Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
Polls on the front page of Slashdot? Is the world coming to an end?! Nope; read more about it. ×

Comment: Re:Not a solution! (Score 1) 40

by s.petry (#49835259) Attached to: Virginia Wants Your Self-Driving Cars

The "study" is you point at is not a study. It's an article which points to a simulation ran with perfect conditions for a self driving car demonstrating how they perform in _perfect_ conditions (key on that last part, it's like statistics but more blatantly fabricated).

The main point of that article is safety, which I agree with. Come to the SF Bay area and follow one of the Google cars around. Interesting that they don't do any better going from San Jose to San Francisco as anyone else, and in many cases do worse. The self driving cars would help if the issue was drivers being boneheads and having accidents. Reality is quite different, which is that having nearly 9 million people in a very small area all sharing the same 3 Freeways will have massive traffic jams. 10% autonomous cars won't get you off an exit ramp with thousands of cars waiting to exit any faster. That is what causes long backups on Freeways most of the time.

Turning cars into mass transit.. that would help congestion.

Comment: Re:Not a solution! (Score 1) 40

by s.petry (#49835191) Attached to: Virginia Wants Your Self-Driving Cars

What you point out is not losing congestion because of self driving cars, it's losing congestion because of turning cars into mass transit.

Utopia looks really cool from outside, but when you find out that the person who is sharing your enclosed self driving car has a poor diet and flatulence problem.. well.. you will start to realize that your Utopia really is not.

"you" in the 2nd part is a generalization, don't take that personally.

Comment: You have it backwards! (Score 1) 393

by s.petry (#49833571) Attached to: Why Is It a Crime For Dennis Hastert To Evade Government Scrutiny?

The person being prosecuted for breaking the law passed the laws he broke. That is justice, not tyranny. Unjust would be the person not being charged for breaking the laws. The point of him helping to pass those laws is only relevant because someone wants to claim good vs. bad law as part of the context of him breaking the laws (which is a completely different issue).

Comment: TFA calls it right - Snake Oil (Score 1) 137

I read the paper from Lockheed Martin, and it's laughable. The Electrical savings they claim makes the assumption that a server is always running malware which is churning up processing time. They don't stop Malware, and don't stop anything in memory.. so they save absolutely nothing and do absolutely nothing.. except of course make bad claims. Even if they could block the writes, which consumes more power.. a process attempting to write repeatedly and being refused, or a process allowed to write when requesting. They can't save money, by their own pathetic assumptions..

The company doing the testing.. well they are called "NCITE". Interestingly this can be to incite, or insight. My guess is the former. Maybe the latter if they are thinking like PT Barnum.

Comment: Re:Hate it! (Score 5, Insightful) 118

by s.petry (#49823029) Attached to: Enter the Polls! Now On the Front Page

While I don't hate it with the same zeal as Mr. or Mrs. Maniac.. I agree that this is a bad change. Polls sat fixed on the right so that people could vote for days.. where as mixed into stories they will vanish within hours.

Polls are not "News Flashes", they are Polls. Polls require larger numbers to be accurate, so longer durations of time visible on the front page.

Comment: I'd take this further (Score 1, Interesting) 144

The real outcome should be that people realize that words are just words, and opinions are only opinions. The amount of criminal acts on Facebook can probably be counted on a few fingers. Even the kid posting that he hated and wanted to kill Obama is just a kid with an opinion. People say dumb things in anger, it's how people react to that anger which shapes a person.

The "illegal" stuff on the internet is already illegal. You can't buy and/or sell drugs, you can't hire a hitman, you can't sell secret information for money, you can't traffic illegal goods including humans, etc.. etc.. All of those things are illegal, and none of them require the Internet to accomplish.

That someone dislikes an opinion.. not illegal. Even if they call you names and yell at you for having a different opinion, it is not illegal.

Comment: Uhh, no! (Score 1) 144

Stop believing what people tell you about boogeymen being around every corner, it's simply not true! I don't care what you post on Facebook, words are not dangerous. Never have been, never will be, but seems very difficult for simple people. Simple people that seem to fear words so much at any rate (I'm looking specifically at Universities and Politicians who specialize in fear mongering with fabricated and false information mostly).

Block the poster, problem solved. If they really stalk you, call the police. A person stalking you is probably illegal, and the person should be prosecuted if they break the law.

If a person calls me a name, I first wonder if I deserved the ad hominem. If not, I have actions I can take to not see their words. Simply put, I have not logged in to Facebook for at least 3 years. Cancel your account.

Sure, there are exceptions to the rule.. but they are so rare it's not worth asking about.

Comment: That is not the real problem (Score 2, Insightful) 82

by s.petry (#49815619) Attached to: Malware Attribution: Should We Identify the Crooks Who Deploy It?

Most malware is hosted and served out by businesses most people consider "legit". This is second only to Governments who infect millions of devices often inadvertently.

In both of those cases, there is no use in reporting. Oh yeah, some schlep will probably be made to be a fall guy but the shit storm will still be there churning out shit.

Report when the correct people can be, and are, held accountable for their actions. Until then, all men are created equally and have the same rights under due process. If one class of people puts themselves above the law, the laws are invalid. Unfortunately this is a cyclical problem in history. Expect vigilantism to increase until things are put back into balance.

Comment: Re:I'm sure /. will ridicule it, but... (Score 1) 306

Computers are pretty integral to modern learning.

Straw man, and one that has been repeatedly debunked. Just remember, advertisers and marketing people said the same exact things about Radio and TV as you are repeating about Computers. Llets go with a simple common sense question which you should have asked yourself: If computers are so "integral" why do the countries with the least computers have the strongest math and science skills? (see China, India)

Then take note of what you say next about _using_ a computer. Using and Programming are not the same thing, and are quite often contradictory.

BTW, you call chemistry "basic"? Why is chemistry of any practical use to anyone but anyone but a chemist?

Basic level chemistry is like basic level physics, and yes it's basic. A perfect introduction to how the world fits together, and like Physics it displays the need for math. I'm not sure why you asked the question deriding chemistry alone when you could have also asked "You call creative writing basic?" or "You call Algebra "basic"? Yes, those are all basic. Amazingly, none of those require a computer.

You are so caught up in your own ego that you seem to actually believe the BS you write.

Comment: Re:Java is done (Score 1) 223

The only way to come to your conclusion is to ignore facts. You can go read the original decision and evidence which accompanied the decision. No, you don't need to be an attorney to figure this out.

But wasn't the whole thing about some private APIs that Google (or whatever was that company it hired) made use and actually copied verbatim?

No, again you can go read the decision and evidence (which includes the charges from Oracle against Google). It was one of the most open Civil cases I have ever seen.

Oracle DBs and Apps make substantial use of Java. Had Sun been allowed to falter, or worse yet be bough by a (then) competitor like IBM, it would have been disastrous for Oracle.

At best a straw man, at worst complete horse shit. IBM does not run around suing people over bullshit like this, and _IF_ they had bought Sun they _Might_ have done something fools nobody but you. Fighting pretty hard to hold that delusion that Oracle is right aren't ya? Well, you did say you worked there so...

An opinion which completely ignores facts is worth very little. An opinion that counters facts and relies on events that never happened... absolutely useless.

Comment: Re:Java is done (Score 2) 223

That's retarded. Oracle had (and maintains) a sizeable investment in Java and the rack servers for which Oracle is optimized for.

The acquisition was about securing the investment. Not any devious scheme.

Disclaimer: I work for Oracle but am not in any way associated with the Java group nor am I part of the executive/decision-making chain.

Your point of something being retarded is aimed in the wrong direction. "Securing" would mean that they originally owned it, but they didn't. They purchased Sun and immediately started legal actions which Sun was never going to pursue because they knew they had open sourced Java. In fact in the Google vs. Oracle case numerous messages from Sun came out expressing exactly that, which is why the first Judge ruled for Google. The Judge also understood the sheer idiocy of Oracle claiming patent and copyright on things like function names and how arguments get passed to them, and all the other crap that Oracle claimed was stolen by Google.

I still have no idea how the first decision was overturned.. oh wait.. money and Larry's personal lobby group.. nevermind.

Things are not as simple as they seems at first. - Edward Thorp