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


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Deal of the Day - 6 month subscription of Pandora One at 46% off. ×

Comment Re:No defense (Score 1) 98

http://www.empcover.com/exampl... There are thousands of references indicating that a space detonation would be much much more damaging than a ground blast.


Physics and real world tests indicate just simply "No" even if the retardation of linking "proof" on a web site desperately trying to sell stuff mitigating the threat they are over-inflating.

Comment Re:What are they suppose to do (Score 0) 56

"For google to hang on to it's safe harbor protections they've pretty much got to drop the ban hammer."

Yes, they do. HOWEVER, if the original content creator puts forth a counter-claim to the DMCA takedown notice, then they are free (And are suppose to) put the video back up - because at that point it goes to the courts between the two parties. They don't lose their safe harbour protections in these cases, or aren't suppose to. They aren't suppose to be the judge ruling who's telling the truth.

If google is going to leave the automated take down in place, they need to make it easy for the uploader to say "no, it's my stuff". Take downs are basically anonymous, that needs to stop. If you issue one, you should be serious about it. Google could say "ok, let's get your name, address, room in the basement, and lawyer on file, then you can issue a take down." I'd be willing to bet there won't be any lawyer information available, and that most of these take downs originate out side of the US where they have no merit anyway.

DMCA only says it has to be offline until the host has passed the information to both parties. Automate that passing of information and the criminals issuing the illegitimate and ILLEGAL take down notices won't be able to do what they do, AND this allows legit claims to get to court where violations fair use, piracy, and defense of free speech can happen.

This is EASY SHIT to do. Google is LAZY.

Comment Re:Close the f'ing borders already! (Score 1) 274

It's utter bullcrap and extremely racist to proclaim 'muslims are the bad guys', you know? I live in a muslim community. I'm an atheist myself but none of my friends looks upon me as a lesser human or someone to either be converted or killed. It's sad that the press has you so riled up that you proclaim 'muslims are bad, m'kay'. You're a twisted and paranoid individual and you might not realise it but when you talk like that you sound very much like an extremist evil muslim.

Your ideas would have some merit if you knew what the word "racist" means.

Comment Re:Close the f'ing borders already! (Score 1) 274

> Have you stopped and thought for a minute about who the immigrants are fleeing from?

>Hint: It's the terrorists you are impying them being part of. They are actually not the same, even though they are all brown people. I know, tough concept.

Yes, the same terrorists that they raised in their country by just a simple modification of their beliefs and the absence of a totalitarian system that suppressed them. So, they carry the seed of their destruction within them and the next generations will act accordingly. Highway to hell...

Example A: Tsarnaev brothers

Comment Re:"Never" == "Life span of humankind" (Score 0, Flamebait) 378

Since "never" in this context is equivalent to "life span of humankind" (which is a much shorter period of time), the prediction looks more realistic.

We're working hard on erasing ourself out of existence in some not too distant future. We might even succeed at that.

Barring oddball volcanic and "rock from space" events, humankind is geared up for a long time.

What won't happen, is much more space travel.

Over the not to distant future, socialism will shut down the western producing companies (leaving no production) and space travel will stop.

Some time after (and it doesn't matter how long) collapse will be far enough that new resources will only come from dumps, and man will no longer have the ability to wage industry to build sophisticated stuff. Resources (mostly rare earth metals but also just plain rare stuff) that was easy to get will be gone, and mankind will NEVER climb back into an industrial / information age again.

Mankind will fall back into city states, goofy assed religions (even more so than now), warring over small amounts of resources, salvaging stuff from the former civilization and subsistence farming. That will go on for 100k's or millions of years until one of any number of ordinary threats (disease mostly) will knock populations down to the point they'll get wiped out by a hard winter or drought.

Our chance to get off this rock is basically almost gone, and there won't be another one.

Comment Re:Work-life balance thrives where it is prioritiz (Score 1) 195

Nawh. He knows they won't move here, the salaries aren't as high as on the coasts. People on the coasts just look at the number, not the overall cost of living.

Does your software license cost less in Nowhere Idaho? How about your car, health insurance and kids college tuition? No? The F250 isn't sold for 75%off in Kansas vs Houston? So what is cheaper? Land, and... what exactly?

Sure, your housing may be cheap, but... you're not in an interesting city - which is fine if you don't like a city lifestyle, but otherwise its not a plus and you've already lost on every other material factor mentioned.

Granted, Houston's not an interesting city, but I'm not there either :D

Land, rent, property taxes, many types of consumer goods, vehicles (lot easier to run a clunker with no emission laws), insurance are all cheaper.

I think you are underestimating the difference in property and rent. Around here, even the difference between college town and middle of nowhere is 900 - 1500 a month. That's a whole stinking mortgage out in the boonies, and then some. Where I live now in NYC would cost 3500 to 5000 per month to rent. I pay 870. Even if you assume cost of car vs walking in that, it's still outrageous to be in NYC.

Comment Re:Does it come with an RA? (Score 1, Insightful) 412

There will be a few people that will completely ruin the shared living space for everyone, and if there's no one to police it, the whole place will go to hell.


Because for that generation "being lonely" is lack of "look at mee! look at mee!"

They are less interested in interaction than they are broadcasting to a captive audience.

I say give them what they want, provide melee weapons and mount cameras on the walls with livestreaming to youtube..

Comment Re:Dreamweaver isn't a CMS, and neither is Frontpa (Score 2) 143

sure they are content management systems. they're used to manage content for millions of websites, even for the governments. the content is created, edited and generated from them and in some cases automatically uploaded.. just because they suck doesn't mean that they're not content management systems.

\\"A content management system (CMS)[1][2][3] is a computer application that allows publishing, editing and modifying content, organizing, deleting as well as maintenance from a central interface.[4] Such systems of content management provide procedures to manage workflow in a collaborative environment.[5] These procedures can be manual steps or an automated cascade. CMSs have been available since the late 1990s."

I'd call them CMMS's. Content Mis-Management Systems.

They lack the fundamental feature of the subject matter though, a database back end with a front end script letting the editors or others make changes with a browser. Regardless of whatever website's definition of it, the core of what people mean by "CMS" is a database and a scripting language running things, and a browser to edit.

In that sense, only SharePoint counts and that's a many generations later offshoot used with FrontPage sometimes. DreamWeaver doesn't count. IF those tools are used they are to manage the template on top of the script, and not the scripting, and not the database.

Comment Re:Keep in mind (Score 1) 120

When the 99% attain an increase in their standard of living, the 1% collect from each of them their profits and fees generated by the process.

They have.

They are:

- fat with too much food
- standing around out enjoying the fresh air
- enjoy ritualized combat and spontaneous outbursts of cultural joy and enrichment
- on cold days, watch big screen TVs or play video games on them
- can breed to their heart's content and know their children will have lots of resources thrown at them
- have been elevated to a specialized class where the rules don't apply to them
- are free to slip in and out of the country at will with a new identity if that suits them

And that's just the lowest of the low. Everybody else gets a lot more.

Sorry dude, getting fat with tons of leisure time to fart around is what everybody else wanted through entire human history. It's what kings did. Now anybody gets it if they want it.

I fail to see how this is somehow wrong.

Just kidding. Humans are fulfilled when they accomplish something. If the "1%" as you say are the only ones doing that, the problem is with the people who aren't bothering, not with those who are going for it.

Comment Re:I have no debt and a hefty savings account (Score 1) 386

I'm pretty sure that what they actually mean is that someone who doesn't roll over debt won't "pay back" the debt in the form of interest without actually getting rid of the debt. If as a bank you've made back the principal and more, then you can easily extend the limit a little further. You can literally not fail to collect what has already been paid back. In that position you want to give them the option to go into more debt instead of reducing their debt to be able to use the card again. On the other hand, why would you increase the credit limit of someone who never gives you more than you gave them in the first place?

I have heard of people having some luck saying "yea I pay it all off, but I want to, and can't make, big purchases with your card. I am going somewhere else if you don't raise the limit."

That seems to work.

Though, if someone can and does pay the card off, why do they need a bigger limit in the first place?

Comment Users View Updates from Apple as Risky (Score 3, Interesting) 320

Users view updates from Apple as risky.

Here is what one can expect with an update to iTunes:

-four or five "yes I agree" click-throughs, one for each service the user hasn't signed up for or ever used
-longer load time and general bloat
-random UI changes that make it an exercise in "what will they think of next" to do basic stuff like sync a phone
-an army of snotty "senior" "helpers" explaining the problem is not a problem, most of whom just don't bother to read
-a SECOND set of random UI changes and feature removals for media organizing, moving or removing stuff like menus and ability to manage play lists, some of which represents hours and hours of tinkering with it.
-"Careful, don't do that" advice from people who lost their whole library, or had to reinstall and couldn't find the library on the hard drive again.

For Quicktime, it's about the same, only the user doesn't use the program much beyond obscure or old porn

Apple has a BIG PROBLEM trying to push their UI bullshit into an environment where their UI bullshit stands out as particularly retarded. There's NO FUCKING REASON to remove the standard word based drop down across the top of the program. More space? People already have more screen space (or second, or third screens) than they know what to deal with. Doesn't look good to emo-fags? How about a toggle to turn it off? (which leaves it on by default)

The actual risks for a slight chance for a security exploit are meaningless compared to the guaranteed fist-smashing-keyboard frustration of a simple update. I have actually helped users disable updates from Apple because they were so afraid of said bullshit or their old iPod or iPhone suddenly not working with it.

If Apple wants to get people to update on Windows, they need to stay within the expected design parameters of Windows better and just let the program look different on different platforms.

You can tell the ideals of a nation by its advertisements. -- Norman Douglas