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:Antarctica (Score 1) 137

by saloomy (#49475087) Attached to: Road To Mars: Solving the Isolation Problem
Hence the quote in TFS: Future space expeditions will resemble sea voyages much more than test flights.

I think the issue not as big a problem as the article suggests. The sort of people who will be on the first journeys to other worlds will like have to fight hard to be accepted to go, and endure a hell of a lot of training. Psychological testing and training will no doubt be included along with other preparations for such a mission. That doesn't factor in such as-of-yet-undeveloped advancements like prolonged sleep (hibernation, near-constant earth communication, etc..). Plus, think of how we are communicating in modern times, we text and chat more than face to face communication, and certainly those forms could be accommodated during the voyage, more so than sailors did back in the day.

Comment: Re:WHAT?!?!?!? (Score 0) 49

by saloomy (#48777527) Attached to: Glitch In OS X Search Can Expose Private Details of Apple Mail Users
Mail can be set to disable remote images, but Spotlight should follow the mail settings. The real issue I think, is that Spotlight results also include email from junk mail folders, which is mostly useless (unless searching for email incorrectly tagged as SPAM). This should be disabled, and a user should have to knowingly venture into their SPAM folder to find such messages. Loading remote images from the junk folder is just crazy, beyond even the stupidity of indexing and searching in junk folders. Apple is falling further and further away from Sir Issac's tree it seems.

Is this the post-Jobs era of Apple we should come to expect? I have been using Macs and iPhones since around 2001, and they have been relatively stable, fast, and seemingly more secure than Windows. But lately, it seems they are just riddled with annoyances and bugs I fear will worsen as time goes by.

Note to Tim: Don't accept mediocre standards, or you will loose what has made you great. Put the features on hold! Fix Fix FIX.... Your users will be happier, and thank you.

Comment: No we shouldnt (Score -1, Redundant) 287

by saloomy (#48744055) Attached to: Should We Be Content With Our Paltry Space Program?
But that doesn't mean that the government should be paying for it, because not all of us agree we should be paying for it. Using Tax to pay for something should only happen for things we can only collectively purchase, like National Defense. We should be able to pay for it ourselves, and reap the rewards individually

Comment: Re:Oligopolies usually suck (Score 3, Insightful) 88

by saloomy (#48664703) Attached to: Comcast-TWC Merger Review On Hold

Somebody please provide ONE case of a merger making a bad company better.

Apple bought Next. The next decade and a half was pretty awesome for the computer industry, and no one can deny Apple's (Next's) role in that.

And in general, these mergers should be allowed. I also think Comcast / TWC should not have to release any territory as a stipulation for approval.

What should be stipulated is the removal of any "anti-competitive" agreements these companies have with various municipalities restricting competition in the local broadband market. If you want great service, make the providers compete for your business, and empower consumers with choice!

Comment: Re:Move to a gated community (Score 4, Insightful) 611

by saloomy (#48603869) Attached to: Waze Causing Anger Among LA Residents

Kinda depends on what/who was there first

No it doesn't. The freeway and the side-streets are public spaces, and no one living on a public street has a right to demand that anyone else not use it as they like, so long as they follow the laws of the road. If you want a private street with no traffic, live in a private neighborhood (gated community), where the builders do spread the community cost among the homeowners. The roads were paid for by taxes collected from everyone. Your taxes don't pay for the roads directly in front of your house, and therefore you have (and rightly so) no right to dictates who can use it. Most of the road-work money comes from gasoline taxes, so its fair game.

Comment: Re: Go California! (Score -1) 139

by saloomy (#48571247) Attached to: California Sues Uber Over Practices
Consumers are pretty good at protecting themselves. When bad things happen because of a service, public perception, courts, and consumer propensity to spend on the best value proposition will protect the consumer. There is no free market failure here, why do we need government to come in and regulate this? If party A and party B agree to a service, government only need to step in when a third party not subject to the transaction is harmed by the transaction. A lack of business due to competition is not a harm, it's the consumer exercising their liberty. Government sanctioned taxi services has lead to the artificially high prices for taxis, and kept demand low. There's a government failure here, let the free market fix it. Adam Mith's invisible hand works wonders, it will fix this too.

Comment: Re:American wastefulness at its finest (Score 1, Insightful) 143

by saloomy (#48541053) Attached to: Using Discarded Laptop Batteries To Power Lights
As soon as you get off the internet, turn off your air conditioner, hang up your telephone, and adjust your diet to compensate for the lack of food on your table, all provided by the ingenuity of America, you ungrateful POS. Wherever you are from, it doesn't matter, it hasn't been as productive, efficient, or as innovative as here in America

Comment: Re:Consent of the Governed (Score 4, Informative) 165

by saloomy (#48442743) Attached to: Judge Unseals 500+ Stingray Records
...certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it ... End of story. There can be no action taken by a government on behalf of its people argued to be for its people, yet conceal that action from its people in the name of its people. It's oxymoronic.

need to keep some things secret

Need to keep things secret? Who decides what is needed to be kept secret? Patriots? Those who stand with liberty and freedom certainly don't.

Comment: Re:Police legal authority (Score 1) 165

by saloomy (#48442685) Attached to: Judge Unseals 500+ Stingray Records
I know, the stingray is essentially a hacking tool. That makes you think though, why on earth is there a large wireless network carrying sensitive data without TLS (transport layer security), or encryption between the modem on the phone, and the carrier? Either the contents are not sensitive, or the carriers / cell phone manufactures are complicit or worse.. incompetent.

Comment: Re:Police legal authority (Score 1) 165

by saloomy (#48442589) Attached to: Judge Unseals 500+ Stingray Records
If the police do not have a warrant, then you can refuse to give the police information. Like an individual can plead the 5th, and remain silent, short of a court order, so can a corporation. Verizon / AT&T do not have to hand over anything without a warrant or law saying they have to. But the question is, how much money do they get for cooperating? How much does the government spend on telecom services, and how much grant money is spent on the telecom industry? They are incentivized to cooperate.

Comment: Re:Abrupt, but like 100 years abrupt? (Score 1) 132

by saloomy (#48275561) Attached to: New Study Shows Three Abrupt Pulses of CO2 During Last Deglaciation

CaptainDork isn't implying anything. S/he says it's okay to attack the character of an individual who is skeptical of the facts, not beliefs.

Right but his sentence could be read another way (or so it did when I first read it).

Can he do that by practicing illegal discrimination? If you bothered to read the Slate article linked by CaptainDork, you'd see that Ken Ham is engaging in just that.

It is illegal, so he can't. But then, I wasn't commenting on how he builds his park, or who he hires to build it. Only whatever he wants. (so long as it passes building codes, but then again, I was really stating my principles not what is legally possible.

That's the point. Again, read the Slate article linked by CaptainDork. And if you're too lazy to do that, then here you go:

Thanks for that. But no, I did read the article. I just don't agree with Ken Ham spending public funds to build something based on his beliefs, and not our collective scientific knowledge. I don't think the government has any place paying for the support of ANYONE's beliefs, including Ken Hams. I know the article was stating that Kentucky did so, and I'm glad I am not from Kentucky. Again, I was really stating what I think is right:

I just don't want him influencing public policy or spending public funds on projects that are not based on science.

If it's not in the computer, it doesn't exist.