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:Van Allen radiation belts (Score 1) 132

I can't claim to know the cause, but I have seen one proven case of a bit flip affecting processing on a machine that ran fine before and after the incident. Since it was doing batch processing I was able to re-run the job with identical inputs. It never made the error again.

Could have been a cosmic ray, alpha decay, power glitch that oddly didn't affect the other machines on the same circuit, who knows?

Submission + - FDA, Other Scientific Agencies Embargo News (

frank_adrian314159 writes: What if you were a reporter and couldn't check on the veracity of a science story before you reported it? That's the Faustian deal science reporters make every day with the FDA, medical publications, and other scientific organizations they depend upon for their "scoops". If you break the code of omerta or any of the embargoes, you can (and will) be blackballed from future information. Salon has the full (and lengthy) story here. Needless to say, this is probably not the openness most people think of when they hear the term "science reporting".

Comment Re:Teddy Kennedy - 1984 (Score 1) 169

Since I am not going to vote for either one, I reserve the right to complain about the whole sordid affair. The Ds being wrong doesn't make the Rs right. It just makes them both unsuitable for office. Of course, nobody here likely voted for Ted Kennedy in a presidential election either, so I would suppose they have room to complain as well.

Submission + - Obama used a pseudonym in emails with Clinton, FBI documents reveal (

schwit1 writes: President Barack Obama used a pseudonym in email communications with Hillary Clinton and others, according to FBI records made public Friday. The disclosure came as the FBI released its second batch of documents from its investigation into Clinton’s private email server during her tenure as secretary of state.

The 189 pages the bureau released includes interviews with some of Clinton’s closest aides, such as Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills; senior State Department officials; and even Marcel Lazar, better known as the Romanian hacker “Guccifer.”

In an April 5, 2016 interview with the FBI, Abedin was shown an email exchange between Clinton and Obama, but the longtime Clinton aide did not recognize the name of the sender.

"Once informed that the sender's name is believed to be pseudonym used by the president, Abedin exclaimed: 'How is this not classified?'" the report says. "Abedin then expressed her amazement at the president's use of a pseudonym and asked if she could have a copy of the email."

Submission + - mechanics of the rejection of science ( 2

Layzej writes: Science strives for coherence. For example, the findings from climate science form a highly coherent body of knowledge that is supported by many independent lines of evidence. Those who reject climate science often rely on several mutually contradictory ideas. Hence, claims that the globe “is cooling” can coexist with claims that the “observed warming is natural” and that “the human influence does not matter because warming is good for us.” A recent study examines this behavior at the aggregate level, but gives many examples where contradictory ideas are held by the same individual, and sometimes are presented within a single publication.

The common denominator among contrarian positions is the conviction that climate change either does not exist or is not human caused, and that either way it does not present a risk (or if it does, then adaptation will deal with the problem). In a nutshell, the opposition to GHG emission cuts is the unifying and coherent position underlying all manifestations of climate science denial. Climate science denial is therefore perhaps best understood as a rational activity that replaces a coherent body of science with an incoherent and conspiracist body of pseudo-science for political reasons and with considerable political coherence and effectiveness.

Comment Re:I am? (Score 1) 206

That presupposes that I would or even could pay the amount they are demanding. If those aren't true, they benefit in no way at all from me not enjoying that content.

Or another case. Let's say I plan to watch something on cable that I subscribe to, but 30 minutes in, the idiot up the street manages to cut a tree down and take the cable with it. In that case, I already paid the cableco which already paid the broadcaster who already paid the content producer, etc etc. So who would I be stealing from if I download the torrent posted by the guy upstream of the idiot with a chainsaw?

Comment Re:So basically ... the attack wins? (Score 4, Insightful) 194

Alas, no. That would have been possible in the before time when a T1 was a lot of bandwidth and the threat was a DOS rather than a DDOS.

In a DDOS, no one host is a big contributor, but there are a lot of hosts. Consider, you have 10,000 hosts (a SMALL attack) fetching valid URLs from your web server and sending them to /dev/null. Now, which of the 10100 hosts fetching pages from you do you want shot down? Keep in mind, your objective includes not letting the attacker win. To add to the "fun", those 10,000 hosts will rotate out and be replaced by others in a much larger pool fairly frequently.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Ada is PL/I trying to be Smalltalk. -- Codoso diBlini