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


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

Comment Jesus fucking christ NO ONE CARES (Score -1, Troll) 191

Just because you're too stupid to realize your political favorite wasn't any different doesn't mean that Trump is any different.

Your team lost. Deal with it, and shut the fuck up about who Trump appoints because not a fucking thing matters without the approval of congress, and as the democrats were kind enough to show, you can have a super majority in congress, and your guy in the white house ... and you still can't get a one fucking useful thing done.

You guys actually like your guy/girl would have been so much better, all that means is that YOU personally are too stupid to realize they are both exactly the same.

Oh my bad, slashdot isn't news for nerds, its BaeuHD and the other 'editors' personal blog. Thought you guys were going to fix it ... you just made it another tabloid.

Comment Re:Here come the science deniers (Score 5, Insightful) 553

On the contrary, I want to see real science on the subject. I want to know what the REAL dangers are.

Unfortunately, the down side is that getting any real research on pot in the USA is pretty much impossible. If you give any hint that you don't INTEND to find something wrong with pot, good luck getting approval and funding for your study.

If you want actual research on pot you have to leave the US. You'll find a different view in any country outside the US, so you have to approach any study in the US with very very high skepticism. I'm not saying its wrong, but you know its biased from the start, so you have to be careful to pick out the facts from the implications.

When the people who make money off Alzheimer's studies start saying pot causes Alzheimer's type affects on the brain, you have to determine if thats true in any meaningful form or if its just another scary title to get more research money, or if its being promoted by others who don't want pot to be legal.

Remember, legalized pot destroys MANY industries. The prison business is fucked in states that legalize pot, thats half their population right there. Illegal pot growers ... they don't want it legal either, and invest LARGE sums of money keeping it illegal, as silly as that might sound cause legalization kills their sole reason to exist. California, as an example, doesn't have legalized recreational pot because THE GROWERS DON'T WANT IT TO BE LEGAL, its not as profitable that way. Police in certain places don't care, so legalizing it would kill profit.

I have no delusions about the dangerous side effects of inhaling smoke, but I would like some facts about what the end results are, from people who aren't biased by a preconception.

I.E. I want real science, not bullshit spewed by people like you who have made up your mind before you even read the summary. You don't know what science is, you treat science like a religion.

Comment Re:Autopilot (Score -1) 147

More importantly, my command radio is on 900mhz because I want it to actually propagate more than a tiny ass distance of 2.4ghz or being useless when it rains.

So great, you took out some kids Phantom. But thats about it. A rifle would be just as effective, lighter and cheaper.

You're also assuming that its not in a flight mode that does safe landings/return to home. Take out the RF link on any of my racing quads and you've effectively just turned it into an unguided missile since it isn't that smart and doesn't carry a GPS or altimeter

Comment Autopilot (Score 4, Insightful) 147

Dude, I'm not flying the bomb to your house while holding the transmitter, I'm turning on the auto pilot, letting it sit there for an hour, then take off and bomb you while I'm 2 states away. Oh, and I'm doing this on software thats a couple years old (ArduPilot from a few years ago) so ...

This is useful for taking down your DJI phantom ... but as far as taking down a weaponized toy? Yea, no, you're going to need to hit inertial management and GPS based on what I can build for a hundred bucks. Give me 200 and I'll start doing optical guidance.

Comment Re:Worth all $1200 (Score -1) 315

Sup loser? Still wishing you could get out of moms basement and see the sun light?

It makes me feel better seeing your posts to know that no matter how pathetic my life might become, I can always look to you to see someone who is actually worse off in the world.

You have the entire Internet at your finger tips and the best you can do is troll one of my slashdot accounts?

Take a look in the mirror. Thats what a waste of life looks like.

Comment Re:Imagine lining them against the wall (Score -1) 31

I wouldn't shoot my dog, there is Euthasol for that when the time comes.

And if you want to be mean, just tie them up, then shoot them anywhere right above the pelvis. It'll take a nice long while for them to die and you only use one bullet, but rest assured it will be an unpleasant end.

Comment Re:Worth all $1200 (Score -1) 315

Quality means different things to different people, AC.

So does value

Also, what people are willing to pay has no real bearing as a measure of real value.

By definition, that is false. You do not understand the meaning of the words you are using. Paying for something is a direct result of it having value.

See for instance, caviar. It is horrid. Salty. Vile.

People pay a lot for it because it is hard to obtain, and its consumption is a symbol of conspicuous wealth.

Because to some people, showing off has value, such as making or break a business deal.

Apple products are similar.

No, pretty much in every way is your comparison wrong. They aren't 'rare', they are high quality and the quality is predictable, multiple studies by people far more in the know than you show people are 'happy' and get more reliable service resulting in lower total cost of ownership with Apple Laptops than they do with even 'high end' Lenovo laptops, as shown by the study produced by IBM.

Also: OS X

You won't understand why that matters because you're too caught up in blowing off the value of the Apple laptop instead of considering other view points.

You may not like an Apple laptop, but there is plenty of facts to counter all of your arguments. Its okay for you to not like it, but stop spewing ignorance.

Comment None - Windows laptops can't run OS X (Score -1) 315

Because otherwise there is pretty much no comparison.

You can't buy a Windows laptop to replace a MacBook Pro because you can't (legally) run OS X on the Windows laptop.

I own MBPs because the hardware is nice, but the OS is the only OS I want to use. I do Windows dev for a living, but really can't stand it. I can deal with Linux but the Linux distro people like to shoot themselves in the face by inserting the gun in their anus and pulling the trigger with the way they can't distros around, FreeBSD is a great server OS, proper organization and no hint of any idiotic systemd bullshit over happening ... ever ... but its a shitty desktop just cause DragonFly is as good as it gets.

Nope, you can't replace a MacBook Pro because you can't get OS X anywhere other than a MacBook pro. Your MacBook Pro can run Linux or Windows or FreeBSD, Solaris, even DOS with some ridiculous efforts, but nothing else can run OS X.

Ignoring all that ... you can make a hackintosh ... which will suck ... because it won't wake from sleep properly ... or the video card driver will be buggy, or sound won't work ... sometimes ... or any other number of bugs that come up from basically trying to shoe horn in drivers like Windows does, and you'll have something that looks like OS X, but its reliability and quirks will just piss you off till you either accept that you're a cheap bastard and you'd be happy to pay for a MBP, or you go back to Windows/Linux and blame OS X for the fact that you didn't want to actually pay for it.

No matter how you want to try and put it though, you simply can't buy a non-MacBook Pro that compares to a MacBook Pro based on OS X alone. Argue the hardware all you want, you still won't beat the software so its a non-starter.

Comment And fart unicorns while saving cancer (Score -1, Troll) 428

and powering the hyper loop and putting us on Mars.

In short, its going to save the world from everything.

Can we please stop posting shit from Musk. He doesn't know shit. He got lucky before .boom and has been riding that ever sense. He gets some smart people around him to do the actual work, but he's still just an egotistical asshole who'll tell you anything to get your attention when he's not front and center.


Comment Re:Disclosure would have been nice. (Score -1, Insightful) 126

No, it isn't, not really.

Turning on the mic takes milliseconds, including the little slider actually sliding on the UI so you know something happened.

Theres absolutely no need to buffer input before its turned on, you don't expect the app to magically go back and get sound from before you turn it on, do you, because thats the only reason you'd want this on all the time. And in that case, you wouldn't label the option to turn the mic off, you'd label it to stop listening to commands which are two entirely different things.

Why the fuck is it listening all the time even when its turned on in the first place, let alone on when you've turned it off.

The VP is a liar and they've been caught misbehaving. There is nothing reasonable about intentionally mislabeling an option to mean something exactly the opposite of what its labeled.

Comment Re:Also too early to spend trillions of dollars (Score -1, Insightful) 201


Yes, contrary to your very narrow minded view of the world, this is a subject still open to debate.

The problem exists.

You can't even define the problem beyond 'warming', which has been shown to have occurred before on large scales. You can't actually define the problem beyond what you are extrapolatinging might happen even though you have absolutely 0 concrete evidence to support your theories about whats happening.

The models aren't failing.

The models you choose to select aren't failing ... of course thats just because you make up some bullshit numbers and formulas then pick the ones that closest match reality even though they have no basis in reality. The process is only slightly more scientific than throwing darts at a dart board with theories attached and picking the one that gets closet to NOT the bullseye, but instead whatever number you think is going to support your argument today. Next week, different except of a weather pattern that contradicts what you said last week.

Plenty of models don't predict your doom and gloom and predict a little more of whats actually happening rather than whats not happening ... you just ignore those models and call them wrong. If the evidence doesn't agree with you, you throw it out.

There is scientific consensus.

Yes, when you put yourself in a situation where the only people you talk to are people that agree with you, getting a consensus is easy. Of course, most of the 'consensus' you base your self on isn't even actual science, its unproven theories on top of unproven theories that leave out massive amounts of data only to prove your own personal point.

Once you actually pull full data sets in, neither the climate deniers nor the climate doomsayers have any indication of what they say being true.

The only fact in this argument is that this has all happened before. The rest is speculation that you want to call facts.

No one on this planet has anything more than a theory about what happening to the climate. Everyone could move forward and hell, more people might actually listen to you when you stop claiming things as facts which any 3rd grader could point out they are different from facts in obvious ways, like direct observation. Speculating based on something you dug up from thousands of years ago just makes you look stupid, then on top of that you pretend that there is absolutely no question as to your methods of dating and determining temps at the time were correct ... except next year when a study comes out and tells us those numbers were all wrong and now its even worse@!#%!@#%.

How the fuck is it, you guys are so absolutely fucking sure of yourself, when every few months there are more contradictions.

You wouldn't understand science if it hit you in the face.

I'm not arguing either 'side', i'm arguing that both of the 'sides' are fucking idiots who don't know what science is, they've just picked a team to join, you included, and you're too stupid to know why you're on the team. I'm guessing you also voted for Hillary and can't imagine how she didn't win, these two things are directly related: You're delusional :)

Note: I did not vote for Trump, and I do believe the climate is changing

There is scientific consensus.

Sure, if you select just the people who agree with you, 100% consensus. Of course, as soon as you find someone who is a subject matter expect ... but doesn't draw his salary by scaring people about global warming research papers, suddenly there isn't a consensus.

There is at least 1 store a month on slashdot contradicting one side or the other ... but you think there is consensus. You only hear what you want to hear, truth be damned.

The "good news" here is that the problem isn't worsening as fast as it used to.

According to models and theories, no indication via direct observation.

You guys who get all fucking excited over AGW, on both sides, for and against its existence get so ridiculously stupid about proving that you are right that you don't stop to ever wonder if you are. You are so locked in to your religious beliefs about the science of global warning that there is no way you will ever look at the truth, regardless of what that is. You're never going to believe anything other than 'the world is doomed due to man-made global warming', even if you were freezing during the next ice age.

You have a problem, and its not global warming, its your lack of ability to not be so locked into a stupid assumption you made a long time ago.

Comment Not going to happen (Score -1) 445

There is no benefit to either Obama or Trump to pardon Manning or Snowden.

Manning certainly didn't do anything other than break the law and feed wikileaks crap for them to mutate into bullshit. You guys need to get over this one, he's going to be in jail for a long time and thats not going to change. Theres no question of laws being broken, no question of guilt, and no real visible benefit to society other than unrest since the population as a whole doesn't agree that anything leaked showed anything damaging, but pretty much all of the population outside of stark raving fanboys will acknowledge at least SOME damage caused by the unrest.

Snowden broke the sacred rule of tattle tailing on the Presidents personal weapon, he's not going to pardon him and Trump is going to want the same weapon as a benefit, so he's not going to do it either. Doesn't matter what he showed us or how important it was, its just too soon. If you want Snowden to get a pardon, you gotta get him out of peoples memory so when his names is mentioned barely anyone knows who he is, then he'll get a pardon, since he will have had to hide for long enough to deter anyone else from doing it for a generation or two ... until another young idealist with some balls does what he does again in another 50-100 years.

EditorDavid, this rubbish you posted sounds like something a middle schooler with ideals and absolutely no knowledge what so ever of how politicians actually work.

And WHO CARES ABOUT ASSANGE'S INTERNET CONNECTION? He's just some jackass holed up in an embassy because he's afraid one of the most pacifisting counties on the fucking planet might find him guilty of being a dickhead and not pulling out . . . or at least thats his bullshit claim. No one got pregnant or an STD that we're aware of, so in the end, nothing is going to happen ... other than he makes up a bunch of bullshit to get attention ... Remember when this started ... he was in England roaming around the public as a normal person, cops could arrest him at any moment on the street ... and then he ran to an embassy because SWEDEN (which DOES NOT ALLOW extradition for political or military purposes) MIGHT extradite him to the US ?! Sweden was going to do it ... but England hadn't done it already ... a country that is essentially our best friend outside of Canada ... didn't give him to us, but he's afraid of the country that doesn't give up people for any of the reasons he claims the US wants him ... they are going to turn him over to the US ... but not England.

You have to be pretty fucking retarded to believe anything regarding Assange at this point, and nearly equally as retarded to still be talking about him for no reason other than clickbait headlines
And what the fuck is up with all the stories on slashdot coming from anonymous reader or one of the editors directly?

Comment Re:Kaspersky unfair bundling advantage (Score -1) 100

Irony: The troll who has nothing better to do with his sad life by follow my posts and make pathetic attempts to troll me ... calls me a troll.

Let me get out my shocked face at your absolutely stupidity and ignorance.

You'd don't have autism, I didn't offend you, you're just stupid. Thats different.

Slashdot Top Deals

No amount of careful planning will ever replace dumb luck.