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 President Obama said something similar (Score 1) 164

Banning Muslims is wrong because we shouldn't punish innocent people because just because someone else is guilty.

The occasion was after one of the Muslim mass shootings last year.

Let's not forget that, at the same time Trump wanted to act against innocent Muslims, President Obama wanted to take action against innocent gun owners. If it's wrong to target innocents for enforcement, when can we expect President Obama to be criticized for exactly the same thing?

Comment Re:easily made up in peripherals. (Score 1) 450

Your suggestion, in a thread about relative costs of systems, is to buy a custom piece of hardware, from a vendor who's website doesn't actually list a price.

Y'all got Amazon where you live? Or access to any of the vendors they list on their website?

But it's not like Windows can backup to thin air. You have to have something on the other end of that CAT-5, so it's probably a wash hardware-wise.

Do you know what I think when I see a website selling a product but not listing a unit price.

"Huh, I wonder if Amazon has them?" would have been my first thought, but apparently it wasn't yours.

Comment Re:AI -- FAR more hype than substance (Score 1) 189

Filtering out extraneous data and acting on the environment is something all living things can do but computers are horrible at.

Unless computers have been trained to do exactly that. We're (genetically) trained to do so through natural selection. Things like software controlled radios are trained to do the exact same thing through careful programming in comparatively short time, rather than across millions of years of trial and error.

Comment Re:There is still a way to get science out of this (Score 1) 98

It's an interesting idea; but even without googling I'm willing to bet the impact zone is too far from any active rover. Why? Because the impact zone is probably close to the planned landing, and they probably didn't plan to land too close to a rover. Why? Because they want to explore diverse areas, and because even a well controlled landing might hit a rover.

I'm willing to wager... uhhh... stupid Internet points that the impact zone is 1000 (one thousand) km or more from any active rover.

AFAIK, the rovers can't get that far in a reasonable time. The zone will be covered with dust again, and/or the rover will fail. They can't "book it", at least not yet. They drive these things like Cameron's father's car. They're orders of magnitude more precious.

Comment A simpler solution? (Score 1) 73

It's miserable and unfair to be in poverty. And simply giving them broadband will not solve that. Therefore I offer a simpler solution:

Why not just mandate that the poor "not be poor" anymore?
We should just give them all say, $100,000 per year, and then nobody will be poor and everyone will be happy.

That should work just fine.

Comment Huh? (Score 2) 98

"That sequence of events followed the lander's largely trouble-free approach to the Martian surface..."

Er, not to split hairs here but it was a largely trouble free approach to MARS.
After it arrived at Mars and after the bit following orbital insertion and correction, the next steps would be:
- separation
- descent ...and then all the OTHER steps of a fairly complex landing sequence went spectacularly wrong.

So it's a heck of a stretch to say anything but a trivial portion of its "approach to the Martian surface" wasn't a complete botch...?

Comment Re: Great! (Score 1) 249

Yeah, Dyn is just a bunch of clueless amateurs. If only they'd asked you how to mitigate a colossal DDoS flood. You'd tell them: security! Because ... the problem with a publicly exposed service that doesn't work if it's not publicly exposed, is that it doesn't have good enough security to keep the public traffic out. Gotcha.

Comment Re: Great! (Score 1) 249

Brave words in defense of a social media platform ...

I'm not defending Twitter, I'm defending YOUR right, and mine, to be free of script kiddies trashing things just because they can. And I was replying to a user here who was cheering on a DDoS attack and hoping it permanently destroyed something he doesn't like. I didn't see that user, or you, proposing or providing an alternative that unicorns its way past your standards.

So, you don't like SV's social media systems. What have you got designed that will work better? Be specific.

Slashdot Top Deals

APL hackers do it in the quad.