Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Prep for the CompTIA A+ certification exam. Save 95% on the CompTIA IT Certification Bundle ×

Comment Re:correct me please (Score 4, Informative) 76

From the article,

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NOAA, said that four of its websites were hacked in recent weeks. To block the attackers, government officials were forced to shut down some of its services.

... NOAA makes satellite data and imagery available through the Web as well as file transfer networks for downloads.

It was just the web sites, not satellites. This is far overblown.

Comment Re:Sure it was Obama? (Score 1) 235

The presence US classified documents implies US government. It's not proof, but that's probably what she's thinking. It may be other news agencies, competitive journalists, people she's pissed off, foreign governments, all just checking up on what's she's doing and ready to set her up for arrest.

Comment Re:She's.. (Score 5, Interesting) 235

And as I was typing and working on questions for a Benghazi-related story, the data started wiping kind of at hyperspeed

I've done that to people before. Remote log in and start keyboard presses like delete as a prank. It may not have been to delete the data so much as to drive them crazy. If she was hacked by specific people to cause problems, that's a very logical tactic.

Comment Re:Both are bad but not comparable. (Score 4, Interesting) 235

Whether the motive is political or personal does not justify crime. This is suppression of information for the purpose of affecting an election. Nixon was stealing information for the purpose of affecting an election. The difference is minor.

Journalism based on political gain is propaganda, and all over in the news. It's hard to believe any one news source these days, they're all biased one direction or another. Get your news from as many sources as possible, get the facts, and make an educated assessment. It's the best way to remove the journalists' biases.

Comment Re:Cake and eat it too (Score 1) 365

It's good to look at the situation from everyone's point of view. The immigrants get paid much more than they otherwise would in their own country. It's very good from their point of view, and Microsoft's point of view. It's bad from an equivalently qualified American's point of view, and America's point of view. Which method is best all depends on who you are.

Comment Re:Two new deniers are born... (Score 2) 207

The paper does not imply that CO2 is not a greenhouse gas. Rather it implies that the estimates of the effects of CO2 may be overestimated. Since meteorologists tune their models based on past weather data, this would mean that the predictive models are tuned wrong and give too much weight to greenhouse gases in temperature predictions. The criticism of the paper also brings up valid points that should be investigated.

Comment 100 Watts (Score 5, Informative) 191

Please keep in mind an important aspect of this new cable, it supports 100 watts power transfer. That means most devices, including laptops, can be charged through this one connector. I see that as the best reason to switch, fast charging and universal connector for all my devices. The article glosses over that important detail. It also enables 10 Gbs data transfer.

Submission + - Hotel fines $500 for every bad review posted online->

mpicpp writes: A hotel in tony Hudson, NY, has found a novel way to keep negative reviews off Yelp and other sites — fine any grousing guests.
The Union Street Guest House, near Catskills estates built by the Vanderbilts and Rockefellers, charges couples who book weddings at the venue $500 for every bad review posted online by their guests.

“Please know that despite the fact that wedding couples love Hudson and our inn, your friends and families may not,” reads an online policy. “If you have booked the inn for a wedding or other type of event ... and given us a deposit of any kind ... there will be a $500 fine that will be deducted from your deposit for every negative review ... placed on any internet site by anyone in your party.”

In response to a review complaining of rude treatment over a bucket of ice, the proprietors shot back: “I know you guys wanted to hang out and get drunk for 2 days and that is fine. I was really really sorry that you showed up in the summer when it was 105 degrees ... I was so so so sorry that our ice maker and fridge were not working and not accessible.”
Oddly, the hotel didn’t respond to a request for comment.
If you take down the nasty review, you’ll get your money back.

Link to Original Source

Comment Re:Capabilities (Score 1) 364

The aim of the F-35 is a possible war with modern countries, not Afghanistan (since we have superiority in Afghanistan, most any aircraft would do). This includes not only where their technology currently is, but where we know they are going. The Chinese and Russians have some incredible defenses, and there's a constant back and forth of advancing weapons and defenses to counter those weapons. This happens whether you're aware of it or not, and most people have no idea what's out there in terms of weapons and defenses because countries mostly keep them secret. The F-35 is part of that superiority strategy, including all of the technology onboard the aircraft.

I'm am in agreement about the A-10. The F-35 in no way replaces what the A-10 can do, and the A-10 does it at 1/10th the cost. I wish they would bring it back into production rather than mothball a very useful aircraft.

Comment Capabilities (Score 4, Interesting) 364

This article doesn't mention the incredible upgrades of the F-35. It has incredible situational awareness (SA), highly networked to acquire SA from all sources, sensors onboard to provide SA, smaller that the F-22, more stealthy, and a range of other characteristics that the pentagon desires (wiki). Those capabilities are the top reason for the F-35 to exist at all. As development has progressed, then the money problems and failures came up as they always do. The capability needs don't justify the failures of the program, but they need to be taken into consideration when there's talk of changing or canceling the program.

Everyone has a different concern. Congressmen are probably concerned about money staying in their state to stay elected. The Pentagon is worried about capability and not being embarrassed over a big failure. The tax payers are worried about not wasting money and some of them about keeping an F-35 job. It's a complicated issue with lots of caveats.

Comment Re:Fight for consumers (Score 0) 211

And my suspicion is that Amazon could care less about consumers other than their impact to their bottom line.

Amazon's profit margin is almost non-existent. They've never had much profit. They pass the savings to the consumer and take almost nothing. I don't see any indication that it will change.

Companies are not evil just because they exist.

If I have not seen so far it is because I stood in giant's footsteps.