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


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:In their defence. (Score 1) 417

And I'm telling you that such rules exist essentially always (I never heard about an org that didn't have them) it's just that often users are utterly ignorant of their existence until they break them and get punished for it.
Our network had very light rule set because we genuinely didn't care what you did with it as long as you didn't harm the network itself or actively look for unsecure machines until a certain moment when IP rights movement decided we needed to police that for some messed up reason. At which point we had to kick a few hundred people off the net for being power users on the local DC hub. Which was the dumbest decision ever, taken against best judgement of all network admins by higher ups, took out at least one of the network admins with it (he was a power user on the hub apparently) and resulted in massively increased evening load when everyone suddenly started to get their warez and porn from outside the network instead of inside.

The network that was never congested suddenly got super congested every evening. Thanks to dumbasses high up. Guess who users thought was to blame? Yeah, network administration. The people who made the rules got away with it clean.

I was a network admin for university campus while studying there for several years. I know what I'm talking about. Not sure if you do.

Comment Re:In their defence. (Score 1) 417

Because you're breaking the rules and it's admin's job to ensure that people don't break the rules, or the network itself. It appears that you have the problem with the rules and with basic logic - you think that admins make the rules.

They don't. They merely enforce them. If you don't like the rules "sticking it to the admin" is the worst choice by far. You will get slammed by the pissed off admin who has seen a dosen of people like you and really doesn't want to deal with the bothersome smartass, and then you'll get slammed by the people who actually made the rules for actively attempting to circumvent the rules.

The right approach would be to actually press the people on the top to change the rules and not become the enemy of the system.

Comment Re:In their defence. (Score 5, Insightful) 417

And uni network admin who sits in all the same chat rooms, had the hole plugged within hours of it becoming public. What you think admins are ephermal "great evil"? Most of them are young people who are in the circles.

Some dude flying solo? Sure, will get through. Trying to get everyone to do it so you get lost in the masses? Hole plugged in hours.

Comment Re:How did this go to trial? (Score 5, Informative) 236

From the TFA:
The judge has dismissed a proposed $10,000 fine against businessman Raphael Pirker, who used a remotely operated 56-inch foam glider to take aerial video for an advertisement for the University of Virginia Medical Center".

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to put two and two together. Videos shot from air need a platform to shoot them from.

Comment Re:IF THERE WERE SUCH A PAY DISPARITY... (Score 1) 427

Let's not go into hyperboles. Women that make "almost six figures" will usually work from home when on their maternity leave. They won't be risking not having their high paid job a couple of months after coming back because they didn't stay "in the loop".

The problem is far more prevalent in low-paid jobs like nursing, education and so on.

Comment Re:Just proves the anticensorship case. (Score 1) 205

Nothing new there actually. A lot of the most rabid anti gay campaigners come out of the closet as gay later in their lives.

It seems that wWhen people feel a strong desire for something and are forced to suppress it because they see it as necessary to live a life they think/are conditioned to think they want to live, they tend to lash out against those who live the kind of life they actually desire to live deep down.

Comment Re:IF THERE WERE SUCH A PAY DISPARITY... (Score 1) 427

There is one claim to support this: because men are not overpriced but worth the extra money.

Several things happen at least here in Finland where when woman has a baby, she is entitled to a long paid vacation to take care of her baby and employer is required to keep her work spot for her. If you're a big company, you just amortise the costs with temporary workers. It hits your bottom line but it's not a major issue, as men are for example more accident prone, in more danger of alcoholism related issues and so on. But if you're a small company with just a few employees, suddenly having to find an entirely new temp worker and pay what essentially amounts to almost two salaries for the same piece of work for years (if woman has several children in short time span) can bring the entire small company down.

This causes many smaller business to shun women of child bearing age, while larger incorporate a "childbearing risk" reduction in women's salaries. It's illegal and but it's common, easily obfuscated and it does make sense. Especially with companies that need professions dominated by women taking a huge hit from this, while firms like engineering where women are generally far less common than men can afford to not really care about the issue.

Comment Re:Nope (Score 2) 392

We were talking about windows and its licensing and benefits of cracking its DRM. You barged in looking like an idiot and talked about using free software - when windows is all pay to get a license. In other words, you went wildly off topic.

Then you started throwing rocks around claiming those suggesting that talking about windows in a thread about windows is apparently a sign of computer illiteracy.

Well done.

Slashdot Top Deals

God made the integers; all else is the work of Man. -- Kronecker