Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


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

Comment Cheaper to use 2.5" hard disks (Score 1) 280

4TB 2.5" external hard disks go for about $120, and I bought one for about $100. That's $25-30/TB. Amazon sell 15x25GB archival-grade Blu-Ray disks for $67.50, which is $180/TB.

And not even that much more expensive to use SSD's (if you're worried about stiction) than archival-grade Blu-Ray disks. I'm seeing internal SSD's in the $240 range; USB3 enclosures are cheap. If you want it packaged, it's going to set you back a bit more, but still less than double the price of archival Blu-Rays.

Comment Re:All on my kindle (Score 1) 21

I'm normally the first one to defend Kindles. I love how easy and ubiquitous they made eBooks. However, I do agree that limiting eBooks to just Amazon sources isn't too bright. This thread has made me come to a decision regarding my first novel (to be published next month - shameless plug). It'll be available in paperback and Kindle versions as per usual book publishing methods (because, like it or not, that's where most people will buy the book from), but I'm also going to look into setting up a DRM-free option for people. Perhaps even a Pay-What-You-Like system.

If anyone has any recommendations for systems like this that an author (with a web development background) can put into place, I'd be interested in hearing them.

Comment Re:Pokemon Go killed more people than Tesla Autopi (Score 1) 124

When you release something into the world, you should really understand people.

You should, but "some idiot might try to change batteries while driving" is not a kind of thing you can reasonably protect against.

More generally, at some point safety features will actually make things less safe. For example, forklifts have to sound alarm while backing. Good idea if there were always just one, but if you have many of them working in the same warehouse the resulting cacophony masks other sounds - such as the tire noise of the forklift that's about to drive over you.

Comment Re: "Millions of dollars"? (Score 4, Informative) 103

They arrested this guy because he had a server located somewhere in the USA. The same way they went after Kim Dotcom.

KAT had all their servers located in Canada-America and Sweden-America, while Kim Dotcom had his servers located in America-America.

While it's been obvious from legal history over the past couple years that Canada and Sweden operate under American law only now, many people are not yet used to that and incorrectly assume those are other countries with their own laws.

That confusion is what lead the parent poster to ask their question. It's just your explanation is equally as confusing of an explanation as it implies the servers were located within the old traditional US borders when that is obviously an incorrect statement.

Instead you should have explained that the servers located in Canada are fully held under US law as if they were located somewhere in the USA.

Comment Re: Pierson's Puppeteers (Score 1) 651

And there is a remarkable lack of evidence that you understand the issue of anthropogenic global warming well enough to make a qualified judgment about it.

If you want to discuss that. We can. There's a lot I don't know about the issue. But I can read scientific literature and it doesn't say what the various chicken littles in this thread have claimed.

Comment Re:Big surprise some jackhole Silicon Valley (Score 1) 235

Many lawyers give horrible self-serving "advice", and will rarely take small cases on contingency. If they were honest, decent people, then they wouldn't have become lawyers in the first place.

That's why you consult several of them.

Why would the algorithm be any different?

1. It is free.
2. It has no vested interest in lying to you.

Neither would be true.

Comment Re:This is the year of the extreme climate claims (Score 1) 410

"But they call us names!" Science doesn't work that way.

Who said it did?

Let's look at the post I replied to again.

You call them corrupt fascists. They call you stupid frauds. Let's not pretend you're here for a serious discussion.

It's like you're not even reading this thread. Look at the above name calling rationalization. That AC just said it.

The point is when you keep treating people like crap and not talk science, some people are eventually going to just give up talking science to you.

When are you or other ACs in this thread going to start talking science? It's evidence-based not name calling-based.

And why should such complaints appear in this thread? The earlier poster that I originally replied to and the article they linked to just irrationally libeled people (and the poster didn't even have the right target libeled). This isn't science. It's noise. It's not going to convince anyone. It's not going to save the Earth.

Comment Re:Pierson's Puppeteers (Score 1) 651

once stopped me in my tracks by saying

It got you to shut up. So it worked. Who knows, he might even believe it too!

I think it also demonstrates the perversity of morality. His "fuck them" attitude, if real, is still probably less harmful than your "let's do it for the children" attitude. After all, those future generations will be able to do that, find their own fucking power. But if we hamstring our societies for frivolous moral reasons (which is where we're heading with climate change mitigation), we'll commit concrete harm to those future generations that merely burning a little more oil can't do.

Here's the problems I always see with this sort of moralizing:

1) No evidence that global warming or other climate change is big enough compared to other problems like overpopulation, poverty, habitat and arable land destruction, etc. There is a remarkable lack of evidence to support the claims of harm.

2) Disregard for the demonstrated dynamic that poor people have more kids and poverty leads to overpopulation which is the biggest problem facing humanity. Among other things, overpopulation is the reason that human-induced climate change is a problem in the first place.

3) Disregard for the cost and ineffectiveness of climate change mitigation. When one looks at Germany's Energiewende, the Kyoto Protocol, carbon emission markets, renewable energy public projects, etc, one sees a history of remarkably costly and useless virtue signalling, often combined with cynical exploitation. There's no regard for how to implement any sort of mitigation measures in a way that doesn't harm billions of people nor regard for the outcome of such projects.

So sure, tell us how your beliefs are going to make the world a better place. But if you really are interested in making the world a better place, then maybe you ought to pay attention to what we're doing now.

Comment Re:Pierson's Puppeteers (Score 1) 651

You realise that there different types of pollution, and not all of it comes in the form of overly visible black smog or choking dust? As for 3rd-world shitholes - as you call them - yeah those will be affected first because they're generally already on the line, but then so will your favourite vacation stops, coastal cities, and your food supply as crops go thirsty and water gets scarce.

Unless, of course, that doesn't happen. There is a remarkable lack of evidence for your predictions.

Comment Re:Fine them?!?! (Score 1) 171

Thanks, perhaps that was what they meant and I read too much into it.

In that case, I would completely agree, there needs to be a real deterrent to make it clear that this behaviour isn't acceptable, and it does need to be meaningful for rich people as well. Things like losing the right to drive and ultimately, if they continue to drive anyway, their freedom for some period of time, not just fining them 10% of this year's earnings or crushing their car.

Slashdot Top Deals

Natural laws have no pity.