Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


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

Comment Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" (Score -1, Flamebait) 230

Atheism is a religion for most who 'believe' in it.

There are plenty of actual atheists in the world, but any one who you talk to that informs you that they are atheist and then continues to discuss religion with you or more importantly, debate the issue ... well, they're just religious in a different way and too ignorant to recognize it.

And for those who choose to respond to this:

I have no problem with religion or lack of religion. What I detest is asshole, self described 'atheists' who have the need to inform religious people that they are stupid for believing in fairy tales and having faith. All at the same time, they have no problem believing in things in science that they only know about because someone else told them it works that way and they take it on faith that it works that way because it fits well in their world view without actually understanding why it works that way or actually being able to prove it. When you start acting like what you have faith in is better than what someone else has faith in ... but are too stupid to realize you're doing the exact same thing ... then you're just a religious nut job, even if your particular religion is that of science.

Science is based on fact. Religion (in ALL forms) is not. Talking about religion and science like they are related is like talking about apple sauce and gasoline being related. Yea, technically they are because we're all in the same universe, but you're a fucking idiot if you're mixing the two together for any reason what so ever. There is no actual relationship between religion and science, they are entirely different things that can neither confirm each other, or deny each other.

Comment Re:Why is Windows 10 the benchmark? (Score -1) 201

Then you've talked to people in some other industry.

First things first: Professors aren't doing shit in the industry. They couldn't do it, thats why they became professors. Those who can't do ... teach. Once you get out of school and join the real world, you'll learn just how out of touch they ALL are. Yours aren't special.

Second: High level environments ARE NOT easier to debug than an AVR. You have ALL THE SAME TOOLS for working on an AVR including debuggers that rate as the best on the planet. AVR's dev tools for example are Visual Studio and GCC. You won't find better debugging tools anywhere, period.

You won't be dealing with layer after layer of abstraction when working with an AVR. Theres no OS in the way to misbehave in some strange unexpected way. There are no middle where frameworks on top of frameworks because everyone had to reinvent the wheel.

Do you know the first quads and 'drones' outside of the military ... ran on AVR? Do you know that our current F35s in production ... have hundreds of AVRs in them?

Oh and for reference: I've written an RTOS for AVR, and several others (ones that do useful things) will run on it, so if thats the tool you need ... you can do it on the AVR as well.

The reality of it is, while you're just too ignorant about the subject to know it, I bet you have more AVR processors in your home than any other type of CPU, by at least one, probably 2 orders of magnitude. Sorry, but you have no idea how pervasive tiny, simple, AVR processors are. And this post is JUST ABOUT AVR processors, I'm ignoring all the other ones in the same class like PICs and others that are as popular or more in some cases.

You don't run an OS unless you have to when you need reliability.

Your alarm clock doesn't run a RTOS. It runs some PIC assembly. And I can actually write AVR assembly for something like an alarm clock faster than 99.9% of the devs of the world could do it in a high level language, with fewer bugs since I actually know what my code is doing and higher level devs don't have anything more than documentation in most cases. They may have the source, but if you have to dig into your framework's source ... you're already losing massive amounts of time.

My advice to you, when you walk into your first job interview ... try to keep your mouth shut and learn from the people you're talking to, because if you speak ... you're just going to look stupid.

Comment Re:Doesn't North Carolina have better stuff to do? (Score -1) 220

You don't know what happened in Charolette. You know whats been sensationalized on the news. Beyond that, you have no clue.

You also have no clue what about the transgender law or 'red neck crime' other than what you heard on the news and read on the Internet, which has been sensationalized and blown out of proportion in all cases.

You've also showed your own ignorance and prejudice. You want to pretend to be all uppity and cultured and like you care about the rights of those people in charolette or transgenders ... and then you follow it up showing your just as prejudice as the next guy when you start saying stupid shit like 'red neck' crime.

You're nothing more than an ignorant hypocrite who thinks its okay to be prejudice against certain classes of people ... as long as you pretend to be a moral crusader against those who might be offensive towards groups you choose to pretend to defend.

Comment Utterly invalid comparison (Score -1, Troll) 539

I'll ignore the fact that the full article is utterly retarded and clearly written by a religious nut job and point out something stupid the summary decided to quote.

the negative impacts that occur in some religious communities, including [...] such things as the abuse of children by some clergy, cases of fraud, and the possibility of being recruitment sites for violent extremism.

So the implication here is that only religions have employees who abuse children, conduct fraud, and recruit extremist. ...

If thats the way you think, you're about as dumb as dirt and are entirely engrossed in your own religion of hating on religion for made up reasons. You're as stupid as the 'god did it' people. The only difference is instead of blaming an imaginary being, you're blaming the people that believe in an imaginary being. You are in fact, doing EXACTLY the same thing you pretend to dislike so much.

You are a religious hypocrite who is too dimwitted to realize you've just followed your own silly religion.

Do religious people do these things you speak of? YES! But the rate is no different within those groups than it is anywhere else in the general population, you're just too blinded by bias to realize your ignorance.

Comment Re:DRM EVERYWHERE (Score -1) 495

Considering I copied it to my server and snapshotted it, I'm pretty sure Apple is going to have a REALLY hard time taking it away from me.

Unless they happen to have a SSH exploit for OpenSSH on FreeBSD that can get them to root on a system in secure level 1, where root itself can not even remove the schg flag on files, which makes them immutable by everyone including root.

Comment Transparent Proxy/DPI (Score -1) 337

So ... its inspecting packets or transparent proxy and making decisions based on whats in the packets, meaning their analyzing everything you do.

Aren't telephone companies bound by some laws regarding privacy or something?

Seems like this would also make them liable for policing what data is sent as well.

I can't really see any way that we shouldn't be pissed off by the fact they are looking at our data in transit.

Comment Not the same (Score -1) 87

Yes, your AI did better with a game ... because a game is no where NEAR as complex of a scene as real life.

There is no game currently in existence that runs on silicon that is 'photorealistic'. Not a single one. Shadows alone are still pretty crappy even at the highest end compared to the real world, and water? Hahahah.

If you think you've trained your AI by using a video game, you need some training yourself.

If you think GTA is photorealistic, you are, quiet simply, a fucking idiot ;)

Comment Nag screen (Score 0, Interesting) 133

Did this release get rid of that obnoxious fucking nag you ever god damn day to upgrade bug?


Oh wait ... problem solved, not using iOS anymore. Not by choice mind you, I broke my iPhone 6s Plus ... but after the forced upgrade or be nagged DAILY and removal of the headphone jack ... I could care less.

Comment Re:Google needs to be careful (Score -1) 241

Google ignored Warner brothers request to take down Warner brothers IP, thats a pretty safe bet when its the same company. Can you even file criminal charges against yourself in any state?

Google did not ignore Paramount complaining about a Canonical since they appear to be different companies.

I'm not disagreeing with your point, but they're walking a pretty safe line.

Comment Re:I rather wish.... (Score -1, Informative) 241

There are. They are codified into the DMCA itself.

The problem is that its not economical to fight back. Most of the people with BS complaints against them just want to not be in court and cant afford to fight something that may yield very little in return, especially depending on who is suing who. Me suing Warner Brothers for a illegitimate DMCA request is highly unlikely to do me any good. I can't afford the caliber of lawyer required to fight it for the time it takes to do so.

When a DMCA request is issued against your site, you respond to your provider with an appropriate response making it clear that you are in disagreement on the issue and will handle the process in court. The provider (Google in this case) is then required by law to put it back and let the courts deal with it.

Then after that ... THEN the courts are involved in the process, so if you KNOW you're not violating the DMCA, you just send a DMCA dispute the the ISP/provider who 'shut you down', and by law they have to put you back until a court tells them to take you down, but you better not be infringing cause at that point you're having acknowledged the complaint and you're moving on anyway ... judges get pissed when you 'know you're breaking the law', so its risky.

Comment Netflix (Score -1) 149

How is it that Netflix can secure it's content on Roku boxes, laptops, Xbox, ps4, Android and iOS devices ... But TimeWarnerCable can't ...

Perhaps TWC and friends don't know wtf they are doing and should get the fuck out of the business of pushing cable boxes on people.

Thats their excuse ... "We can't secure apps" ... Well other people can, so you've just admitted you're not qualified to be doing what you're doing.

Now piss off with your bullshit and lies.

Comment Bullshit - Neither OS X or Windows work that way (Score -1, Troll) 82

So the video shows a windows ten login screen and a blinky usb device ... but nothing special about that

The linked article makes a bunch of claims, but doesn't substantiate any of it.

Windows doesn't provide the USB dongle with a password at any point, as implied by the article. It 'auto-installs' signed drivers already on the PC or if configured, downloads them from the internet ... SIGNED DRIVERS ... SIGNED BY MICROSOFT. Not just any random driver on the USB device.

Windows does not do 'auto-run'

OS X doesn't do anything implied in this article either. If it doesn't have a driver for your USB device already, it just doesn't work, with the exception of printers there isn't a magic way that it reads drivers from the USB device or random internet sites.

This story is simply bullshit.

Slashdot Top Deals

Feel disillusioned? I've got some great new illusions, right here!