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:Should read (Score 1) 612

by kwiecmmm (#49140199) Attached to: FCC Approves Net Neutrality Rules

"Democrats force through socialist regulations." Nothing Obama does in the next year will make durable law, not amnesty, unnatural marriage, communication regulation, healthcare subsidies... A conservative President and congress will set things right in 2010

I sure can't wait for 2010 for this to happen. I expect we will have flying cars by then as well.

Comment: Re:"Broadband" is a stupid name (Score 1) 430

by kwiecmmm (#48933165) Attached to: FCC Officially Approves Change In the Definition of Broadband

Broadband is a description of the technology, not of bandwidth. The FCC is a technical organization, so why can't they use the correct name?

Because the people who vote on this change are not technical people. And because most Americans would not understand a good technical name.

Comment: WTF (Score 1) 397

by kwiecmmm (#48915145) Attached to: "Mammoth Snow Storm" Underwhelms

What the hell is this crap: "scare-mongering" and "government's overreach"?

Guess what, the weather is unpredictable sometimes.

Would you rather them say a dusting of snow and then get 2 feet of snow? When that happens it takes 3 times as long to dig out, because snow removal efforts are not properly prepared. Every weather report said that it was going to hit NYC hard. And in the mean time Boston has a foot of snow overnight, and more still falling.

If you are going to post something about the weather, at least make it somewhat of a technological story, not this stupid shit.

Comment: Give it 3-5 years. (Score 2) 385

by kwiecmmm (#48857115) Attached to: FBI Seeks To Legally Hack You If You're Connected To TOR Or a VPN

The first arrest that happens due to this, will result in appeals that will eventually get this rule overturned as unconstitutional.

This is no different than saying your neighbor committed a crime so we want to search your house as well due to proximity to him. A decent lawyer will be able to make the argument that just because you are on a TOR or a VPN does not mean you are doing something illegal.

TOR was created as a method to allow people in oppressed countries to speak freely, it is funny that the country that funded this is now going to be one of those oppressed countries.

Comment: Re:parachutes? (Score -1) 130

by kwiecmmm (#48830495) Attached to: Lost Beagle2 Probe Found 'Intact' On Mars

Really? Well shit, good thing you figured it out.
Better tell all those PHDs and other people who do that for a living before they blindly chuck any more multi-billion dollar probes at Mars without any effective means of slowing down.

Well they did fail to do a conversion from standard measurements to metric measurements on the 1999 Mars climate orbiter. But I do agree with your point, we have successfully landed on the moon which has a lot less of an atmosphere than Mars.

I guess the circuits controlling communications got screwed up, so it was assumed to be lost.

Comment: Re:Who's in charge, again? (Score 1) 202

by kwiecmmm (#48813357) Attached to: Obama Planning New Rules For Oil and Gas Industry's Methane Emissions

Hopefully the Republican Congress will now find some balls and defund the EPA.

Do you even know part of the reason why the EPA was created originally?

Before the EPA began enforcing regulations on pollution it was so rampant that the Cuyahoga River caught on fire multiple times. There were other rivers that were like this as well, but the Cuyahoga fire got a Time story that drew attention to it.

I don't know if you are one of those who believe that company's can self regulate, but the issue here was where the pollution was dumped into the river wasn't where the fires started, they started further downstream. So there was no reason for the companies to even care about this. This is very similar with air pollution as well.

The EPA and other government agencies need to be reformed, but Congress needs to write some laws for that to happen (make it easier to fire government employees, eliminate the crazy amounts of bureaucracy that reasonable regulations have to go through, and go through older laws/regulations and eliminate the ridiculous ones). But this would require Congress to get off its ass and write reasonable laws and possibly even reform an agency rather than just defund it.

But the obvious solution is to just defund the EPA, nothing bad can come from industries having no regulations on their environmental output.

Comment: Ahead of the Curve (Score 1) 386

by kwiecmmm (#48697465) Attached to: The One Mistake Google Keeps Making

But rest assured – Google knows this. They’re not looking for short term profits. They’re not even looking for profits in the next few years. The dreamers behind Google, like the dreamers at Tesla and Virgin Galactic are people who are looking decades ahead.

The original Forbes article states this in the end, the poster either didn't bother to read that far or just didn't think this was relevant. Most of the article does crap on Google for this stuff, but at the end the guy realizes that this is a long term goal which Google is trying to get ahead on. So this was most likely written as click bait that bad mouths Google, but the actual author knows that Google is playing a long term game here.

Welcome to current journalism, lets bad mouth something we think is intelligent, to get people to click on a link. But at the very end we will write up a few sentences saying why this will probably pay off in the long run.

Comment: Scientist angers a few christians!(More News at 6) (Score 1) 681

by kwiecmmm (#48690687) Attached to: Neil DeGrasse Tyson Explains His Christmas Tweet

I am trying to understand this better, a scientist (who is an atheist), angers a few Christians for stating a fact.

OK for those of you about to argue that Isaac Newton wasn't technically born on Dec. 25th, neither was Jesus. There is plenty of research to back up the fact that Jesus was most likely born in September. The reason that Christmas is celebrated on December 25th is to put it in contention with other end of the year celebrations (religious and secular) like Hanukkah.

I also heard him say that the earth is more than 5 billion years old, and the universe is around 13.8 billion years old. Why aren't these people yelling at him about these scientific observations?

"An entire fraternity of strapping Wall-Street-bound youth. Hell - this is going to be a blood bath!" -- Post Bros. Comics