Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


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

Comment Re:stupid managers making clueless requirements (Score 1) 230

First thought:
Not really true, but it could go into a mode where it only operated in a VERY degraded no external connectivity.

Second thought:
And I guess even that could fail if, say, the power went out, so I guess you're right after all.

The problem here is that "network failure" isn't well defined. Computer failure is, though, so if all the computers that ran the software went down, the network would have clearly failed. I'm sure they meant something different, but they don't seem to have been explicit about what they meant. (Betcha that "never goes down" came out of marketing, and they didn't know, or care, exactly what they meant.)

Comment Yes. (Score 1) 879

The problem is it needs to be phased in, and various support programs need to be phased out. Handling this smoothly will be difficult. And the transition period probably needs to be about 15 years.

Jobs ARE disappearing a lot faster than they are being created, and the population is growing. This does not augur well for social stability unless there is some universal support system. Basic Income is the universal support system that has the most push behind it. And we need a lot more effort put into virtual reality, so that people without jobs can find something that they will do rather than cause trouble. Of course, that itself will eliminate entire classes of jobs. But virtual reality when properly developed could replace gyms, schools, and many other activities. The "school" replacement could be essentially apprenticeship games.

Think of this as a high-tech version of "bread and circuses", but it needs to be done in a way that's less socially disruptive than Rome was forced into....and preferably before wide-scale civil war breaks out. (Again, check the history of Rome.)

If this is handled right we could be headed towards a utopia...but if it isn't we could be headed towards a profound dystopia. Unfortunately, I see very few signs that anyone with any power even realizes the problems.

Comment Re:The Goldman talks... (Score 1) 308

I'm quite convinced that Hillary violated the law in setting up her private e-mail. I'm a lot less convinced that doing it the officially approved way would have been any more secure.

And if I chose between Hillary and Trump I'll pick Hillary. There's a lot I don't like about her, but it doesn't come close to what I don't like about Trump.

OTOH, I don't live in a swing state, so I'll probably pick Stein. Not because I think she'd be a good president, or because I think her ideas would work, but because they're CLOSER to the ideals I have than those of Hillary. Sanders would have been even better, and his ideas could be made to work if Congress would cooperate.

Additionally, despite my dislike of Hillary, I think of her VP the way I think of Spiro Agnew...President Nixon's life insurance policy.

Comment Re:I used to think Assange was smart (Score 2) 308

Corruption is, indeed, good to point out. But timing can cause one to suspect partisan motivations.

If I liked Hillary, I'd be upset. As it is I just don't think she's as bad as Trump, which is a really low bar. And she may mean some of the good things she says. (Her honesty rating is higher than that of most politicians holding office...but I sure wouldn't claim she never lies.)

Comment Re:Hardly an urgent matter (Score 1) 208

For this kind of problem a couple of decades for cleanup may not be excessive. And you pointed about the failures of climate science without understanding their nature. Greenland is melting a LOT faster than predicted. It's more likely that we have less time than we think for the cleanup than that we have more.

Comment Re:Who would have thought? (Score 1) 60

I know of several times that the US govt paid for data, but the data wasn't exactly private data, and the purchase wasn't secret. They may also have done it with private data, or have kept their purchase secret, but I don't know about those cases. And it may well depend on which arm of the federal government you are dealing with.

Comment Re:I can't wait for Obama's inauguration (Score 1) 60

I can't tell whether you're serious or not, and if you are, whether or not you're being sarcastic.

The reason to vote Democrat is that the Republicans are even worse. If you're not in a swing state, you should probably vote 3rd party, but how sure you need to be that you aren't in a swing state depends on how much worse you think one candidate is than the other. And you need to do it in the certain knowledge that your 3rd party vote will not yield the candidate that will be if their platform wouldn't really work it doesn't matter.

Comment Re:Illegal? (Score 1) 490

You've got a language mixup, which others have been sharing.

Legal is not a unitary entity. If it was an official Russian policy, then it was legal IN RUSSIA. This doesn't make it legal in the US.

The actions of the CIA are frequently illegal in the country in which they occur. This doesn't make them illegal within the US.

And action can be taken against someone in court only in the place where the action is illegal. I used to be able to say and only for actions that were illegal where they occurred, but US precedents, e.g. the case against Kim Dotcom, have removed that constraint. Now you could be tried in a Thai court for slandering their king, convicted under Thai law, and have extradition applied for even if you never set foot in Thailand. I consider this an extremely harebrained precedent, but the US has established it multiple times. And this means that if they could identify the perpetrators, presuming they are Russians and in Russia, and have never left Russia, they could be prosecuted in a US court, and a request for extradition could be sent for them. I don't know what extradition treaties the US has with Russia, but I believe that Russia is attempting to join the EU (has joined), and I think that there's an extradition treaty involved in that. So potentially the "accused perpetrators" could be extradited from Russia to the US under treaty for doing something that was legal and part of their official duties within Russia to be tried in a US court.


Comment Re:Trump is a communist (Score 1) 490

Communists, as opposed to those who pretend to be communists, have always been quite thin on the ground everywhere. There hasn't been a communist government in Russia since Lenin's 2nd year. The Russian Communist Party quite quickly turned into oligarchs, and the guy at the top turned into a proto-Czar. Stalin had a lot in common with Ivan the Terrible. I'm told neither was really hated within Russia. (Georgia might have a different opinion.)

So for Trump to think highly of the top oligarch is not surprising. I'm much more surprised by his admiration for Hitler.

P.S.: I case you can't guess, I'm *not* a Trump supporter.

Comment Re:The source isn't important (Score 1) 490

Well, it's not *completely* irrelevant, but the real question is "Did whoever did it doctor the stuff before releasing it?" So far it seems as if they didn't, which causes me to doubt that anyone very high within a government is involved...but it could just be someone quite subtle.

Comment Re:lol (Score 1) 490

True, but the published evidence that I've heard is that the attacks came from IPs within Russia. The could be forwarded, it could be non-governmental, etc. Still, there must be better evidence that *that*. But would the target audience of the articles understand any more detailed evidence? So I'm torn between:

1) They don't have any decent evidence, and

2) This is politics, so even though they have decent evidence they don't want to bore their audience.

I consider;

3) They've got decent evidence, but they've got good reasons to hide it

to be an extremely outside chance.

Slashdot Top Deals

If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my shoulders. -- Hal Abelson