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


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

Comment That's easy (Score 1) 789

Piss people off by spending it, or not spending it, the way I want. Since I'll be dead and have no heirs there's no reason to spend it on others, especially when no one bothered to spend their money on me during my lifetime.

Screw people. We're supposed to be the smart ones. If you want to spend a fortune, make your own. Don't expect someone else to spend their money the way you want.

Comment Re:Everyone has right to self defense (Score 1) 180

and able to quickly join a well-trained militia

And thus, "a well regulated militia. . ." yet I don't see the NRA agreeing every person who owns a gun being regulated in any sense of the word nor claiming the same group is part of a militia and should be called up for training by the government.

After all, if you're going to call up a group of people you need to have them registered and that is the last thing the NRA wants despite what the 2nd Amendment says and implies.

Comment Re:Personal Responsibility? (Score 1) 706

what ever happened to "Personal Responsibility"?

Are you seriously suggesting people should be held accountable for their actions? That's crazy talk! Imagine the calamity which would ensue if this were true.

No more being forced to hand over your money to a private company because the government told you to do it, no more people whining after someone kills themselves because they were arrested for being somewhere they had no right to be and didn't want to answer for their crime, no more people trying to justify not paying someone for their work, the list goes on.

You might want to reconsider your comment in light of how ridiculous it is. Why have personal responsibility when there's always an excuse or someone else gets to pick up the tab?

Comment Re:Story summary ... (Score 1) 1037

Well, some of us prefer hard science fiction to the squishy stuff.

I honestly rue the day the all-inclusive crowd decided to re-designate SF as "speculative fiction." All fiction is speculative as it is all an exercise in what-if. The difference between hard science fiction and the rest, as I see it, is that based upon the objective reality currently understood at the time of authorship, the hard stuff is actually within the realm of known possibilities, because, you know, science. I find that to be a significant enough distinction to distinguish these works from those containing gods, elves, magicians, macro teleportation, ESP and so on.

That is in no way to imply that the squishy stuff cannot be fine work -- it most certainly can, and often is. But the bottom line for me is that it is different on a fundamental level, providing a different kind of experience from, say, "The Martian" or the technically flawed, but scientifically sound, "Red Mars."

Doesn't matter to me personally who, or what, gets a Hugo, or why. I'm sitting about ten feet from three of them, and the shine has worn off after decades of observing the process. All I'm saying is that if hard science fiction is of such consequence to these people that they feel awards should be proffered in that specific category, there are doors that are open, or could be opened. Assuming the story is at all accurate, which, from the other comments here... it very well may not be.

Comment Re:"I am about to be killed, tortured, or exiled," (Score 1, Interesting) 706

The website did not willing give up the account information- it was stolen.

I'm confused. Does Ashley Madison not have possession of the information? When these hackers broke in, did they take the information and not leave anything behind?

I ask because many times on here when talking about people stealing songs the argument is always brought up that nothing was actually stolen since the original owner still had the song. Therefore, there was no theft but is instead considered "sharing".

If the above analogy is correct then there's no problem. Nothing was stolen, only shared because information wants to be free. So which story are we going to use today?

Comment Re:Story summary ... (Score 2) 1037

Summary aside, if there really is an objection to the range of science fiction stories that the Hugos are currently addressing these days, then I can see two reasonable solutions, either or both of which may already exist:

1) hugos specific to the category being awarded: e.g. "hard science fiction"

2) another award entirely -- which means publicity, fan gathering, etc. Lots of work.

It seems like a tempest in a teakettle to me.

Comment Refining and transport costs? (Score 1) 61

From TFI:

The transportation and extraction costs are sufficiently high

This may be half-true if the vision is mankind going out there and mining and refining, but if it's done the sane way, the way it of course will ultimately be done -- which is by solar-powered robotics with self-repair capabilities along or incorporated -- the initial (and total) cost will be irrelevant due to the profits maintenance-free, zero ongoing-costs, self-repairing operations will continuously produce.

As for "transport costs", really, WTF? What about gravity? Inertia? Orbital mechanics? Ion drives? Sunlight? Did he forget his fundamental physics?

Mine it, refine it, and kick it - not very hard, either - (using an Ion tug/pusher that just starts it on its journey-to-wherever and then returns to the operation) towards where you want it to go, past whatever you want to use to give it more or less oomph, and it'll (eventually) get there. And once the first such package arrives after the initial latency caused by transport time, the others will follow at reasonably similar intervals to the kick-out intervals, assuming only that where they are being sent to isn't moving under its own power, in which case, every "kick" would have to be towards somewhere else (and you'd have to know where the target was going to be on receipt, too, or there wouldn't be any receipt.) Still, that's not going to be the critical use-case -- this is going to be almost entirely about sending materials mined from nearly zero-g environments to planetary and moon orbit, to the surface of the moon, to earth, to mars, etc.

If we're talking about delivery through an atmosphere, then a re-entry container, perhaps even a lifting body, will be required from some things. So an operation has to be set up to build those as required and send them to the mining sites in that case. Unless we just want meteoric delivery, which might actually be practical for some things, particularly high-temperature-tolerant things. Aim them towards a sufficiently deep part of the ocean or man-made body of water built for the purpose, rake them up at set intervals (during which none would be incoming, obviously) and there you have it. Any such containers or lifting bodies should (again, obviously) be built out of something we can re-purpose, as they are also nothing but materials mined for free in space, albeit not exactly raw materials. Heck, you could probably just make hydrogen balloons that come in slowly and let them float down to a reasonable altitude and then puncture themselves when they drift over a designated receiving area -- no massive influx of reentry heat there. Have to be some damn strong balloons to tolerate being inflated in a vacuum, but our materials science is working on that already. Not to mention other mechanisms that may be possible. :) We'd probably end up with too much hydrogen, lol. Still.

Sure, the initial startup will be much harder if they push into it as a manned operation that needs constant support and staffing. But the endgame here, indubitably based entirely on zero-ongoing cost-robotics, is almost unimaginably profitable in terms of both money and materials gleaned from these operations.

Comment Re: Idiocy. (Score 2, Insightful) 394

No, it's good security. Users do not need to have admin privileges so they can install every piece of crapware on a machine which isn't theirs or, if it is, poses a security risk to everyone else on the network.

Locking users down is good IT policy and fortunately, where I work, it is followed. You need something installed, put in a ticket with a justification. You don't need War and Peace, just a blurb on how the software relates to your job.

If you can't do that, you don't need it and most certainly do not need to be able software at will.

"Life begins when you can spend your spare time programming instead of watching television." -- Cal Keegan