Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


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

Comment Re:Understandable, but... (Score 1) 378

I usually get away with shopping late, but I guess I got my hand caught in the cookie jar on that one. There was no way I'd show up to the family X-mas party without a gift for my nephew (who is also my Godson). I'm just annoyed that Amazon displayed so much confidence in their shippers, and it ended up causing me headaches. The other 51 weeks of the year, 2-day shipping means 2 (occasionally 3) days. They're probably as good as anyone on the planet at shipping consumer goods to people, so when they said, "We've got this," I believed them. Meh.

Comment Re:Understandable, but... (Score 1) 378

I ordered a toy for my nephew 5 days before Christmas, with Amazon Prime 2-day GUARANTEED shipping. Right on the item page, Amazon GUARANTEED that it would arrive by Christmas. I don't hold UPS responsible. I hold responsible the vendor that made the claim. I spent my Christmas Eve driving to a Toys-R-Us 3 towns over, instead of sipping egg nog and decorating the tree.

Comment Re:Scalpel or gun can be used for good or bad ... (Score 2) 406

Let's ask this another way: why aren't business men considering the ethical implications of their investments? Why aren't militaries, bureaucracies, and governments considering the ethical implications of their orders? Why isn't the average person taking five minutes to understand a problem now so he doesn't demand government, the market, and God on high give him an answer that he's going to hate more than the original problem a year from now?

TFA presumes that we as engineers are smarter, better humans than everyone else, that we can and should forsee all of the ethical implications of our work. It's pure hubris, and I call shenanigans. By and large, engineers do what their employers pay them to do, to feed themselves and their families. IMO, every link in the chain should be held to the same standard of moral accountability. We're not exempt, but it's unreasonable to expect us to take any more (or less) responsibility for the bad things that our work makes possible.

That said, I once quit a job working on systems that could be used for what I perceived as evil. My girlfriend (also an engineer) works for a military contractor, and I give her a hard time about that occasionally. Her response is that she works on detection systems, not weapons. To my mind, it's at least a waste of good engineers to further meaningless political power struggles, and keeps the warmongers in business.

Comment Re:Liability of exit nodes (Score 1) 186

Who in their right mind would run an exit node in the first place? Who is this person who thinks it's a good idea to send data and requests on behalf of anonymous users who don't want to get caught doing it themselves?

All I can think of are:

  1. Good Samaritans with fat data pipes and legal immunity
  2. People who want to get on watchlists, to prove a point
  3. Underinformed nerds

Comment Re:LulzSec Connection (Score 1) 622

I think you just hit the nail on the head! Either...

1) Someone in LulzSec stole this dude's wallet
2) Someone in LulzSec fabricated the whole story (most likely, IMO)
3) The thief stole the BC and "donated" it to LulzSec in a bizarro Robin Hood-esque gesture
4) The pastebin is fake or something

Slashdot Top Deals

All life evolves by the differential survival of replicating entities. -- Dawkins