Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


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

Comment Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics! (Score 1) 165

"citing a poll commissioned by London & Partners, the mayor's economic promotional company"

As Slashvertisements go this one is a bit more like news BUT it's still PR. Of course the Mayoral commissioned poll is going to show whatever the Mayor needs it to show. And of course the papers are going to let the Mayor get in all of his sound bites as he scrambles to lessen the impact Brexit will have on his people (bottom line).


Comment Re:Temperature increase from what temperature? (Score 1) 258

So, on topic, it seems to me that the great improvement here isn't necessarily the reheating but the fact they do so on vaporized milk (dispersed/whatever preemptively blocking pedant reason why what they are doing is different from actual "vaporization")

My question: Have they tried doing this during the initial round of pasteurization to see if the resulting once-baked milk is significantly 'cleaner' and possibly closer in taste/nutritional value to unpasteurized milk? The science makes a lot of sense to me as your heating will be more effective with more exposed surface area but I'm not clear on why this needs to be a secondary process instead of a modification of the primary process.. ?

Comment Re:Really? (Score 1) 265

Personally I'm making the assumption that our genetic ancestors survived by eating all of the species who didn't. Even a meat eating dinosaur would need a LOT of meat at its disposal BUT a small mammal can live for a long time on the meat of a single massive dino. The conditions post-impact might even be just about perfect to naturally preserve them.. ?

Get out the smoker, honey! We're making dino-jerky!!!

Comment Re:As long as it's for the right reason (Score 3, Informative) 482

I'm extremely conflicted on this issue. I strive to not be a hypocrite as much as possible so in this try to constrain my activities to a set of rules that I would be comfortable with everyone else following. SO here's where I'm at:

I go to a LOT of concerts. I believe the vast majority of people don't understand the depth of this statement. 5-7 nights a week. 250-300 days out of the year I'm seeing live music. There are many different kinds of shows and each one has slightly different rules. Clubs are very different from Theaters are very different from Stadiums are very different from Festivals. You really need to respect the environment you're in. I really hate how a lot of people use their phones during a show BUT at the same time my favorite hobby, aside from seeing the music in the first place, is capturing it for the many many people who live vicariously through my concert experiences. This is not vanity. I get thanks on the daily from people who don't have the time or money to go see what I do and truly appreciate the photos and videos I capture and share. SO, I need to find a balance between getting that done and not being "that guy" at a show either. Here are the rules I try to follow:

1) Turn off your flash. *Period. Cell phone flashes suck. You will get better photos with the light that is being provided by the stage light engineer. The *only time you need your phone flash is if you are taking pictures of your friends in the audience and then only if they are in the dark (see #2). Your friends look cooler if you take a photo away from the stage so they are illuminated by the stage lighting anyway.
2) I don't take selfies or group shots during shows: This is not only obnoxious for the flash that is often used (necessary or no) but also for the "sorry we're going to expand and shove you all out of the way so we can get an unobstructed shot". I'm not going to say I've never been in such a shot nor taken one but I avoid it to the max because I hate it when it happens.
3) Keep video to a minimum: I love having videos but hate taking them and it's really hard not to be "that guy" while doing so. Aside from the above *never use flash while recording because goddammit why are you blinding me for that long! but also: a) Video is better horizontal than vertical. b) try to not hold the phone blocking everyone else's view. This is prime if you can be close enough that you can hold your phone over someone's shoulder so only you and maybe the couple people immediately behind you can see it. c) Phone video only looks good when you hold the phone extremely still. If you can't do this then don't record video. d) (Personally) since I want this to be worthwhile to the general public I always record a entire song. I don't want to watch some crappy minute long shaky video of whatever so if I'm going to go through the hassle and aggravation of recording one then its going to be steady, quiet and a complete song. I also shoot for no more than 1 video per show or set if any.
4) Do your work quick and go away. Block people's view for as little time as possible and put your phone away. I've had shows where I took literally hundreds of photos and the people around me were like "dude I rarely saw your phone in the air". Look for a good shot, get your settings configured when the phone is out of view, pop it up and take a few quick shots (this is faster when the flash is off and any HDR is off as well!) and put the phone away. ALSO you're not going to capture the whole show. Don't try. Take a bunch of (near most) songs off and just enjoy them. I've been behind people who were shooting constantly and it's annoying.
5) Don't do a bunch of other stuff with your phone. If it's a really major show I might do a single FB update with a photo but else my phone is in my pocket unless it's being a camera or watch. *exception: for really large shows (festivals / stadiums) people may need to find where I am / vice versa so texting is a necessary evil sometimes BUT I'm not sitting there chatting about other crap. Purely logistical stuff.
6) ALL of this only works well if you're close to the stage. At a stadium or other large venue show there are great wide-angle shots to get and honestly you're not blocking most people's view so shoot away BUT I'm always close to the stage and if I can't get close enough for my phone pics to look great then I'm just not taking them. Cell phones do NOT look good if you use your zoom (unless you have one of the *extremely rare phones that has an optical zoom on it) so if you have to zoom then you're too far away. Just don't take the picture.

There are some smaller shows where friends of mine in the bands I'm seeing will ask me to record certain songs for their purposes and I'll push these rules a bit for a business job. Specifically more video and both videos and photos almost always look better when recorded from high at a down angle. I'll still try to put myself in-front of a pole or out of the way so I'm not wrecking anyone's view more than necessary but if the band wants a video then, sorry-not-sorry, I'm putting their desires above yours for a bit.

FYI I've been at a few shows lately where phones or at least the use of them was banned. Dave Chappelle had the secure phone sacks. I avoided using one but still kept my phone away for all but a very secretive single "I was here" shot. Amon Tobin and Puscifer had lots of security making sure your phone never came out.. mine stayed in its pocket. The late, great Prince was absolutely vicious about no phones at his events. You had to leave them in your car and any, even slight, violation resulted in ejection so not worth it. In-general always respect the artist. It's their art to let you, or not, record/capture.

Comment Re:Honestly (Score 1) 97

Not surprised at all since I helped build the system.

DoS has been matching Passport and Visa photos for a long long time. The only news here is that the FBI, only somewhat recently, added Face and Iris to their NGIS Fingerprint system. The fact they can search all 3 databases from one source was a fairly easy piece of middleware since all the databases are running the same Biometric software.

The world rotates based on a careful balance of the illusion of security and the illusion of privacy... people still enjoy their delusions tho.

PS. DNS-and-BIND apparently read a completely different post than yours. Reactionary response to something I'm pretty sure you didn't say..

Comment Re:Smells Like A Fish Story (Score 5, Insightful) 210

Exactly. It is stories like this that make me wonder why I even read /. anymore... The title fails the test. The summary fails the test HARD. I admit I didn't RTFA because... are you kidding me?

I don't know why I'd bother with digging deeper but just because:
1) A modern QA engineer's job largely centers around automating as much testing as possible. The more automation you do the better you are at your job (so long as the quality stays high)
2) That being said I've never worked at *any company that could survive on a *fixed set of automation for so long as 6 years. Features change and the automation has to change with it. If this story is even remotely true it would have to be: "Spent 6 months automating all testing; Didn't update the automation for 6 years and by miracle the tests continued to pass and no new features failed in prod (or if they did it was blamed elsewhere); at the 6 year point someone figured out this was happening (aka something broke in Prod HARD and they decided to evaluate the testing)."
3) I could see being obsolete not having written any code in 6 years but forgot it all? rubbish. He learned how to script an automation tool and that knowledge got deprecated. Everything else he didn't have experience doing in the first place which just got worse the longer he continued to not work in the business doing actual work. Bummer.

Comment Re:An easier sollution (Score 1) 1144

The sky must be gorgeous in your universe...

Dark nightclub with presumably loud music going on. Vast majority of the patrons imbibing whatever they so choose to be imbibing. First burst of gunfire rings out and your supposed hero immediately jumps to action with his hip piece and shoots down the guy with the AR. Great. Now patron B coming out of the bathroom doesn't see guy with the AR who's now on the ground BUT he does see random, non-uniformed, gentlemen with a gun drawn and similarly steps to save the day by shooting this clearly dangerous person. This chain reaction can easily involve way more people and way more guns than that simple scenario not to mention the probability that any one or many of these shots aren't fatal in which case you have injured people on both sides of the action trying to make their last stand to the best of their ability. Everyone is well-intentioned I'm sure but the friendly fire takes its toll. That story doesn't even need the alcohol (or whatever else has been consumed that night) to be present. That could happen with "clear" heads.

Note: I'm am not anti-guns in the slightest. Guns may make it easier for such an asshat to take out as many people as he did but at this point in our history, in this country alone, there are enough firearms out there that if he wanted one there'd be someone willing to sell it to him. My problem is people like you that seriously think a shootout by numerous armed unknown shooters in a dark and drunken environment could ever end as cleanly as what you describe above. I think gun reform (or not) could be a way more sensible discussion if people would stop making such ludicrous claims.

Comment Re:Honestly? (Score 1) 187

I'm all for the security benefit of this.

I'm also all for Firefox not being a bloated steaming pile that crashes constantly. It is, by far, the worst performing browser I use on the daily and that's *including IE11 which should say a lot. I seem to have seen the performance go completely away when I switched to the 64bit port so maybe my experience is specific to Windows x64 but honestly that's not a good excuse since that's no longer a unicorn environment. Both Chrome and IE have plenty of their own problems but Chrome hasn't crashed on me in years. IE has maybe crashed on me a handful of times in the same time. Firefox crashes on me at least daily if not more often when it's in a mood. Firefox's single process is using the same amount of memory as my Chrome's 26 processes combined which has 44 tabs open vs. 17 in FireFox. Firefox also has only very recently been surpassed by a couple of my IE processes as the king of page faults. All of the above number in the 100s of millions for a browser that crashes daily so has only been up for less than 24 hours.

If it weren't for the fact FireFox renders some very important (to me) websites better than Chrome or IE and that I require the severe sandboxing I get from having 3 completely separate browsers running or FF wouldn't even be on my host. I've got my fingers crossed that these process changes will make using this browser much less painful.

Comment Re:Hahahahaha FANTASTIC (Score 0) 664

...and to play devil's advocate a bit: It's WAY better especially if you're sitting on a version > 7 as those middle releases had issues. I'm not sure about all the complaints about MS getting ad revenue from me as I haven't seen a single ad in Windows 10 and in every other way it's been a better OS. If you've chosen to run Windows at all, 10 is the most stable and performant place for you to be.

If you don't want to go there then switch to Linux / etc.

Slashdot Top Deals

New crypt. See /usr/news/crypt.