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


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! ×

Comment Re: Uh, why? (Score 1) 20

Let me put it this way: if I had to use systemd/Linux or OS/2, I'd choose OS/2. Being able to boot properly is an important trait for any OS. OS/2 has this ability. Systemd/Linux often does not.

As much as I hate systemd, it really has no place in this conversation. You can get Linux without systemd, so you're presenting a false dichotomy in any case.

I've also had OS/2 corrupt itself on an unclean shutdown and fail to boot. I haven't had this with Linux since the early days of xfs.

Comment Re:Uh, why? (Score 0) 20

OS/2 was a very stable and reliable operating system

What? Who told you that? I ran 2.1, 3.0 and 4.0 and they were all unremittingly unreliable pieces of shit. Not just that but I ran them on a fucking PS/Valuepoint 486, so there was absolutely no excuse for incompatibility. Linux makes OS/2 look like Windows 3.1. The system was especially likely to explode when you ran Windows programs, too, and Windows compatibility was absolutely the only reason many people bought it.

I was actually running OS/2 for evaluation at a site that was ALL IBM, every single PC, every single piece of networking equipment, and OS/2 was still a horrible pain in the asshole. People remembering it fondly have memory problems.

Comment Re:Battlestar Galactica Quote (Score 1) 151

My quote emphasizes the need for distinguishing between police and army.

Your quote fails to recognize that it doesn't matter who's policing you if their goal is not to do the will of the people, because the people have thrown up their hands and said fuck it and given up even trying to keep them in check.

The police behave just like the military, except with shittier muzzle and trigger discipline.

Comment Re:Hire Actual Human Reviewers Maybe? (Score 1) 151

Seem to recall articles here on /. about Google's reviewers having to look at so much shit, they basically broke down mentally within a year

There must be a subset of the 4chan-esque crowd which will do the job they are paid to do faithfully in spite of being shitlords. Hire them, their eyeballs can withstand anything.

Comment Re:But Dissent is Now HATE (Score 1) 151

Right, watching and listening to 150 hours of new content uploaded every hour should be easy peasy.

If your argument is that Google cannot afford to hire 150-200 additional employees, it's a pretty lousy argument.

And how does one police/supervise the "reviewers"? Why, you need another person to listen to the same stuff to make sure, right?

Your failure is of imagination. No, no you don't. You let the community flag your misses. Just getting the vast majority of them would do the job.

Sounds like an impossible assignment to me.

That's because you're being disingenuous. Or dumb.

Comment Re:This is going to be a train wreck (Score 1) 104

It's not a legal loop hole. It is the sensible way to do business. What is not sensible is the way we do social services. We waste a bunch of money on fraud determining who is eligible. If you simply give them away to everyone, then that gets a whole lot cheaper. Now you only have to verify citizenship.

Comment Re: Our Future. (Score 1) 104

The op was making the quite valid point that a reasonable minimum wage only accelerated the problem.

That's a lot of nonsense, though. You might more reasonably say that upcoming automation caused the minimum wage problem. Companies could always play the "we will automate these jobs" card in order to argue against increasing the minimum wage.

Comment Re:Our Future. (Score 1) 104

There may be a short era of good feels, a generation that grew up working a no longer needs to and is simply satisfied with a life of comparative ease; but their grand children will demand free super sonic airline tickers, I promise you!

You're going to have to put up some kind of evidence for that. The millenials are used to having nothing, which is what their parents (and their parents' parents) left them.

You really think a group of top tier capital owner class types wont employ an army or robots that looks much more like the armies of the past and simply refuse to pay the taxes? What does for example Amazon need the government for once they can hire/build their own fully automated asset protection?

Unless and until one of these corporations actually manages to amass such an army, you can file that away under "skiffy bullshit" because the governments have all the military and will bomb them into a smoking hole in the ground if they don't play along.

Comment Re:deploy this, and you arent a state anymore. (Score 1) 88

Encountering has little effect, police encounter pretty much every human in America on a daily basic

And they are overwhelmingly racially biased against blacks, so they're looking harder for evidence of a crime. And they send them into neighborhoods with more blacks looking for crimes.

and infact encounter other police a disproportionate amount (and yet police shooting police hardly ever happened).

Which is too bad, because cops commit crimes at about the same rate as the general population, except rape. They are approximately four times as rapey as the general populace.

Comment Re:Nor replaced but protected (Score 1) 104

The robots are not here to take our jobs, but instead to protect us.
I mean, who wants do do those menial jobs of transporting and feeding older people ? Especially in the ones in multi-story buildings.

You might be able to solve that by making a robot that can wash an old person's ass for them. But you might also solve it by making a robot that eats old people. Robots aren't moral, they're machines.

Slashdot Top Deals

If you are good, you will be assigned all the work. If you are real good, you will get out of it.