Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re: 16GB is pretty good (Score 1) 90

On some level... who cares? I can plug in rhe xps if it runs low. I cant add ram to the mac.

Dell precision laptops can run xeons with 64gb ecc if i want. Its nice to have choice so you can get what you need and make your own decisions about weight / battery vs perfomance. Dell has xps and precision so you can get what ylu need.

Apple just has something like xps... and its less capable then the xps. Its a joke next to the precision.

And its not like apple even had to make it thinner. They could have added ram and battery and made it a touch thicker.

Comment Re:End taxpayer's financing of research (Score 1) 43

Sure, as soon as we stop government from giving corporations subsidies in the form of patent protection.

Please, explain, why one must depend on the other.

If anything, the opposite must happen — those entrepreneurs spending their money on research need reassurance, the fruits of their investment will be theirs to rip.

Comment Re:Misguided attempts to fight thought-crimes (Score 1) 133

Keep reading. Let us know when you get to 14

The Fourteenth applies to discrimination by governments, which I already said should remain illegal (sadly, it currently is not). I'm talking about that by private entities.

If you insist on the 14th being applicable to corporations, then it must apply to individuals too. A girl rejecting four Black suitors, but then going out with an Asian one would have to explain the statistics and prove herself not racist. Will you accept such laws too, or do you think, that would be a ridiculous overreach?

But, of course, the 14th Amendment is not applicable to corporations, otherwise there would've been no need for the laws cited in the write-up...

Comment End taxpayer's financing of research (Score -1) 43

Private entrepreneurs, hoping to profit from research by promising researchers should be the ones financing it. As long as the taxpayers pay for most of scientific dollars — and are represented by bureaucrats without personal "skin in the game" — the bureaucrats will be both subject to corruption and loath to appear corrupt, frivolous, or otherwise derelict of their duties and funding only "reliable" science.

At some point it must have seemed like a good idea to have financing-seeking scientists appeal not to the unscientific louts and their charitable instincts, but to fellow scientists charged with dispensing the dollars already confiscated from the louts at gun-point (as all taxes are collected, don't kid yourself).

As TFA suggests, fellow scientists may be too stifling as well. Go back to what works best — Capitalism. If it seems like there is a chance of it being useful, someone will pay for it.

Comment Re:more shit stirring click bait... (Score 1) 134


I see a difference between instructing a mail carrier to deliver a flyer to a predominantly white neighborhood, versus instructing the mail carrier not to deliver the flyer to any homes in that neighborhood that have non-white residents.

Actions are perceived differently when it gets to an individual/personal differentiation.

I expect the courts to agree.

Comment Misguided attempts to fight thought-crimes (Score 0) 134

The Fair Housing Act of 1968 makes it illegal "to make, print, or publish, or cause to be made, printed, or published any notice, statement, or advertisement, with respect to the sale or rental of a dwelling that indicates any preference, limitation, or discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin.

Such laws are bogus, in violation of the First Amendment and, obviously, counter-productive.

After decades of fighting the thought-crimes of discrimination, we still see plenty of it. It is, actually, even getting worse as prominent institutions host openly segregated events. The government must not be allowed to discriminate, but discrimination by private parties — both individuals and companies — should become legal again.

Submission + - Blood donors exposed in Australia's largest data breach (

davidmwilliams writes: In an incredible display of ineptitude by its website partners, the Australian Red Cross Blood Service has seen 550,000 individual donor and donor applicant personal details exposed.

These details were not brute-forced out of a system, there was no SQL injection or heavy server attack. Rather, the web devs had directory browsing enabled on the web server, then saved their 1.7Gb MySQL backup to the web server. That's it.

Worse, the Australian Red Cross Blood Service didn't discover this by themselves. A person who found the data made it known to them. It's plausible others made this same discovery but did not disclose it.

Submission + - Hillary Clinton's aides used Yahoo! mail for State business (

mi writes: Hillary Clinton’s chief of staff at the State Department, Cheryl Mills, may have received classified national security information through one of two or three personal, unsecured email accounts she regularly used to communicate with Clinton aide Huma Abedin.

Several were found to contain such highly sensitive material that the State Department redacted 100 percent of the content pages, marking many pages with a bold stamp reading “PAGE DENIED.”

If it is too secret for a FoIA-request, should not it have been too secret to entrust to Yahoo! Mail service?

Submission + - Facebook Lets Advertisers Exclude Users by Race (

schwit1 writes: Imagine if, during the Jim Crow era, a newspaper offered advertisers the option of placing ads only in copies that went to white readers.

That's basically what Facebook is doing nowadays.

The ubiquitous social network not only allows advertisers to target users by their interests or background, it also gives advertisers the ability to exclude specific groups it calls "Ethnic Affinities." Ads that exclude people based on race, gender and other sensitive factors are prohibited by federal law in housing and employment.

Comment Re:Why fight vote-buying? (Score 1) 271

So now both parties do it, and it becomes an auction for each vote.

What of it? Votes of the indifferent are worthless anyway. Votes of the convinced will be too expensive. Who cares...

I still don't see a problem. People vote for all sorts of bogus reasons — Obama was attractive to some women, for example, and got some share of votes based on that. Trump may have the same advantage this time. May as well allow the otherwise indifferent folks to simply sell their votes.

Comment Re:Support your claim (Score 1) 302

so long as they prepare it such that it is impossible for any tenant to create sound that leaves the property and enters another.

Once again, you are imposing this impossible requirement unfairly. A property owner can be expected to be considerate — and demand same of his tenants, whether short- or long-term. Placing additional sound-proofing requirements on some owners, but not others — depending on their use of the property — is wrong.

Comment Re:Nothing (Score 1) 122

That's too bad. I have a degree in computer science and have worked with machine learning for the last twenty or so years. The progress in the last five years has been incredible. Today a student can build a system on their own computer that easily solves problems that the my-brain-is-magic types thought were unsolvable ten years ago. That doesn't guarantee that the progress will continue, but it looks promising, and is already incredibly useful.

Comment Re:Shut up, indeed. (Score 1) 122

Your UID is low enough to remember the real Slashdot, when computers that could translate the world's languages in better than realtime, drive cars better than humans, and beat the best chess players would definitely have been AI.

We seem to have been invaded by irritable American political pundits in the meantime.

Comment Re:hello? dock? (Score 1) 336

The new HP Spectra and Dell XPS are two excellent laptops.

Yup, that's probably what I'll end up doing. Dell precision makes a good pro laptop... all the ports including usbc, gobs of ram. 2nd hard drive. keyboard has all it's keys.

They'll even ship it with ubuntu if I want. Although I'll probably get Windows10 and use the new linux services stuff for the unixy stuff I want.

Why did I buy macbook pro's the last 10 years?

- Magsafe -- now gone. After losing a couple laptops over the years, I really valued this. Now its gone.

- upgradable -- not in years now. My 2011 mbp got an SSD upgrade, and a ram upgrade a couple years later. My 2015 is stuck with what it came with.

- Unix -- windows is basically caught up for my needs (between linux subsystem and hyperV ...)
nice big multitouch touchpad - used to be pretty mac exclusive, now everyone has them

- build quality -- apple still has good build quality, but lots of PC vendors make comparably good equipment

- keyboard... for a while PC vendors were doing stupid layouts with a slash next to a shortened enter key -- while my desktop keyboard has a wide enter key with the slash above it, so whenever i switch to the laptop, I'd hit \ instead of enter every single time. Mac's always had the wide enter key... but now that trend has mostly faded on the PC, while the mac goes and removes the function keys and the esc key.

- price was never a primary motivator; and I'll pay top dollar for a good product; but this latest batch of macs ratchets up the price for no discernible relative increase in capabilities. I'm not 'price sensitive' but I'm also not going to stand around and just get ripped off.

Maybe I'll buy a dell for a work laptop and a 13" macbook air as a toy for browsing the web on the couch and replying to email; and to keep at least a toe in OSX. But no point in buying a macbook pro for that. And that's just it... there's really nothing pro about the "pro" laptop. Its just a faster more expensive macbook air now.

Slashdot Top Deals

Not only is UNIX dead, it's starting to smell really bad. -- Rob Pike