Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Pixels? (Score 2) 126

Now that that's out of the way... Even a single pixel can be quite useful if applied correctly. Use it as a toxin/radiation alert in high risk situations. Covert navigation. Just always knowing due north in any condition can permit a skilled navigator to get most any where, and would be unlikely to be picked up by enemy nightvision, unlike a glowing compass. Communications, mores code as mentioned in a post below, useful in covert tactical, even if used for nothing more then a 'holy (whatever)! Abort! Abort! Evac!' signal. Covert display for a concealed radar detector for the states that do not permit radar detectors. A signal to let your pet bunny know that you put food out. Why, the possibilities are near endless. Incorporate eye motion, and you can even have Pong any where you are. Heck, work in augmented reality and you can Pong between buildings as you walk.

Comment Re:Pixels? (Score 3, Informative) 126

First time my butt... 2008, with photo of an even more complex working lens, on a rabbit's eye. From Slashdot, and from 2008 and 2009, respectively. Took a while to sort through all the google echos of this being the first time, to get to the older pages where it had already been done. Though it is comforting to know that even more people are working to help create our soon to be our Human-Rabit hybrid Cybernetic overlords, whom I, for one, will welcome.

Comment Re:SEEMS PAR FOR THE COURSE !! (Score 1) 202

I know. First thing I thought of when I saw the headline was 'Um, it's the sun, they are all freaking huge.' Even setting aside that the sun it self is a constant nuke fireball, just about any event we can notice at the scale of the vid is likely to be larger then the earth. Once the low end of a scale is 'An explosion the size of earth', I really find it hard to worry about the bigger ones. I'm kinda peeked out by the low end of the scale already, Honestly, my O-Shit-O-Meter would have been more then maxed out with most volcanoes erupting in any proximity to me that I could notice it. So something this much larger.. Well, needle on the meter is broke now, not sure what that reads as.

Comment Re:Any laywers here? (Score 1) 983

Well said. It's sad that they don't see this as the reason that risks for police are on the rise. If the police can't be trusted, then more people are willing to attack the police, which makes them more scared and so they do worse things and show they can't be trusted, and round and round it goes. Personally, I think the only things that is likely to put a dent in it, is for a large number of people to go 'always on' video streaming their surroundings. When the police can not stop proof from getting out, then they will behave better. I find it ironic that they sy they need cameras to watch us, and if we have nothing to hide, then we have nothing to fear. And then they act like this about cameras? Clearly they have much to hide, and much to fear, and it's time it's made public.

Comment Re:Catastrophic failure? (Score 1) 39

I'll give you a smiley :). If it helps, I got a chuckle out of it when I first saw it, and was wondering how any one would think it wasn't humor. Then, I got remembering the gen public out there... Even the brilliant folks can be beaten down into missing humor after being exposed to the average folks out there for too long.

Comment Re:To this, I say, so what? (Score 1) 544

Well, IMHO it's not going off the deep end. It recognizing where meet comes from, and doing it your self rather then having some one do it for you. No more going off the deep end then fixing your car your self. Now, /not/ killing the animals and still eating them, at least partly... That would hit the mark for going off the deep end for me... Yup, you don't eat a pig like that all at once...

Comment Re:Why not? Once it's dead, it all looks like meat (Score 1) 544

With apologies to Will Rodgers... I never 'et an animal I didn't like. I quite respect some one killing their own food, rather then being squeamish and needing others to do it for them. Eating meat costs a life, and people should respect the life that ended. Few folks do, and I see that as quite a shame.

Comment Re:Video camera? It's a movie projector. (Score 2) 66

Certainly. All that is needed to understand this is an understanding of the word 'Movie' and where it comes from. A Movie is not a big budget production that you pay to see, it is a series of still images projected in rapid succession to give the appearance of motion. Only quite recently has the terminology started to shift from 'Home Movies' to 'Home Video'. So yes, if you converted the video to super 8, it would in fact qualify as a movie. Though don't be surprised when kids these days aren't aware of the real meaning of the word and are confused by it. And get off my lawn...

Comment Re:Hey buddy! (Score 2) 294

There was a prank going around the Gateway 2000 tech centers that I found quite amusing. Do a screen-shot of the desk top, set it as the background, then move the icons to a folder. I found it really showed the clued from the clueless. Quite a few techs called for some one to fix their system. And no, i wasn't the one doing it, though I was the one to fix it many times.

Comment Re:DNS or IP blocked? (Score 1) 230

Actually, it seems more likely that he feels that it is not reasonable to believe that they are likely guilty, given the long history of less then honest actions. Just as some one with a criminal background is more likely to be suspected of a new crime then some one with out. Not exactly fair or kind, but also not unreasonable. Though it is hoped that discovering that there was no evil after all will remind people to use a bit more care in what they say. It's an honest mistake, but the folks getting nasty about it are looking like asses now that it's discovered that Comcast had no hand in it.

Comment Re:Tor (Score 2) 201

To be honest, I have never really understood that mindset. It only comes into play when you wish to flood the page with all sorts of, glamor. And I mean that word in the sense of distracting effects, sounds and movement. It's only needed for making a big show of it, and IMHO, rather few sites benefit from such things. If your business is selling programs for inserting all kinds of special effects, then your page would likely benefit from using such. But if your site is for disseminating information, then all the bells and whistles rather get in the way. Sites that hide and ap that starts playing audio as soon as you load the page? Come on, your taste in music is not that impressive to the random person stopping in, or loud adds that you can't find to shut them up that interrupt what you are listening to while surfing... It's at best rude. I can only speak for my self, but I closed such pages the instant they started, till I got no-scripts and prevented it that way. I've since found my elf back on some of those sites I remembered dumping before. More then once found that exactly the item I was looking for at a better price then I ended up paying on the site that didn't try to scream in my ear. But if I have to fight the site to get through to what I ant, why should I? If you are more interested in showing off your l33t flash skills then you are in trying to sell your product or service, then I'm likely better off going with a company that feels their product or service information matters more then a flash tag or animation, or vulnerable flash plug in. And before any one takes offense, I am using 'you' in a general term, and not meaning any one personally. Or to sum up my feelings on the subject. I am interested in the contents, not how showy the box looks. And honestly, outside of the catalog or ordering system, how many web sites really need flash or scripts? Many here have typed out full web pages with out tools and fancy plug ins that look every bit as good as the web pages with 30 scripts, 6 java applets and a few flash objects. Don't use a tool simply because you have it, use it only when it's needed and most of those compatibility issues would vanish.

Comment Re:Security is hard (Score 1) 162

Quite so. The fact that they made it so that the security is really only aimed at watching the owner rather then protecting them is where they ended up going way wrong. I'm a fan of letting people break what they own. Protect me from others, but never protect me from my self. Sadly, real security is not popular, so companies fake it by getting in the way of the user, and most users assume it's getting in the way of the hackers even more. Real security requires that people think, and making people think doesn't seem to be a winning strategy in business. At least not as winning as telling them they shouldn't need to think.

Comment Re:Security is hard (Score 2) 162

No kidding. The only perfect security just happens to lock out all legitimate users as well. So long as some one can access the info, then some one else can find a way in as well, the more people that need to be able to access it, the more ways in there will be. It doesn't help that traditionally, security tends to be the lowest item on the list. Need to save money, most companies will skimp on security before they will skimp on janitorial. Guess they want to be sure the place looks nice for any one that breaks in. Same goes for computer systems. The order of importance seems to be, Make it look nice, Make it simple to use, Make it work, and make it secure. Sadly, it pays off to work it that way. If it looks good, people assume any problem with it is their own fault and not the program. Make it simple and most people don't realize just how few options they have and just how little they can really do with it. Make it work, well, folks expect problems and blame them selves, so we can fix the bugs later. Make it secure, but don't do anything that prevents to legitimate users from doing what they should... Good luck on that. Best example of how people react to a company making an attempt at doing the right thing and getting hammered for it is, and I /really/ hat to say this, but... Microsoft and their access controls in Vista/win7. They started to do it right and put in real security, and people went ballistic. Problem is, people didn't get pissed that it only locked the user out and let hackers through, they got pissed that it asked them before just doing things. Now, I'm not saying it couldn't be done better, it could have. But look at what people complained about, 'it's in the way', not 'it's insecure'. Right there shows why things will never be secure. People want convenience, not security, and people are the ones that pay for the work.

Slashdot Top Deals

To communicate is the beginning of understanding. -- AT&T