Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


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:So? (Score 1) 621

by nautsch (#44939495) Attached to: GTA V Proves a Lot of Parents Still Don't Know or Care About ESRB Ratings
This is the exactly reason why there are those ratings. After a certain age, it is okay to consume said content. I cannot imagine, that your dad let you watch splatter movies at the age of 6. I am not saying, that the ratings are perfect and there are no kids, that can handle the content, but I am saying, that a 6 year old child shouldn't be made (or allowed) to see ultra violent content.

By the way. I your dad was present during those movies or games it is a completely different story.

And I call bullshit on the character building and strengthening. You sound like you had a healthy relationship with your dad, which probably was responsible for you becoming a "great man" ;-)

Comment: Re:So? (Score 1) 621

by nautsch (#44939099) Attached to: GTA V Proves a Lot of Parents Still Don't Know or Care About ESRB Ratings
Its not about imparting the behavior on the child. its about content that might be disturbing for younger players. Its about protecting the child from weeks of nightmares and not to protect you from being shot by a child which played GTA (which, as you said, is probably not going to happen).
This is also the reason, why I think violence in games is much much worse than nudity or sex. I was mature enough as a kid to watch those stupid late night erotic films, so i think the kids today might be able to handle that stuff, when they can hold a controller without breaking their hands.

Comment: Re:And still no death penalty for rape (Score 2) 436

by nautsch (#42520589) Attached to: Anonymous Helps Find Evidence In Gang Rape Case

In no way am I saying rape isn't bad. If rape leads to death, then it is worse than murder. Although, it depends on the method of murder. Burning alive would be much worse.

So death by fire: what? 10 minutes? probably much less, due to suffocation; Death by rape: probably hours or days of pure torture.

Comment: Re:And still no death penalty for rape (Score 1) 436

by nautsch (#42520541) Attached to: Anonymous Helps Find Evidence In Gang Rape Case

Yeah prove how excellent our society is by killing everyone who does something we don't like. Put them in prison by all means but killing them just proves that you are no better than them.

I am undecided on the death sentence, but I think theres a huge difference between "something we don't like" and rape. Noone should be killed for stealing a Mars bar, but for rape or murder ... not really sure.

Comment: Re:There's more to this story. (Score 3, Interesting) 343

by nautsch (#41463831) Attached to: Linux Forcibly Installed On Congressman's Computer In Act of Terrorism

(preferred because somebody who really really tried could probably resurrect the old data through a mere zeroing, but it would be a lot harder if overwritten with random bytes, and way harder if you executed this command five or six times in a row).

I have NEVER seen that done or even heard of it. Could you link me to a source, where it is shown, that a zeroed drive could be used to get anything meaningful back? The "overwrite 7 times to be sure" is a myth as far as I know.

Comment: Re:Marriage =/= legal union. (Score 1) 804

You can only go to your church, synagoge, mosque or whatever the sacred place is called in your religion to celebrate your marriage if you can show the official document sealing your marriage.

At least in Germany you can freely do any marriage rite you want without any paperwork. It just doesn't count anything (tax benefits, ...) as long as you didn't do the official paperwork from your municipality.

Comment: Re:Just set a jumper, done (Score 2) 377

by nautsch (#40566639) Attached to: Ubuntu Can't Trust FSF's Secure Boot Solution

Why not? This is easily answered.

Secure Boot does not mean "secure for you". It means secure for Microsoft.

The advertised "feature" of anti-virus, anti-malware is a strawman. I don't get why any hardware manufacturer would be so unbelievably greedy and implement this just to get a stupid "Works with Windows 8" sticker, but obviously I am just too stupid to get it, because it will probably happen.

I really, really hope something will happen, that prevents the whole secure boot thing with MS certificates. I don't know. Maybe the European High Court (or whatever its called) does something about "secure boot"

There would be a really easy way of implementing secure boot without any certificates from a special vendor. Just securely hash the boot sector at first boot. If the has changes, ask the user to verify the change or rebuild the old boot sector. This way you cannot change the boot sector without the user knowing it. Easy as this and as secure as the so called "secure boot". And as a bonus you still can run any software YOU want.

Comment: Re:Darwin in action. (Score 1) 404

by nautsch (#40350645) Attached to: Black Death Discovered In Oregon
I clearly said "in this case". And i stand by that. 500 years may be significant to give some random development an edge in a species, but it will definitely/reasonably certain not cause something beneficial to develop. This might never happen, due to the nature of evolution. And 500 years for something to come into existence by coincidental mutation is very very very unlikely to an extend, that I would say impossible.

Comment: Re:Darwin in action. (Score 1) 404

by nautsch (#40346657) Attached to: Black Death Discovered In Oregon
500 years, eh? What is that? 20 generations? maybe a few more or less. Evolution is not directed, so even if somethings seems evolutionary benificial, it does not mean, that it will develop. There has to be alot of improbabble mutations happening for growing some kind of piercing mechanism on your penis. So in this case 500 years is definitely not evolutionary significant.

Read up on your evolutionary theory.

If you can't understand it, it is intuitively obvious.