Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. ×

Comment Re:Linus is a dumb ditch digger (Score 1) 361

Bullshit. I was there during the '90s too. SunOS was the cool kids' UNIX at the time and you could get retired 3/xx series Sun hardware cheap. Linux did run on a common PC but was a bug-ridden, totally insecure crock of shit until about 2.0.

Well I was there too, and my recollection is a bit different. First you couldn't get "cheap" 3/xx hardware unless you were lucky or connected, and second Linux may not have been performant early on, but it wasn't especially buggy or "insecure crock of shit", well at least not compared to anything else. SunOS came with a boat load of severe vulnerabilities right out of the box for basically the whole of the nineties. And it was neither worse nor better than anything else. Security just wasn't understood or on everybody's radar until it started to pick up the very last years of the nineties.

Comment Re:Linus is a dumb ditch digger (Score 1) 361

There's also another aspect: Linux ran on cheap (and nasty) hardware that people actually had available. The BSD people were famous for "That's a crap piece of hardware; wont write a driver for that. Buy this expensive kit instead..." Linux OTOH was driven by a "lets make it run everywhere" kind of ethos.

My first 386 ran Linux from version 0.11 and onwards. I couldn't even get the (semi legally aquired) 386 BSD versions to boot. Let alone run.

Submission + - Why Don't Mobile OSs offer a Kill Code? 1

gordo3000 writes: Given all the recent headlines about border patrol getting up close and personal with phones, I've been wondering why phone manufacturers don't offer a second emergency pin that you can enter and it wipes all private information on the phone?

In theory, it should be pretty easy to just input a different pin (or unlock pattern) that opens up a factory reset screen on the phone and in the background begins deleting all personal information. I'd expect that same code could also lock out the USB port until it is finished deleting the data, to help prevent many of the tools they now have to copy out everything on your phone.

This nicely prevents you from having to back up and wipe your phone before every trip but leaves you with a safety measure if you get harassed at the border.

So slashdot, what say you?

Comment Re:Well yeah (Score 1) 359

That's actually a good argument for the Universal Basic Income. No punishment for seeking independent income, no way to cheat for it since every citizen is entitled to it.

Part of the depression of government dependence is probably related to various bureaucrats lording it over you and the knowledge that if you manage to make a bit of money independently, you could lose all support and end up on the street.

Comment Re:Well yeah (Score 3, Insightful) 359

That's why we need a safety net that makes it more or less OK if robots take your job.

Don't forget that they can even indirectly take your job or at least cut into your pay. Imagine if robots take 25% of the jobs out there. Some small fraction of those people will then be applying for your job, and they'll probably be cheaper than you.

Comment Re:Call me crazy... (Score 1) 89

Apparently that's part of the solution here. That's why the specs aren't bigger.

Personally, I could use a bit more storage, but it seems fine as-is. I don't need a phone that can do CFD in the background, I just need it to communicate. Voice, text, email, some light web browsing, and an SSH client. It should be fine for that.

Comment Re:Huh? (Score 1) 247

If your statement applies to a 27 year old man, it applies to an 80 year old woman. Both in this scenario would have bought a self-driving car from an auto manufacturer. I chose her as an example to highlight for you the absurdity of expecting the end user to have the engineering expertise necessary to be liable for not choosing their mass market self-driving car carefully enough.

But if you prefer, what failure of expertise might a 22 year old liberal arts major show in choosing a m,ass market autonomous vehicle would attract liability for an engineering failure?

Perhaps the real reason you're upset is that your argument hinged on an unreasonable expectation of the consumer's engineering knowledge.

As for your comment about DRIVER error, that would be the autonomous system designed by the auto maker. It would not be the person who punched in the address of the university and pressed go before cramming in an extra 30 minutes of studying for the exam.

Comment Re:Huh? (Score 4, Insightful) 247

In general, liability goes to the entity that could and should have done a better job avoiding the incident. So tell me, if an autonomous vehicle crashes, who could have done a better job avoiding that, the manufacturer that marketed the car as safe and their development team, or the 80 year old lady who bought the autonomous vehicle because she was no longer allowed to drive? What is it that you think the lady could and should have done better but failed at to attract a portion of the liability?

Slashdot Top Deals

The trouble with money is it costs too much!