Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Compare cell phone plans using Wirefly's innovative plan comparison tool ×

Comment Re:50 hours of crap. (Score 1) 448

Hint: if two people are at the same coordinates, yet one is in daytime, the other is in nighttime.... odds are it has something to do with the cord system, or them not reading it right, and they're actually on the opposite sides of the world. Just saying. It's interesting; i've been playing online games since some game from AOHell back in the 90's, yet i don't seem to be as jaded and whiny as some new players. You'd think that'd be reversed.

Comment Re:50 hours of crap. (Score 1) 448

Yeh, some of the reviews point out the multi-player part, which is possible but the devs say would be extremely rare.... and morphed that into what we consider MMO multiplayer, where there's hundreds of people within throwing distance. Anyone who didn't realize that two people, starting at random places in a universe where visiting each planet for 1 second would still take billions of years IN REAL TIME, almost would NEVER meet.... doesn't have much common sense. It's possible you could meet someone else, but the odds are, well, astronomical. That said, there was a system within jump radius from my starting planet that had been discovered by someone else.... however, given the juvenile names he chose for his system, i decided against meeting them.

A decent amount of the complaints are from lack of common sense, and people coming into the game with preconceived notions that were wrong... and no, not all of that was because of the devs. Another issue i've seen in complaints is people saw things in the per-release vids, then complained they didn't see the same thing when they started. Back to the BILLIONS OF YEARS in real time to see all the planets.... every planet is not going to have the exact same animals and such, yet these guys complain they don't get to see everything on their first planet that exists in the universe. Seriously.... that's well beyond simply lacking common sense.

The game can definitely use more activity in it, but some of the whining is just that, whining.

Comment Re:Logic Says It Should Be Legal (Score 1) 380

How can the individual make up their mind when they are being sold fake (or even worse, adulterated) prescription drugs (as happens all the time in countries that don't regulate them carefully)? Unless everyone has their own home gas chromatograph that's just not going to work... nice troll, but no thanks.

Do you know WHY Canada, Europe, Australia, Japan, etc all have drugs at 1/10th (or less) of the cost of the US? Because they are single-payer. In a monopsony the buyer has a lot of control on the price, as opposed to the US where the drug monopolies have free reign.

Comment Re:Logic Says It Should Be Legal (Score 1) 380

There may be some merit to that argument for places like Mexico where quality controls are quite poor

This is in fact a government granted monopoly.

HAH! This is one of my favorite hypocrisies of the Libertarian. So, do you want the government to ensure your drugs are safe, or do you want to let anyone make and sell any drugs as cheaply as possible?

Because the only "government monopoly" in this case specifically or in many others generally is that other companies feel that it costs to much to test their drug to make sure it's safe. Is the system maybe a bit too careful? Probably. But when it's a life saving drug (that can be dangerous, as you said, without proper quality controls) it's hard to justify cutting corners to safe money.

You cannot have both a free market AND a monopoly in most cases.

This is even more amazing! If that were true, anti-trust laws wouldn't be necessary. Wow. There are SO many examples that disprove this I wouldn't even know where to start. Thank you, it's been a long day so it was nice to have a good laugh...


Hillary Clinton Used BleachBit To Wipe Emails ( 558

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Neowin: The open-source disk cleaning application, BleachBit, got quite a decent ad pitch from the world of politics after it was revealed lawyers of the presidential hopeful, Hillary Clinton, used the software to wipe her email servers. Clinton is currently in hot water, being accused of using private servers for storing sensitive emails. "[South Carolina Representative, Trey Gowdy, spoke to Fox News about Hillary Clinton's lawyers using BleachBit to wipe the private servers. He said:] 'She and her lawyers had those emails deleted. And they didn't just push the delete button; they had them deleted where even God can't read them. They were using something called BleachBit. You don't use BleachBit for yoga emails or bridesmaids emails. When you're using BleachBit, it is something you really do not want the world to see.'" Two of the main features that are listed on the BleachBit website include "Shred files to hide their contents and prevent data recovery," and "Overwrite free disk space to hide previously deleted files." These two features would make it pretty difficult for anyone trying to recover the deleted emails. Slashdot reader ahziem adds: The IT team for presidential candidate Hillary Clinton used the open source cleaning software BleachBit to wipe systems "so even God couldn't read them," according to South Carolina Rep. Trey Gowdy on Fox News. His comments on the "drastic cyber-measure" were in response to the question of whether emails on her private Microsoft Exchange Server were simply about "yoga and wedding plans." Perhaps Clinton's team used an open-source application because, unlike proprietary applications, it can be audited, like for backdoors. In response to the Edward Snowden leaks in 2013, privacy expert Bruce Schneier advised in an article in which he stated he also uses BleachBit, "Closed-source software is easier for the NSA to backdoor than open-source software." Ironically, Schneier was writing to a non-governmental audience. Have any Slashdotters had any experience with BleachBit? Specifically, have you used it for erasing "yoga emails" or "bridesmaids emails?"

NASA's Outsourced Computer People Are Even Worse Than You Might Expect ( 252

Eric berger, writing for ArsTechnica: As part of a plan to help NASA "modernize" its desktop and laptop computers, the space agency signed a $2.5 billion services contract with HP Enterprise Services in 2011. According to HP (now HPE), part of the Agency Consolidated End-User Service (ACES) program the computing company would "modernize NASA's entire end-user infrastructure by delivering a full range of personal computing services and devices to more than 60,000 users." HPE also said the program would "allow (NASA) employees to more easily collaborate in a secure computing environment." The services contract, alas, hasn't gone quite as well as one might have hoped. This week Federal News Radio reported that HPE is doing such a poor job that NASA's chief information officer, Renee Wynn, could no longer accept the security risks associated with the contract. Wynn, therefore, did not sign off on the authority to operate (ATO) for systems and tools.A spokesperson for NASA said: "NASA continues to work with HPE to remediate vulnerabilities. As required by NASA policy, system owners must accomplish this remediation within a specified period of time. For those vulnerabilities that cannot be fully remediated within the established time frame, a Plan of Actions and Milestones (POAM) must be developed, approved, and tracked to closure."

Comment Re:*The* Quickest, Not *Its* Quickest (Score 1) 174

Except this vehicle goes fast in a straight line, handles pretty well (not supercar well, but for 4 door? Definitely.) is ALL electric, seats 7, and is pretty close to being able to drive itself. And your numbers are off by 10x, it was $450M, not $4.9B. Due 2022, paid off in full in 2013.

I think they have earned the right to bleat on a bit.

Comment Re:There's a simpler answer to this (Score 1) 189

I disagree about the "openness being a disadvantage." Seriously, name one thing that the carriers/OEMs do, in terms of software, that adds any significant value. I throw down the gauntlet.

The source cheaper hardware that require different (software) drivers. It adds significant value because they make their products more affordable to people who can't pay $700 for a smart phone. This is why Android is 80% of the smart phone market, and also why it's horribly fragmented. The openness is obviously both an advantage and disadvantage - cheaper phones, more market share, but a nightmare for cutting edge app developers to deal with.

Comment Re:There's a simpler answer to this (Score 1) 189

That's great in theory, but in practice it's horribly restrictive to app developers that want some basic level of consistency among devices. It has nothing to do with "bling" and everything to do with support for all of the apps you use.

More than 10% of our Android app users are still on API 17 or earlier (*4* year old OS). We want to drop support for those devices but 10% is non trivial.

On the other hand, we stopped supporting iOS 6 (also released 4 years ago) so long ago I can't remember, and have required iOS 8 (released 2 years ago) since early this year with no complaints. We are planning on requiring iOS 9 in the next release (otherwise known as THE LATEST until 10 is released this fall) since Apple did not drop support for any devices with the new version.

Comment Re:The actual proposal (Score 1) 189

The article is right that money talks, but to think they'd give any to an OEM. Ha.

Yep, that basically summarizes the whole problem. Money is the solution, Google doesn't want to share, and so OEMs have no incentive to keep their devices up to date.

And why should they? It's the same problem with all "smart" devices - phones, TVs, set top boxes, etc. Any development effort spent on updating last year's devices is expense with no reward. If Google wants to keep Android devices on the latest version the hardware supports they need to create an incentive for OEMs to spend money to do so.

The obvious solution is some sort of revenue sharing on Google Play and Ads. Until they suck it up and share some of the $$$ they are making, Android will always be horribly fragmented.

Comment Re:or, maybe Google screwed up "ownership" (Score 1) 189

That way the OEM is only responsible for a microkernel.

Any embedded developers out there with more info?

Yeah... that's not how microkernels work. In a microkernel the device drivers run outside of the kernel - the kernel just implements the minimal core hardware access/virtualization and OS features. The microkernel for an ARM-based platform would probably be highly portable to many different SoCs, but the drivers outside of the microkernel would be specific to the various peripheral features of the SoC & other hardware on each device.

Slashdot Top Deals

If you can't understand it, it is intuitively obvious.