Including children. Including fetuses.

Comment Re:So much idiocy (Score 0) 591

Nobody is talking about "kill all the zygotes" except you, you logic-impaired

First, yes, someone was talking about killing zygotes: "No Human Beings are aborted coward". By the way, you are "a grammar impaired" and so is AutodidactLabrat who turned AC immediately after calling me a coward.

Second, you didn't respond to the point I made. You dodged it and tried to say that since bad things naturally happen that it excuses us from murder. Well people die from being overweight all the time too, but nobody is saying it's OK to murder overweight people are they?

Third, you're using ad hominem attacks and at the same time trying to portray yourself as the paragon of reason. That's rich.

Fourth, about the oak trees thing: now it's you who is failing to think. Perhaps you should re-read what I wrote. Furthermore, the point isn't about whether there are more than one ways to exterminate all X's. It's about whether a very young X is still an X. I think so. You think not. I'm calling you a murderer or at least a self-righteous supporter of murder.

I don't have a solution to all the ills of the world. I can't save every last single person from death. But killing innocent children is still wrong. Even if nobody bemoans the deaths of a mass murderer, even if nobody bemoans the deaths of sperm or egg cells (following your chain of logic there) it's still wrong to kill innocent children.

Fifth, none of you responded to this:

Considering that a zygote literally has the DNA of its parents then in what scientific sense can you say that the zygote isn't a human?

Sixth, who's the coward? Me or the lot of you dog-piling me and modding me down for standing up for the truth? Oh, you don't like being called a murderer? Or is it just that you hate the idea of having real science and reason rubbed in your self-righteous arrogant faces when you had thought to label yourselves the masters of all that is intelligent? I was absolutely correct in my original assessment that posting a comment valuing human life over a convenient lie would get me modded down and attacked by true cowards-- the lot of you.

Theory is gray, but the golden tree of life is green. -- Goethe