Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



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

Comment Re:Only a fraction of US munitions... (Score 1) 197

We bomb brown people because we can get away with it. That's more opportunist than racist, but it's still racist.

As soon as "white" people start doing the same crap, it happens to them too. I'm guessing you're wishing away that pesky little Balkan conflict a few years back, where we bombed white people for, among other things, slaughtering olive people.

Pretending that it's skin color that makes ISIS a fair target for air strikes is the worst sort of craven intellectual laziness.

Comment Re:So what. (Score 1) 265

It's clearly a generational thing. Many older individuals can't seem to understand that dvds are inconvenient.

It's more likely that the older individuals have already lived through the death of a service and don't want to experience that particular inconvenience again.

Do you remember when DIVX went belly up?

LK

Comment Re:Good counter-argument, but I think it won't hap (Score 1) 97

A law to the extent that "no autonomous vehicle shall be used to transport passengers or cargo for hire within the limits of the city. Violators shall forfeit the vehicle and pay a $250,000 fine" still supports the autonomous car, and would make the unions happy. Most big cities are deeply blue, and deep blue areas are the places where unions still have any kind of foothold and still exercise power.

Again, I think you're just being unrealistic in your assessment of how easy it will be to displace things like taxi unions.

Comment Re:Careful Seattle, payback is coming (Score 1) 97

If I were building a giant fleet of autonomous robot cars, guess which markets I would absolutely flood with them as soon as they were ready? Any markets that tried to block my human driver efforts today...

There's a gaping hole in your logic: governments that can block your human driver efforts could (would) also block your autonomous vehicles.

Comment Re: Ditch AT&T (Score 1) 87

ATT is gone, the company bearing the name today is southern bell company, SBC. ATT split itself up and sold all the pieces, SBC bought the name.

Someone else noted that you got the particular baby bell wrong, but seriously, how can you say "this isn't AT&T." It's a bunch of AT&T successor companies that merged back together.

"It's not the Empire, it's the First Order. Sure they've got stormtroopers, and TIE fighters, and Star Destroyers, and evil jedi/sith with their red lightsaber blades, and yeah, they've got an even bigger death star and they're blowing up planets, their Vader analog is running around with Vader's fucking head in his sock drawer, but they don't have Bell Labs and Verizon, so it's obviously not AT&T."

Comment Re:Only a fraction of US munitions... (Score 2, Funny) 197

Our Nobel Peace Prize President dropped 26,000 bombs (real bombs, not little hand grenades)

Probably a lot more than that. You're not understanding the usefulness of air strikes on this sort of combatant.

on various brown people

Right, right. It's because of their skin pigment! For reference, resorting to lazy race baiting doesn't really win arguments (see the most recent election results as an example)

(even though we are not at war).

Yes, I can see you're having some trouble grasping current events. Please don't do anything dangerous to other people in the future. Like, voting.

Comment Re:Startups (VC funding) should make $1million mes (Score 1) 407

For example, I worked for a company that was growing 80% per year, becoming a leader in a new business segment. They would quickly duct tape together some software that would allow them to expand into another chunk of the market, a chunk that will be worth $20 million in four years. Later, they can spend $1 million to go back and fix the duct tape mess. They net $19 million that way, incurring $1 million in technical debt to quickly grab $20 million of the market before competitors do.

While I agree the above is completely logical, the difference between technical debt and financial debt is that there is no one holding you accountable for paying back the former. There's also the problem that technical debt has its own interest expenses... you'll find that your initial shortcuts have been built upon, and those things have themselves been built upon, and you can't simply fix the original problem without incurring FAR more cost. Even if the costs to fix the problem haven't ballooned, the money people have no desire to "waste" that million dollars to retire technical debt. They'd rather spend by investing in another new market, or paying bonuses, or dividends.

Comment Re: False premise (Score 1) 481

Let me field that answer. They'll use it, just like organizations kept using WinXP pre-SP3, until the new Director of IT came along and said "Are you fucking kidding me?! What incompetent idiot let you stay unpatched and critically open to everything that has come along in the last fucking decade?! Oh, the same one who thought it's a great idea to never upgrade hardware, despite your staff barely surviving on machines that crash daily, or catch fire like those two did last week."

Comment Re:Top priority? Always? (Score 1) 144

If your companies top priority is to keep data secure, they how/why did you get hacked. They always say that, but clearly that is not the Top Priority

I see you're doing your part by not using dangerous apostrophes where they are needed!

Implicit in any company's statement that security is their top priority is the large bundle of compromises that don't go away whether or not that is your top priority. They could make the data perfectly secure by disconnecting the servers and putting them in a bank vault. They could make sure the data can't be breached by simply destroying all of it. See?

Security can be your Top Priority, but it has to be done in the context of things like still making it available to users across the internet. Doing it while not going bankrupt. Making the service competitively priced so that it can actually be afforded and put to work.

They could have said that the system could only be used on equipment they ship to their clients, connected to the back end through a hardware-based dedicated VPN with biometrics, dongles, and constant nagging by three-factor comms surrounding every time someone hits the enter key ... and of course nobody could or would want to use the system or pay the monthly fee needed to keep something like that alive.

They may very well put security at a higher priority than chipping away at a long list of UX updates, performance under load, documentation, multi-language support, and a thousand other things. Doesn't mean that doing so means they'll be perfect in their security results. Ever run a business like that? No? Give it a whirl. Make security your top priority, and then start paying attention to what that decision means in real life - including in your ability to get and retain customers during that balancing act.

Slashdot Top Deals

Time to take stock. Go home with some office supplies.

Working...