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. ×

Comment Yeah, that's one of the funny things about law (Score 1) 67

just 'cause someone's stealing your stuff doesn't mean you can commit acts of violence on them. At least in most Jurisdictions. A buddy of mine went through some criminal law classes and he always got a kick out of the look on people's faces when they found that out. It makes sense though. If you don't feel threatened you shouldn't be attacking somebody. That's sort of a key component of civilized society. I guess you could make the argument that if you're poor enough having what little you have stolen is a threat, but ideally we shouldn't have anybody that poor.

Comment Re:Latin lover (Score 1) 102

If Trump gets in, the house, the senate, the speaker, everybody is going to be against him. Not much will get done.

Most of Trump's big ideas don't require Congress at all. He can blow up trade deals, withdraw from NATO, deport millions, ban certain religions from coming to the US and it will not require one bit of congressional approval.

He'd also be traveling with nuclear launch codes. I don't want a guy who is rage-tweeting about Miss Universe's sex tape at 3am to have access to that stuff. Sorry, not sorry.

Comment Re:Latin lover (Score 1) 102

I'll ask the question again:

Do you know Trump's well-laid-out plan for international trade? Do you know his well-though-out plan for dealing with the deficit? Can you name a single bit of legislation that Trump said he would push besides term limits?

If you could have answered any of those questions, if you could have made the case you would have. Trump would have. You didn't and he hasn't and that's why we're where we're at.

Comment Re:Address the issues (Score 2) 102

Both candidates have specific, well-laid-out proposals which anyone can find.

Yes, except Trump's proposals are all to women he's trying to feel up.

Do you know Trump's well-laid-out plan for international trade? Do you know his well-though-out plan for dealing with the deficit? Can you name a single bit of legislation that Trump said he would push besides term limits? The policy papers on his website read like one of those sample Powerpoint presentations written in Latin. And all he has to say for himself is that whatever he's going to do, it'll be, "tremendous". Since I've had four years of high school Latin, I happen to know the root of the word, "tremendous" and let me tell you, it's a disgrace, believe me. Sad!

Trump is a fraud of a fake of a fugazi. If you go to his website, not even that is real. He's got a ticker running across the top showing donations "in real time" and it turns out that it's just a loop that was put up weeks ago and if you look at the code for his site, it's a script that calls an XML file named, "Sample_donations". He's a fucking Potempkin village in a fright wig. He's a creation of the media and not one thing more.


[Note: since the story broke, the Trump campaign has taken down the phony ticker widget.]

Comment I suppose it depends (Score 1) 157

on what you consider conservative. The strict definition is "opposed to change". By the definition Hillary is more conservative than Trump. I'm more inclined to call these views "Regressive". But then I find most of what we call "Conservative" to really be regression. Back to the "Good 'ole Days" so to speak and typically some of that Old Time Religion.

Comment Re: Great! (Score 1) 249

Not that there was ever that much good on 4chan to begin with, but what there was was really good.

I agree, but I also see it as a social experiment that was doomed to failure because anarchic social interaction will always result in the very few who have never learned to play well with others believing they have the right - even the permission - to poison the public well.

There was never a mechanism to clap back at the shitlords, in other words.

Comment The issue isn't (just) speed - it's (also) range. (Score 1) 43

LTE is already pretty darn fast, so losing a little performance isn't going to make that big of a deal. It's not as if you can torrent to your hearts content without killing your cell phone bill.

The issue isn't just speed. It's also range.

At any given speed, the Qualcom can support it at substantially lower signal levels. 6ish dB in a lot of cases, a bit less in some, enormously more in others.

Look at the graphs in TFA. In addition to some specific pathologies that penalize the Intel chip farther, the bulk of the graph has the drop off looking similar but with the Qualcom shfited 5 or 6 dB to the right. (Those squares are 5 dB wide.)

6 dB is four times the effective signal strength, which corresponds to twice the range. That maps into four times the area served at that speed from a single cell tower (important in sparsely-served areas), deeper penetration into buildings and the like (in more heavily-covered areas). It can also map into more data pushed before a given area and channel allocation's bandwidth is saturated. 3 dB corresponds to twice the effective signal strength, 1.4ish times the radius, twice the area served.

If the modems were equivalent and the problem just the layout of the board and antenna, you'd expect the two curves to be the same shape but just offset. The shape is substantially different, so (board issues or not) something else is going on.

Comment Re: Great! (Score 2, Insightful) 249

You're wasting your breath, ScentCone. Guys like him have declared war on the Internet because Twitter took away Milo Yiannopoulos' blue checkmark, and some female video game critic gave Bayonetta a 7.5/10.

This is the nihilism that online anonymity and toxic 4chan culture has engendered. They're terrorists who are simply too lazy to leave their moms' basements. That they see themselves as some sort of shit-posting freedom fighters would be very funny if it wasn't so tragic and pitiable.

Comment Re:Budget and Timelines (Score 2) 312

Would it have been possible for the Congressionally-approved design to have specified "steel meeting the ASME SA316 standard as it existed on X date" to head off the problem at the beginning? Also, did the ASME committee really care about the structural weakness or did some anti-nuclear member(s) of the committee realize it would screw over the reactor construction and do it on purpose?

Slashdot Top Deals

When all else fails, read the instructions.