Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment Neither is Right for Everyone (Score 2) 319

Your friends show two distant points on the patching spectrum we have to make all the time.

Neither is right, nor wholly wrong. The first friend doesn't worry so much about stability, and for himself that's fine. He knows the choices he's making and he's really into that. Good for him. The second friend is more conservative and more in line with what the mainstream hopes for and expects. I'd like to know what they consider "serious security" updates, because it could be anywhere from reasonable security to complete insecurity. This is why most environments have tiers of patching and testing. We know we need to get security updates out as much as possible. Some people get more value out of being on the bleeding edge than having a stable install, others can't/won't have their work interrupted for any cost. This is also why this argument is silly to have between two people on which way is "better."

As for what I do? My home system gets updates as soon as I see they're available. I occasionally play with nightlies or betas, on a VM, to see if there are major interface tweaks, a new feature I want, or whatever else I'm interested in. I'd never suggest that for most of my friends or relatives.

Incidentally, that's pretty much how it goes at work. Most of the people I work with in IT, and a few select users are in the first group. Most people get security updates quickly, and well vetted other updates when they're more thoroughly tested.

Comment Re:Corporate taxes (Score 1) 410

I'm not sure what you're going for on point 4, but the first three are at least interesting. If you could explain that, it'd be appreciated.

I'd expect that there would be a bunch of newly developed "hidden benefits," especially for those at the top of the larger corporations. An example would be the free housing and transportation that the executives and board would receive. That would need to be dealt with in some fashion too, but I like the start.

My comment is just a blow-hard edition of modding you up, but I don't have points.

Comment Re:Outright bans are not smart (Score 2) 376

We know why it's in foods. It's cheap. It's really cheap. To make sure that choice is clear, labels would need a requirement that any amount is listed... and not allowing the "less that .5 gram" exception that exists today.

Of course, there's a part of me that knows that people won't think about any consequences anyway. I weigh freedom which allows increased public health costs (medicaid, medicare, Social Security Disability, whatever else) of allowing this choice, vs an outright ban that might make that serving of Oreo's cost an extra 10 cents a bag (no citation, it's just a guess). I honestly don't think there's a correct answer in this case.

I don't think it's a major violation of our rights to ban a substance that was designed to be redundant if it's markedly more harmful than the existing alternatives.

Comment Re:why didnt Snowden use Wikileaks??? (Score 1) 398

Mostly very fair points... But like the anonymous coward said above, Chelsea Manning's capture, detainment, and sentencing happened because of her actions after leaking the documents.

Could Wikileaks have handled things a little differently when releasing information? Sure.

Could Wikileaks have stopped Chelsea from talking with Lamo? Probably not.

Comment Re: Help us Google Fiber! You're our only hope. (Score 2) 568

Fair enough it's like roads. It's also just like roads in that many of these companies have received subsidies to lay down their infrastructure too right? They're happily taking those payments to string out the last mile to a bunch of people still? I guess I'd be more sympathetic if I felt like us, as users, were using so much bandwidth that they weren't able to make a profit, or pay their workers. I also would be more sympathetic if the pricing they suggested didn't feel like it was a straight cash grab on top of the cash grab I feel like they're already charging.

I totally understand that the bandwidth I buy per month is oversubscribed. It's what I expect in a consumer market.

I also don't believe it's costing them more than 10% of what I pay to maintain/expand the capacity that I'm using. Show me the balance sheet if I'm wrong, and I'll happily admit it.

Comment Re:This also in... (Score 2) 146

Here was the comment I was looking for. I've seen third-party ads attack from plenty of reputable (and not so reputable) sites. As much as I love piling on MS, Bing, and IE, I don't think it's wholly fair to single them out for this issue. Of course, anecdotes are worth little more than the electrons that carry the information to your eyes, but I'm fairly confident most of us have been called in to clean up an infection from [typical site used by many].

Now, if you want to talk about Microsoft's awful ad campaigns, that's 100% fair, and please proceed.

Comment Re:Moo (Score 1) 273

Maybe the tenured professors remember their pre-tenure days of being beaten down in reviews by freshmen who thought they should get an easy A in their class. Wouldn't surprise me if they look at the intro classes and just say to themselves, "F 'em, if they don't want to work, I don't want them advancing in my field."

Slashdot Top Deals

Wernher von Braun settled for a V-2 when he coulda had a V-8.