Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Who cares? (Score 2) 61

So, it's the NASDAQ website. Who goes the NASDAQ website? You can't trade stocks there. Financial information was not leaked, so BFD. This is fairly common on any website. Sounds to me like a single security research got butthurt because they didn't acknowledge his finding quickly enough.

Agreed. So they emailed NASDAQ. Who at NASDAQ? Who picks up and reads that email? Was it just the web site tech support number? That might get read only once a week if you are lucky. Unless they actually spoke to a manager/director at NASDAQ who is responsible for security, then they were not really talking to "NASDAQ."

Comment Arrogance (Score 1) 169

Only the arrogant idiot who thinks that he is smarter than the instructors believe that lectures are worthless. Or maybe I just went to a school where people actually took classes because they were challenging, not because they were easy A's. University is probably the only opportunity that most of us will have to try to glean some of the brilliance of the top researchers in their fields. Why would you want to throw away any minute of lecture?

Comment Re:Referendum against diverting flood water (Score 1) 85

In keeping with Boulder's progressive nature I have filed a request for referendum at city hall that would make it illegal to direct, divert, absorb, or otherwise disrupt the natural flow of flood water through the city. Unfortunately this will mean homes and businesses will be flooded beyond repair but someone must represent Mother Nature's interests.

Yeah, it's called building where the river DOESN'T flood. Common sense is often bad for business, especially all those contractors ready for public dollars to build dams and sewers where they would not be needed except that some business decided that it's cheaper to build there.

Comment Re:why this news? (Score 2) 552

Why is this news... is this our version of People magazine, where instead of hearing about all the details of the Kardashians' lives, we hear about every email or event that happens to Linus?

It shows that the best or at least most respected in the business can still be stupid when it comes to simple things like backups. Seriously, there is no reason in this day or age to lose more than a couple of transactions if you are careful. Someone kick Linus in the ass for being so sloppy and lazy.

Comment Don't Call Us (Score 3, Insightful) 176

This is purely publicity and funding for the "Program." Let's be serious. Donating their $35 does not in any way make them eligible for anything. Everyone knows that, or they are delusional. If anyone is going to Mars, they will be chosen based a long sequence of qualifications and skills, and sending in $35 is not one of those.

Comment Re:So, bad then? (Score 1) 314

(That, and stuff like buproprion, which can short-circuit the addiction mechanism.)

You win a cigar! (pun intended)

The majority of people who smoke are using nicotine to increase their dopamine. Reduce this need with bupropion (wellbutrin), and you reduce the cravings for nicotine. Trying to quit smoking makes you irritable and depressed. Wonder of wonders. This is why the smokers are so vehement about their "right to smoke." Can't take away the baby's candy without a lot of crying.

Comment Re:Please just get over it! (Score 1) 762

Women have boobs. People jerk off. Stop trying to hide obvious human sexuality issues from everyone. EVERYONE does this stuff. Why hide it? This puritan crap needs to go away.

Because in both cases it was displayed as something that SHOULD make you embarrassed, something to be ashamed of. That's why it was supposed to be funny. If anything, your argument is the absolute opposite of your position.

Comment Re:Yay for monopoly! (Score 1) 130

Apple said,here is what i am paying, if you let someone else get the book for less, then this is the new price I am paying.

Not correct at all. The rules stated that if any other retailer sold the book for less than what Apple was, Apple could change their price and take it out of the publisher's percentage. Apple was all about protecting their 30% and not actually competing as a retailer.

That just means that Apple is guaranteed to get the same price as any other vendor. I'm still not seeing how this is price fixing, that is, keeping a price artificially low or high when you have total control of a product. There's gotta me more to it.

Comment Grass roots (Score 1) 227

The only way I've been able to implement proper security at any site has been from the ground up. You find a couple of developers or application support folks with a clue, and get their systems and processes into shape. At the same time, streamline and increase stability. Hopefully other teams will see the benefits of your changes, and follow suite. The only security that comes from on high is security theater, e.g. PCI compliance auditing, which never addresses any real security issues, only check boxes to justify the auditor's fee.

Comment Re:How about a little more balance? (Score 1) 294

Excluding, of course, the fact that Microsoft remains the company it's cool to hate. Nevermind everything they've enabled over the last few decades.

I think that's the reason that so many people DO hate Microsoft, everything they've managed to do the last few decades, or in most cases, not managed to do.

Comment Re:That's true (Score 1) 95

I remember when I first tried google. I had been using AltaVista and I was amazed at how much more relevant the Google results were. Primitive search engines seemed to just bring up any page that had a lot of the words in, Google's page ranking, and looking up related terms (you ask for "secured lending" and also get pages that say "mortgage") made a real difference.

That's one of my frustrations with google. If I wanted to search for mortgage, I'd have searched for "mortgage." Just give me the words that I specify and I'd be happy.

Comment Re:Why is that surprising? (Score 2) 86

I was thinking the same thing, but now I'm not so sure. We have at least 8 decent points of data in our solar system for orbital bodies like stars orbiting the center of gravity. Among the 8 planets, 3 of them (Me, V, J) have an axial tilt of less than 4 degrees, 4 of them (E, Ma, S, N) have an axial tilt between 23 and 29 degrees, and one of them (U) is damn near sideways. In other words, our planets are all over the place. So it would seem to make some sense if the stars orbiting the galactic center were also all over the place on their axial tilt, so it wouldn't make sense that the bipolar nebulae are all oriented in the same direction. I wonder how many nebulae this includes though. If it is roughly half of them then that would seem to be in line with our solar system.

In astronomy/astrophysics, you have to extrapolate the macro from what we know of the micro, but in this case, I'm not sure that your analogy holds water. The difference in mass between a star and a planet is orders of magnitude. This is like comparing the spin of a baseball to the movement of the tectonic plates. If you look at the solar system as a whole, even though the planets themselves have tilted spin, in general the planets are all on the same plane orbiting the sun.

Slashdot Top Deals

Memory fault -- brain fried