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:Yeah. Totalitarian dictatorships have upsides t (Score 3, Insightful) 175

by gweihir (#49502815) Attached to: The Upsides of a Surveillance Society

Actually, in typical totalitarian societies, drug dealers usually make arrangements with the "authorities". The thing is that totalitarian societies care not one bit about the welfare of their citizens, they only keep up appearances. What then happens in addition is that everybody on drugs is known to the authorities and if any of them ever voices a critical thought, they will be publicly crucified. All that are behave like the sheep they are supposed to be are left alone.

So, no, expecting that crime against citizens is less in authoritarian societies is not realistic. The one exception are some theocracies and quasi-theocracies where they are true believers and even see thinking anything else than the church/party line is a capital offense. There you actually may get less crime. The cost is extreme, though.

Comment: Original AltaVista.... (Score 1) 218

by gweihir (#49502649) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: What Features Would You Like In a Search Engine?

"Near" keyword, logic constructs, all those nice features AltaVista (which was just a hardware-demo) had, and Google never managed. Google is borderline unusable these days and you strongly notice they do not care about good search but only about placing their adds and profiling you.


The Upsides of a Surveillance Society 175

Posted by timothy
from the you-mean-it's-not-all-upside? dept.
theodp writes Citing the comeuppance of ESPN reporter Britt McHenry, who was suspended from her job after her filmed ad-hominem attack on a person McHenry deemed to be beneath her in terms of appearance, education, wealth, class, status went viral, The Atlantic's Megan Garber writes that one silver lining of the omnipresence of cameras it that the possibility of exposure can also encourage us to be a little kinder to each other. "Terrible behavior," Garber writes, "whether cruel or violent or something in between, has a greater possibility than it ever has before of being exposed. Just as Uber tracks ratings for both its drivers and its users, and just as Yelp can be a source of shaming for businesses and customers alike, technology at large has afforded a reciprocity between people who, in a previous era, would have occupied different places on the spectrum of power. Which can, again, be a bad thing — but which can also, in McHenry's case, be an extremely beneficial one. It's good that her behavior has been exposed. It's good that her story going viral might discourage similar behavior from other people. It's good that she has publicly promised 'to learn from this mistake.'"

Comment: Re:I thought we were trying to end sexism? (Score 1) 587

Apparently, sexism is alive and well. What these morons are trying to do is force people into directions that they do not want to go. I know a few women in tech and science, and they all say that it was hard, but not harder than for the men to succeed. That is equal opportunity and when it has been reached, nothing needs or should be done anymore. If individuals still decide more for a gender-typical career, that is their right.

Comment: Re:Hasn't this been proven to be junk science? (Score 0) 310

"Hope" is never rational. It is an evolutionary mechanism that keeps people going in two circumstances: 1) Then they have grossly miss-estimated the actual risk to them (a very common problem, see for example all the morons that are afraid of terrorism but are willing to drive a car), and 2) when most are going to die, but a tiny number may be enough to keep the genetic group going.

What is rational is actual risk management with real numbers. Your 1 in 1 Billion is not relevant, as the change that you will be killed by a freak accident soon is already far, far higher and hence completely supersedes that small chance. As such it is not rational at all to even consider it a possibility, except in a theoretical sense. Life is messy, and assuming that very rare things will never, ever happen to you is the only rational course of action. Anything else opens you up to scams and prevents you from taking control of your situation. That is also called dysfunctional.

Comment: Re:Hasn't this been proven to be junk science? (Score 1) 310

People are a) stupid and b) very much afraid of death. Hence they are easy marks for this scam.

The reality of things is that there is no suitable cryo-technology at this time that allows even reasonable-quality freezing of anything much larger than a single cell. Crystals will form, it takes far too long and storage temperatures may be far too high for long-term storage. Also, the person is dead at the time this is done which may well be to late for any recovery. The other problem is that for the foreseeable future, cryo-revival will be infeasible and after that exceptionally expensive. Why would anybody revive strongly damaged legally dead people when making new ones is so easy and there are already too many anyways? And then there is the little problem that anybody revived will be displaced in time, with nobody they knew still alive.

This whole thing is just one of the tributes the time-honored tradition of separating stupid people from their money.


A 2-Year-Old Has Become the Youngest Person Ever To Be Cryonically Frozen 310

Posted by Soulskill
from the rest-in-peace dept.
merbs writes: After losing a long battle with brain cancer, 2-year-old Matheryn Naovaratpong became the first minor ever to be cryogenically frozen. This article is the story of how a Thai girl was frozen in Bangkok and shipped to Arizona to have her brain preserved in liquid nitrogen, while medical science works on a cure. "Typically we’d move the head from the trunk of the body. We didn't know what their reaction would be from the family, the mortuary, from border officials; this has to go through a number of shipping venues, customs, the TSA and so on. To see a frozen head in a box might have raised a number of red flags. In the U.S. that’s not a big deal, but there, they may not be accustomed."

Can Online Reporting System Help Prevent Sexual Assaults On Campus? 231

Posted by timothy
from the vote-early-and-often dept.
jyosim writes Studies have shown that as many as 90 percent of campus rapes are committed by repeat offenders. A new system is designed to help identify serial assaulters, by letting students anonymously report incidents in order to look for patterns. But some argue that having the ability to report someone with just the click of a button may not be a good thing. Andrew T. Miltenberg, a New York lawyer who represents young men accused of sexual misconduct, says though the system seems well intended, he is concerned about dangers it may pose to students who are accused. 'We're all guilty of pressing send on an angry text or email that, had we had to put it into an actual letter and proofread, we probably wouldn't have sent,' he says.

Comment: Re:Faster than DDR (Score 1) 72

by gweihir (#49483921) Attached to: Samsung SSD On a Tiny M.2 Stick Is Capable of Read Speeds Over 2GB/sec

Seriously, find out the facts before posting BS. DDR has single word access times (and that is what counts) around 100ns. These drives have around 10...100us latency. A factor of 100...1000 is nowhere near comparable. What you are apparently unaware of is that DDR does not use any command queuing and has really small blocks, while the SSD uses, for memory, very large blocks and it only gets the 1.2GB/s because it knows about a whole set of future requests before it has to deliver them. That does not work for RAM.

If you limit the SSD down to RAM-sized blocks and force it to deliver immediately, it gets completely trashed by DDR RAM, and that is the only sensible benchmark for random accesses to RAM.

Some people really have no clue and only can compare numbers. Pathetic.

"Oh what wouldn't I give to be spat at in the face..." -- a prisoner in "Life of Brian"