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. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. ×

Comment Re:hurr durr (Score 1) 320

The reason I referenced Galileo was specific. If you remember (I bet you don't because of how full of talking points, unground axes, and shoulder chips your phrasing is) Galileo was "persecuted" not only by the religious power structure of the time, but also by sycophantic "scientists" looking to curry favor with the pope and the power structure in Rome.

Draw what conclusions you want with current events, the underlying principle is what I was pointing to. You can see it is a constant in human behavior. It is still happening today.

Comment How does it work legally for boats? (Score 1) 244

Many larger recreational vessels (say, 30' and over) have been available with combination systems (radar, depth sounders, chartplotters, autopilots) which integrate to make the boat self-piloting.

Surely at some point there have been problems where these systems didn't work as intended and there were accidents that resulted.

For most boats, though, at best the control system (electronics and autopilot) might come from one vendor, the hull from another, and the primary propulsion from a third.

But I wonder if they have held the electronics/autopilot liable for the malfunction or if they have shifted it onto the mariner in all cases.

Comment Re: Mod parent down (or up as per bias) (Score 1) 194

"Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken!"

Similarly, calling yourself a Democrat while following faithfully in the footsteps of corporatist Republicans does not make you a Democrat. Giving lip service to liberal issues while selling your constituents down the river in favor of big business does not make you a liberal. Just because you bought into the lie doesn't make the truth false.

Saying the party is not "left enough" when their candidate is decidedly "right" is an inadequate response. Enforcing the lie on others (saying that message should be buried) is beyond subversive. You are, I am sure unknowingly, acting like a fascist pig. Shout down and forcibly bury any dissent from the Party Narrative! No dissent from within! We must have a solid Front!

I sincerely think you should reconsider your position on this. This AC is asking for, in his own way, a more liberal, left leaning, candidate from the democrat party. Your response is to demean him and his mental faculties (moron) and then state he should be silenced in the public forum (deserved to get moderated down); his arguments not even discussed, and hidden from view. Frankly sir, your attitude disgust me. His self expression is more than valid in light of the facts. This is an issue that should be discussed, not only on its own merits, but also on the basis that this could very well be the reason why we have Donald motherfucking Trump as the president now. And I say that as a two-fold statement: not only that the proffered democrat candidate failed to beat the second most flawed presidential candidate in history, but also that the attitude of hiding any dissent and covering up any problems with the proffered candidate was prevalent from the top of the DNC down to the average everyday democrat voter.

Then again, maybe I am just a bitter Bernie supporter who should be silenced, dismissed, and modded down.

Comment Re:Doing more with less.. (Score 1) 133

That's kind of bullshit, really, because the enable-exchangecertificate -services flag specifies specific services in an umbrella manner (eg, IIS, SMTP, etc) and neither it nor its official documentation explains that assigning a certificate to these services *won't* actually use this certificate.

Ie, the -services iis flag will get your assigned cert for OWA/ActiveSync/OA with IIS, but the Backend site will hang onto the self-signed cert at installation, as will hub transport SMTP. And it's poorly documented at best and NOT mentioned in the enable-exchangecertificate documentation in addition to running counter to past version behavior.

But the larger problem is that Exchange on premise is rapidly become a spaghetti mess of code written mostly for O365 hosting and cut-down and neutered for sites not quite ready to pay 3 to 5 times as much for hosted Exchange. The documentation blows, which is magnified as more and more configuration melts into a maze of Powershell commands.

I predict that by Exchange 2019 or whatever the next version is that MS will have reduced the documentation and ease of management so much that only sites large enough to support dedicated exchange teams (and access to high-level support) will even be able to run it on premise.

Comment Re:Good news! (Score 1) 194

And this children is what we call the slippery slope.

Notice it is not only a flawless example of the fallacy, but also a flawless example of how many people actually think.

Yes, that is right children, many so-called humans actually think in logical fallacies. They allow the intensity of their baseless emotions to somehow derail logic from it's inexorable path.

No! We don't exterminate them! That would be inhumane. Logic dictates that we do not kill lesser species.

Comment Re:Fake science/sloppy science (Score 4, Insightful) 320

Woah, I am confused by what you just wrote.

You seem to be saying that if a bunch of scientists agree that *this* (whatever *this* is) is the way it is, but none of the experiments that prove that *this* is the way it is are reproducible, then we should just go with the consensus?

Soooo, Galileo had some experiments he could back up, but the other scientists at the time had a consensus view of the cosmos. Their results were not reproducible, his were. You seem to be arguing for heliocentrism based on consensus.

Essentially, your introduction of the concept of consensus based on results with a total lack of any comments on how reproducible those results are leaves me wondering just what you think the scientific method is predicated on.

I don't care how "cutting edge" the research is. If it can be successfully reproduced and is based on sound principles I would consider it first before any "consensus" based on what a bunch of people think but can't back up with reproducible results.

Comment Re:Fake science/sloppy science (Score 1) 320

What a fucking GEM!!!! You had me at:

Abstract: The exponential dependence of resistivity on temperature in germanium is found to be a great big lie. My careful theoretical modeling and painstaking experimentation reveal 1) that my equipment is crap, as are all the available texts on the subject and 2) that this whole exercise was a complete waste of my time.

And kept delivering right through to the end! Thank you sir!


The diagram on the right side labeled: Fig. 1: Check this shit out.


Comment Re:Fake science/sloppy science (Score 4, Insightful) 320

Exactly right. If it is not reproducible, it is not "Science," period.

If, as others have written, your experiment is so finely predicated on the experimental set-up (using certain equipment, preparing samples or data in a certain way, etc.) then you need to document that so specifically that anyone can repeat it. Why, you ask, with an dumbfounded and incredulous look on your face? Because you could be introducing very specific bias in the way you set up your experiment. If it only works when you do it *just like this,* maybe the reason is that the experimental result is a direct consequence of your set-up and not an actual measurement of naturally occurring phenomena. I like to call it "measuring your equipment."

If you cannot, through your extensive documentation, re-create the experiment in another lab with completely different humans what you have published is essentially science fiction.

Comment Re:Always wait for the S version (Score 1) 112

IIRC, the AT&T Next program or whatever they called it made my last iPhone (6 Plus, so it's been a while) basically an 18 month interest free loan.

If you're upgrading on two year cycles, then that's at least 6 months with no payments. 3 years would make it 18 on and 18 off with payments.

In some cases, even "perpetual" payments may not be as bad as they seem. Until the 6 Plus, I upgraded every year but my wife got my year old handset and her handset got pushed down to be our "home" phone. So each phone technically had a 3 year (probably slightly longer) use cycle, at which point it was close to software obsolete or nearly unusable with the most recent software update.

My 6 Plus is the first iPhone I've had where there wasn't a noticeable degradation in performance when switching to the "new" OS released with a new phone model. Between that and the lack of compelling new technology, I've been content at this point to hold on to my 6 Plus. It really is all I need.

Comment Re:People are a problem (Score 1) 123

You're right that the tyranny of the majority could be a big problem, but these days initiative and referendum seems like it has some real benefits. As a safety override for legislatures which are increasingly incapable of only passing legislation beneficial to the moneyed class or so divided by partisanship they are unable to fix issues which the partisans have stakes in but which the electorate sees as non-partisan.

I'd put legalizing recreation marijuana in the category of cases where referendums served the public good. It stays illegal because the existing stakeholders in the security state and big pharma see it as antithetical to their individual interests, and most politicians are too pusillanimous to take a reasonable position on the issue.

Comment Re:Interesting to mull over effect of shapes. (Score 1) 103

You can't really compete with the concept of WWZ zombies -- they're just too fast and aggressive, but I think nearly every other invocation of them would fall away from an elliptical wall.

The other low-tech zombie fighting tool I've always wanted to see employed is a good old demining flail. These look like tanks with a combine attached on front, only the combine part is steel weights the size of melons attached to chains. They rotate and pound the ground to set off any mines.

If you raised the flail assembly so it just spun in the air, you could literally drive into zombie hoards at low speed and just pulp them.

My guess is that a similar apparatus on a smaller scale could probably be adapted to nearly any vehicle, probably even improvised from hydraulic sweeper attachments for Bobcats.

Comment Re:You all laugh now (Score 2) 103

I always wondered why a slope with an incline that gradually increased to vertical wasn't ever employed in zombie fiction forts. They would shamble forward until their center of mass shifted and then fall back.

With the right slope contour, you could make it so they fell back pretty far.

Another option would be a kind of blind curve, where they shamble in and then just shamble away on the other side.

Slashdot Top Deals

One man's "magic" is another man's engineering. "Supernatural" is a null word. -- Robert Heinlein