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


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

Comment Re:How about no... (Score 1) 60

And what happens when there's nowhere to grow? No more competitors to acquire? Their stock can't keep going up, since there's no growth. Eventually it will all come to a halt, and very likely come crashing down. When investors see no reason to buy in anymore because there's no growth left, their stock will tank as people sell. Can they survive that? I would think it would be more advisable to maintain status quo and have a few competitors than to hit that brick wall where there's nowhere to go.

Comment Re:Because Windows Sucks (Score 1) 269

You mean that Canon Canoscan 8400 scanner I have that has no support in Linux? The one that worked in Windows XP? Linux doesn't support everything. Even major hardware vendors like Canon have products that have no support in either Windows or Linux.

There are lots of great uses for Linux. But you cannot put it ahead of Windows for most people and most applications. Hardware companies produce Windows (and maybe Mac) drivers, whereas many times they won't produce Linux drivers (or will drag their feet before getting them out), leaving the user community to sort out how to get something working. I've had a scanner, a wi-fi dongle, a printer, and more that just don't work on Linux because no user has written a compatible Linux driver for it, yet. And the manufacturer never made a driver for Linux. I've never really had that issue with Windows. Aside from finding some legacy drivers for older versions of the OS, or getting an old bit of hardware running on newer versions of Windows, I've had no issues finding a driver for my hardware.

Until Linux catches up with graphics capabilities and hardware drivers, it cannot appeal to the majority of users out there. They just don't want to dig into command lines, config files, and compilers to get things running. Ubuntu has done a great job of getting things up and running for everyday tasks, like email, web browsing, watching streaming video, and creating office documents. But, that's not enough to win most people over. Popular software is written for Windows. Hardware drivers are written for Windows. Why change when it does what you want/need?

Yes, Linux is good for control, openness, and customization. If you want to write custom software for your research project, Linux is a great option. You can tap into and alter the OS to your needs. Slim it down to fit on a small SD card. Run it on some homebrew hardware project. But, it still doesn't have that mass appeal. It's just too... techy... for most people.

Comment Re:I like working. People are different. (Score 1) 404

I'm not saying you have to work less. I'm saying that many companies are the reason for the long hours and low vacation time. Many people put in 50+ hours of work every week, not because they want to, but because they're required to by their management. It has nothing to do with peer pressure. It's the culture of management these days. It's no wonder why employees aren't loyal to their companies anymore, when their companies don't seem to find them very valuable anymore. If you enjoy working, that's great. More power to you. But most people don't enjoy their job, and would rather spend time with family and friends or traveling instead of working so much. Consider yourself fortunate that you'll spend a large chunk of your life doing something you actually like.

Comment That's definitely not accurate... (Score 5, Interesting) 404

It's highly unlikely that we're addicted to our jobs. It's not usually by any choice that someone will work more and get less vacation. This is a cultural issue that's being pushed on the working classes by employers. I'd love to have a mandatory month of vacation and see everyone work less than 40 hours per week, as they tend to do in Europe.

Comment Turned Out Fine for My University (Score 1) 363

While I can understand the argument that a common textbook makes it easier to teach the same material to multiple sections, it's not necessary if the teacher or professor covers all the necessary material.

While I was enrolled as an engineer, one math professor decided he didn't like the textbook being used to teach the course. It was wordy, confusing, and generally not well-written. So, he embarked to write his own book that would be much easier to utilize while teaching calculus courses. He wrote up all of his lecture notes in textbook-like form for easy compilation later, and passed them out to his students for free with each lecture. His notes were very easy to comprehend and matched up with his classes very well. Everyone enjoyed having him as a professor because he actually cared that his students understood the material better.

In his case, sure there was some future financial gain in it for him. (After he found a way to get everything published.) But, it was more about his ability to teach the students effectively. Other professors didn't care that he used his own teaching method or didn't use the standard textbook for his courses. And we all turned out just fine because he still taught all of the material, just in his own way.
BR I guess my point is this: let the teachers choose their own methods, as long as they teach the students the required material. Oftentimes, this can result in greater effectiveness, as it's more comfortable for the person doing the teaching. And that, in turn, usually translates into better learning of the material by the persons being taught. Don't just railroad everyone into doing the same thing. That's how we get all of this common core and standardized testing BS that doesn't really do anything for the teachers or the students.

Comment Re:Do you know how far bullets fly? (Score 1) 620

That may be true if you're actually shooting at something within range. But, buckshot will not be terribly dangerous when shot upward. A round pellet will lose speed due to air resistance and simply fall to the ground. It might hurt, but shouldn't be lethal. A handgun or rifle round, however, utilizes aerodynamics with a pointy nose and spins for stabilization as it flies in a parabolic arc thanks to rifling in the barrel. It will hold its lethality far longer than buckshot, and will usually still come down nose first.

Comment Re:FCC Prevue (Score 1) 56

With all of the news lately about car manufacturers cheating on emissions testing, it wouldn't surprise me in the least if ISPs were doing something similar here.

What's to stop them from coding in some type of recognition for requests made to FCC servers as part of this SamKnows testing to avoid throttling or giving them priority?

/Note: I'm not in IT, IS, CS, etc. So, my knowledge of this is pretty limited.

Comment This is why... (Score 1) 162

...not everything needs to be a smart device. The only secure devices are those not connected to the internet at all. The more devices people keep inventing that connect to everything else, including the internet, the less secure everything becomes.

STOP adding wi-fi to everything! It's not necessary for things like this. If you're too lazy to boil some water you've got bigger issues to worry about.

Comment Re:WTF (Score 1) 394

+1 to this!

I don't understand why people think it's sooooo difficult to live in today's society without social media. Maybe if they'd get off of it to begin with, they'd understand how unnecessary it really is. I have Google+ and LinkedIn accounts, but I created those a long time ago and don't really bother with them. I'll update LinkedIn when I'm looking for a job, but that's about it.

I agree with posters who say that any company that won't hire me because I don't have a social media account (or won't share it with them) are places I don't want to work anyway.

Comment Who's liable then? (Score 1) 800

So, who's liable when an autonomous car hits another vehicle and causes injuries and/or deaths? Since the owner doesn't necessarily have (full) control of the situation, is the programmer liable? Is the auto maker liable? If the car is fully autonomous, it wouldn't even be an owner's decision. Can you hold them liable? (I suppose, even the choice to BUY a car like this could be considered as accepting liability..?)

It seems to me that the best course of action would be to have separate areas for autonomous vehicles, at least at first. Kind of like express lanes on a highway. Without as much danger from human error, it should prove a much safer way to travel. If the driver needs to exit or drive into a non-designated area, they can then take control of the car and drive manually, as everyone else does.

Comment Jammer..? (Score 4, Interesting) 1374

Can anyone say "RFID jammer"..?

Not only will the pro-gun crowd say that a jammer could be used by government agencies to disable their weapons, but the bad guys could easily build a jammer for their own use to ensure their safety during commission of a crime. Imagine cops closing in with "smart guns". The bad guys flip on the jammer and cops can't do anything about it. Throw in the bad guys having traditional guns, and the cops have a serious problem on their hands. Same goes for home invasions.

I understand the idea behind smart guns, but this is a horrible idea. And as a gun owner, I'll never guy a smart gun. I've heard of fingerprint scanners being easily bypassed, as well. Unless you can tie it to DNA or something, I see no good way to produce a gun like this. And even then, it could likely be bypassed without much difficulty.

Slashdot Top Deals

If a listener nods his head when you're explaining your program, wake him up.