Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
What's the story with these ads on Slashdot? Check out our new blog post to find out. ×

Comment Duplo or not: Drones! (Score 1) 214

Forget the stupid AVs. They need streets, follow traffic rules, can relatively easy be searched, might even get stuck in a traffic jam at prime time.
A drone with GPS guidance and environment awareness can fly sufficiently close to buildings, too close for flight radar, does not need any street, cannot be searched, only taken down. If equipped with poison or explosives, the drone might not hit the target, and yet will be anything but pleasant.
The only downside is the payload. You can't load her up to kilotons TNT, though, on the other hand, the potential precision is much better, and the payload can be deposited - in average - much closer to the target.

Comment Re:Boycott, Divest, and Sanction (Score 1) 121

I'm sorry for you, but you did a thorough research without finding the relevant semantics. Otherwise you could not have titled me as 'UMNO propagandist', because what i wrote is exactly the opposite of what UMNO is trying to instill into the population. Namely, that the Malays are the indigenous population. If I had much more time on my hands, I'd find out some academic articles, including by prominent Malaysians, that this is exactly not the case (Malays being there for thousands of years).
Alas, you are also mistaken w.r.t. the immigrants. The first Chinese settlements have been there around 1500 AD, when Malacca was about the centre of trade in South-East-Asia.

Remains your kind suggestion of me being an idiot, because - and I cite - 'this is an American site'. Wow. Your logic is quite remarkable. Because the United States has been around for only 250 years, I am supposed to be an idiot for arguing in longer periods of time?
Or maybe you simply misunderstood the whole matter, since I never questioned anything close to your example of the Romanians. The only thing that I questioned, and I am in the good company of science, is that the Malays were the natives of the Malaysian Peninsula. And i am in that same company, when I state that about 90 % of the Malays have landed in that region as a result of migratory activities, whenever those might have happened.

Comment Re:Another political dynasty (Score 1) 121

Even though you are AC, I correct you:
Your assumption is possible, but in reality it is a bunch of oligarchs that hide behind Islam in order to con the simple people, who are, as we have learned in other posts, forced to be Muslims. This is - by the way - expressed in the law of the land.

Comment Re:Boycott, Divest, and Sanction (Score 2) 121

You are objectively incorrect. I don't have to pull out the resources, everyone can do on her own. There are camps where people who desire to leave the Islamic religion are interned for weeks, and months. They are called 're-education camps' where some Imam tries to convince them of the beauty of the religion.
True, it is not life imprisonment, but against basic western understanding.

Comment Re:Boycott, Divest, and Sanction (Score 1) 121

Alas, wrong. But you couldn't necessarily know.
The Malays have not been lving there for thousands of years, 90 % are migrants from other places as well, from the overcrowded Malayan Archipelago, driving out the native population ('Orang Asli'), who are in these days more often that not forcibly converted to Islam.

Yes, you fell for the usual official propaganda, which is shown by your second last sentence. That's the official formulation. Don't forget that in 1969 close to 2000 people were slaughtered in a large inter-ethnic unrest. The previous dean of the Institute 'ATMA' (Malay and Islamic Civilisation) at the National University of Malaysia formulated it more correctly: "Malaysia is a country in stable tension".

Comment Re:Small correction (Score 5, Informative) 121

Insightful? Hmm.
Do you really know the situation in Malaysia, or are you arguing out of some emotional arousal?
The Malaysian constitution prescribes favorable allotment of jobs and university places to the members of the ruling, majority, ethnicity, the Malays. And this is not just in writing but implemented. Malaysian citizens of Chinese or Indian ethic background see it happen that a student with straight 'A's is denied a university education in the public universities while a mediocre Malay student is gladly admitted. Wow! There is even a university with 140000 students exclusively for students of Malay ethnicity. Check UiTM in WikIpedia if in doubt. Malays get monthly allowances for their kids, the others ethic groups don't.
All chancellors of all universities are Malays, almost all deans (with very few exceptions) are Malays due to the constitutional 'preferences'.

I think I can stop here, and I am arguing based on 12 years as university lecturer in said country.

Now the ball is in your court: I don't have much of insight into Israel, maybe you can enlighten me on the situation in Israel, please? Maybe I can learn something from that.

Comment Re:Wikipedia... (Score 1) 119

Why AC?
I have created some pages, and found them deleted likewise. No, not about family members or stuff, but as a starting point to collectively collect sparse information about some almost forgotten actors in not almost forgotten movies. Actors that have impressed me one way or another, despite minor roles. Why is it so wrong to start a wiki page on person XYZ who pops up in the credits of a movie as cinematographer or actor, and put in a few lines, as many as I can do, a link to the IMDB entry of the movie, and over. Maybe in a year, or a decade, or a generation, some family member or another fan finds that entry and can make it grow.
With deletion, we have this unique opportunity of information collection removed.

Comment Re:Only one issue? (Score 1) 119

No, the country can't be 'fixed' by changing one law. And Lessig doesn't say so.

But no amounts of laws can 'fix' a country that is governed by people who could only make it into government by buy-ing into politics of powerful sponsors. Sponsors who expect the elected ones to push for the policies of the 'generous' sponsors.
So make it two steps: First remove the decision of the sponsors on who can become a candidate. Second, get candidates that are determined by the (voter) population alone.

Comment Re:I'm sorry, what is his message again? (Score 1) 119

Someone asked 'why modded down'?. Whoever that AC was, let me point out that I agree with that mod by answering your question:
Firstly, all sources have to be laid open. Affiliations included.
Secondly, your post is not quite on topic, because Lessig has never said anything close to 'censoring'. Watch his talk at TED. He wants the result of elections to be a result of the votes alone, like written by the founding fathers. When the idea is, any candidate, irrespective of funding by 132 (watch said talk) individuals can make it, this is no censorship. On the contrary, if 132 (or 144k, watch the talk) decide on the candidate to run, that would be censorship, since the US has rather 144M voters.

I doubt that you consider funding by some party expecting 'returns' after the elections as 'democratic'. Therefore, some system must be put in place to limit, yes, limit, funding in a way that only altruistic campaign donations are possible. If you consider a reduction of corruption as 'censoring', that's your perspective.

Comment Re:EVER HEARD OF A (Score 1) 131

Would be nice, but isn't.
Peer-review is a crazy thing, I agree. Too often my own contributions were not understood, or deliberately brought down for offending the reviewers' personal opinions. Too often my own reviews were lousy, or I didn't understand the papers, or brought them down for not agreeing with my opinion.

And yet, the process as such has often resulted in my re-thinking my own papers, improving them, and often my reviews have resulted in papers of others being improved.
Try this in blog format, and 90%+ of a******s don't have a basic idea what the whole thing is about, and those who'd know don't come to view it. No, academic progress is not possible in selfie format, but in collaborative ways, with ever changing contributors.

Comment Re:With those figures ? (Score 2) 131

[why AC?]
If I had mod points, I'd mod you up, even as AC.
That's exactly the situation! You can as well see the standing of public U-s in the USA vs the private ones. 2 generations ago the public U-s were often great places of academic activities, and with a high standing (leave out Harvard and a few more). Recently, the funding for the public U-s has gone down, and businesses have bought in. As of 2015 ever more public U-s are on the decline while private ones rise. Naturally. Naturally? Naturally; in case one agrees with academia and tertiary education as just another business area.

Personally, I'm much too old to buy into this crap, though when I talk to younger colleagues, for them all this sickness seems just plain normal. The worst part, at least to me, is the consequence over the long run: when almost all third party funding is done from business-minded people with 'industrial applicability' within less than 3 years, we obtain some serious refinement of existing technologies in the best Confucian sense. But why did China drop off the scientific map centuries ago? Because their inventions, from porcelain to dynamite saw but small refinements, but no larger work, no application beyond a narrow field. In short, effective stagnation. So the Europeans could harvest everything and re-invent it.
Back to the topic in question: Who in our days is given the liberty and the funding to think the thoughts (often enough out of the box or ready applicability) that can lay a foundation over one or two generations into the future?

Comment Re:The wet blanket says .. last hint ;-) (Score 1) 254

How long did it take to rotate an image in Writer without copying to Draw, rotate it there, and copy it back!?
It was filed March 17th, 2002 (!!) against StarOffice. It was filed, again, February 17th, 2011, against
It was - drumrollllls - solved on July 2015.
This points to a serious bug in governance.

The value of a program is proportional to the weight of its output.