Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:wayland (Score 3, Interesting) 259

I'm... sorry?

You think SysV init scripts are in any way, shape or form moderately acceptable?!

I have a very simple refutation to that -- the collection of run scripts behind this link.

Go ahead -- have a look. Keep in mind that systems using those mostly one-line scripts all provide not just startup/shutdown/status, but also the ability to auto-restart on failure and lack the propensity for race conditions that pidfile-based locking almost universally used by SysV scripts is so very, very prone to.

Holding up SysV init scripts as a thing that doesn't have to be changed... it beggars belief.

Comment Re: Well now (Score 1) 775

So hey, I'm shoving this camera in your face so ten years from now you can be turned down for a job because you might do today that can be taken out of context. But why all the hate?

Dunno. Personally, I'm all for personal responsibility -- if I do something in public today that'd get me turned down for a job in ten years, that's 100% my own damned fault.

Ubiquitous cameras help keep honest people honest, and help get people who aren't honest caught. If some asshat runs me off the road on my (very, very well-lit) bicycle, I damned well want there to be a record showing (1) their license plate, and (2) me being my usual, exceedingly law-abiding, conscientious self. If someone breaks into my condo? Record. If someone picks a fight, and I need to show that self-defense was justified? Record. If someone was merely an asshat? Well, that's fair game too.

Keep in mind, too, that if everyone is getting the same kind of record built up about them, then small infractions aren't such a big thing. If everyone is a drunk asshat at a party every so often, or does a bit of political baiting, then evidence of that happening doesn't really matter -- as long as it's equal-opportunity public record, then employers &c. will be forced to compromise on hiring people whose indiscretions aren't so bad.

So -- if shoving a camera in your face is something you hate, maybe you should think long and hard about the way you behave in public.

Comment Re:Well now (Score 1) 775

You are recording on private property and people can have an expectation of privacy.

It's more complex than that. Have a "privacy fence", where it takes some effort to see through? Yup, expectation of privacy. Have a chain-link fence which can be seen through from public land? Not in any state I've lived in, no.

Comment Re:Well now (Score 2, Interesting) 775

He chooses what to post on to the internet. If somebody wearing Glass walks up to you, your property, or your workplace, you have no choice in the matter as to which of your activities gets uploaded to Google.

So what? If you're in a public place, you had no expectation of privacy to start with... and a world where you did, where people are prevented from photography in public by virtue of needing to get permissions from every single person near them, is no world I'd want to live in at all.

This is probably just a matter of valuing things differently; I value a person's right to record things which happen around them in public more than I wish to grant a new right not to be recorded in public places (thereby allowing any single member of the multitude present in a crowd to restrict the entirety of the masses nearby).

Comment Re:Guns are, what ensures peace (Score 2) 273

While it's true that most if not all of the gun control laws between the Civil War and World War I were part of the 'Jim Crow' system of creating separate systems of "justice" delineated on race, it is, as the AC who responded to you notes, false to say the NRA was a 'civil rights organization' and indeed it had little political function until after the NFA. You overreach into fiction degrades the value of your facts.

Comment Re:Skeptical fungus is skeptical... (Score 1) 162

DeviantArt already allows pretty much everything except actual intercourse and erect penises (because a limp dick = art but hard dick = evil ... vaginas are fine no matter what *rolls eyes* yay arbitrary moralist bullshit).

There are already communities for disseminating all-the-way smut art, such as Hentai Foundry.

Comment Re:Let's hold on a sec. I see what's she's doing. (Score 5, Informative) 162

If you want to know what tumblr is really about these days, think of a sexual fetish, then put it into Google with 'tumblr' tacked on, and you'll get whatever you want stream dumped from tons of different sources. When it comes to jacking (pun huhuhu) still images from porn producers, the fetish catagorizing fans on tumblr are second to none. Granted sometimes the "blogs" (haha yeah right) get shut down for infringement, but there's always another dozen that spring up to fill the void.

Comment Re:Citations? They need to be sued heavily (Score 1) 507

Seatbelts: "Consumers find them too restrictive!"

So, an aside here: There's absolutely no question that seat belts make drivers and their passengers safer -- none whatsoever.

Pedestrians, on the other hand, have a considerably higher death and injury rate in areas where seat belts are in use -- seat belts reduce risk for drivers, drivers behave more recklessly (because they can), and other road users who aren't protected by those seatbelts die.

I'm also reminded somewhat of guard rails on some of our major freeways (Austin area) being replaced with a trio of metal lines intended to redirect vehicles back onto the road rather than letting them cross the median into the other direction's traffic. It's not an entirely bad idea -- unless you're on a motorcycle, in which contact with those things at speed almost always means dismemberment.

Anyhow -- there's more than one kind of road user, and decisions made intended to protect one class can have unintended effects on the rest. A groundswell of support for something that makes drivers safer might well increase the risk of death for folks who are already in a marginalized class.

Comment Re:Tanks work the same way (Score 1) 551

All the M1s I've seen and worked with had single-axis sight head mirrors. It adjusted for elevation, but lead compensation moves the sight picture around. If the target - or the tank - changes direction suddenly, the Abrams gunner has to "dump lead" (reset the system), retrack, and re-lase.

Whereas the Leo gunner just keeps tracking with the same sight picture and waits an extra heartbeat for the gun to realign.

Maybe the very latest Abrams finally has a 2-axis mirror and has made it into the 1980s.

Comment Re:Tanks work the same way (Score 1) 551

Lack of an autoloader isn't really a knock on a tank. Autoloaders tend to be finnicky, and struggle to keep up with the reload speed of a well-motivated 19 year old.

But on top of that, it is really very useful to have that 4th crewman. Tanks need a lot of work to keep operational and the crew commander is frequently off getting orders - having that extra body is a real force enabler.

Comment Tanks work the same way (Score 5, Interesting) 551

The FCS on a tank works mostly the same way.

The sight is mounted on a mirror that can pivot in two axis on good tanks, an one axis on an Abrams. The ballistic computer knows what ammunition is in the breach (a user input - by the loader on good tanks, by the gunner on an Abrams) and so knows the ballistic profile of the round being fired. A slew of other sensors measure crosswinds, barrel droop, and the like. The laser rangefinder provides range, and an angle encoder in the turret slip ring provides rate of turret rotation, which provides a measure of target relative motion.

Gunner tracks target and then lases to get range. The FCS then jumps the gun barrel in both elevation and rotation while the sight mirror jumps back in the other direction(s) to keep the sight picture unchanged. The gunner fires, and the round impacts where the ballistic solution says it should.

From the gunner's perspective, you lay on target, track for a second, then fire the laser and fire the gun in close succession ("lase and blaze") and the round "magically" flies out and hits the target - no matter if you are moving, the target is moving, or both. You can be driving along at 60 km/h and hit a target moving 60 km/h 2500m away on the first shot.


Comment Re:And this... (Score 1) 35

What in the world does any have to do with "the cloud"? The scenario is entirely relevant when you're putting servers you own in DC space that you lease.

If anything, using cloud services negates this impact on pricing somewhat, since the service themselves is such a large customer of their DC that they have considerably more negotiating leverage (and, commodity OpenStack instances being reasonably fungible, it can be considerably easier to switch cloud providers than to move physical hardware between datacenters... unless you did something silly like lock yourself in to a single cloud provider's extensions or API).

Slashdot Top Deals

My mother is a fish. - William Faulkner