Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


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:New boss - same as the old boss (Score 3, Interesting) 66

Not a troll. They are ALREADY trying to figure out how to stifle free speech. Net Neutrality the concept is great. Net Neutrality as defined by Politicians and the current laws is so screwed up as to be dangerous.

And with the President's penchant for "executive orders", just imagine how the next one will screw it up even more.

Comment: Re:it could have been an accident (Score 1) 559

by Dunbal (#49344617) Attached to: Germanwings Plane Crash Was No Accident

Or if that is not possible then there has to be a mechanism for the pilot outside the cockpit to enter irrespective of what the other pilot does.

Agreed. The problem is how do you prevent someone unauthorized from getting hold of this "foolproof" entry method into the cockpit by any number of means, including the low tech solution...

Comment: Re:it could have been an accident (Score 5, Insightful) 559

by Dunbal (#49344573) Attached to: Germanwings Plane Crash Was No Accident

No. You are trying to explain a mechanical failure of a door right at the moment when the aircraft suddenly starts descending into mountains all the while during which the copilot also does nothing to try to correct this unscheduled descent and also ignores air traffic control. Seriously if it has wings and floats on the water and looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it probably is a duck. Your version requires many, many things to go wrong at once. The simple answer is, of course, only one thing went wrong - the co-pilot locked the door and set the plane to descend. Occam's razor, and all that.

Adding fuel to this theory is that the co-pilot was detatched and monosyllabic when receiving the briefing about landing in Dusseldorf - he had already made up his mind that he wasn't going to reach Dusseldorf. If the pilot wasn't going to go to the bathroom he probably was planning on killing the pilot anyway.

Comment: Re:Yeah! (Score 1) 164

by Dunbal (#49344429) Attached to: Japan To Build 250-Mile-Long, Four Storey-High Wall To Stop Tsunamis
You're thinking of a wave not a tsunami. Think about rapids in a river, and the standing waves you get over those rocks that are much higher than the surrounding water. A tsunami has a waveLENGTH of several km at least. That is a LOT of volume of water that is going to move up and over the wall.

Comment: Re:Will that be enough? (Score 1) 164

by Dunbal (#49343445) Attached to: Japan To Build 250-Mile-Long, Four Storey-High Wall To Stop Tsunamis
No and no. This is a "feel good" project so that politicians can convince people they are doing something effective while not actually addressing the problem at all. In the meantime I'm sure that the politician's cousin/uncle/brother-in-law who surprisingly "won" the bid for construction is very happy. Politics as usual.

Comment: Re:Same can happen at a cloud provider... (Score 1) 246

by Zordak (#49341535) Attached to: RadioShack Puts Customer Data Up For Sale In Bankruptcy Auction
It's not quite that simple. When B purchases the data, the contract between you and A doesn't just disappear. B purchases the data subject to the contract. Since there is no provision in the contract that it's not transferable (at least not on RS's end), that's a normal and acceptable thing to do with a contract. That's not a guarantee that they won't do the most nefarious thing with it that they can get away with, but simply putting up a torrent of it probably won't fly. In fact, that's exactly what the NY AG is talking about here. RS received the data under an agreement. They can't breach that agreement just because they're going bankrupt.

Comment: Re:World War III (Score 1) 54

Depends on how broad the question is: given that not every potentially violent extremist will react in the same way, the answer to 'are potentially violent extremists better defused by coddling or by needling?' is likely to be something statistical, rather than "yes" or "no"; but that would be the right answer.

I don't mean to pretend that the right answer will necessarily fit neatly on a bumper sticker(indeed, it'd be quite a shock if it did); but a potentially complex answer is by no means the same as some sort of intersubjective mush of multiple valid viewpoints.

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