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


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Wrong question (Score 1) 130

The real question should be why did the auto companies take so blinding long to start going public with their solutions. I know for a fact that the big three in the US have been working this problem for over 50 years. Classmates I had at Univ of Mich in the mid 60s were working on driverless cars with several proposed technologies. I suspect they were working on it from the WW-II days once radio controlled bombs and bombers were invented. What took them so long to get up off their asterisks and do something?


Comment Surrounded (Score 1) 209

The home I live in is literally surrounded by people with cable TV as close as 100' away in some places and 200' in others. But because the wire to feed our house is too long Charter Cable is too darned cheap to serve us. They screwed up laying out their network. I'm stuck with Frontier DSL at a whole 7 Mbps. Getting Fiber in here, despite over a decade of ads implying availability, I can't get that either.


Comment Re:Tough times ahead (Score 0) 294

Which liberal goon gets to make the call on what is fake news and what is not? Do you set the criterion? Do *I* get to set the criterion? I consider MSNBC, for a prime example, and CNN, for a second prime example, to be fake news sites where political coverage is involved. So I'd block the sites completely, or should I only block political news on the sites? Oh, wait, do I get to call what is political or not?

The perception is that Google is DEEP in bed with the progressive Democrat leadership. So will they declare FoxNews is a fake news site? Is Project Veritas a fake news site? Does truth and accuracy count or is it "truthiness" and "says what I want it to say" the criterion? This move on Google's part leaves me really considering that the perception matches reality in this case.


Comment Beware what you wish for (Score 1) 2837

I'm trying to think back over history. Two interesting concepts that are currently in favor with different factions are Communism and Democracy. Neither works. The former cannot even be started without a despot involved. The latter leads to failures such as Greece, Thailand's "Democrazy", and other dramatic mistakes.

The US Constitutionally speaking is a Republic rather than a pure Democracy. I'd rather not go with a pure democracy. But, if I must then I'd demand that the election is not settled until one candidate has over 50% of the vote. So a runoff election between, in this case, Hillary and Trump with no third, fourth, or fifth party candidates involved is mandatory. I suspect the results might not be what the pure Democracy advocates are expecting. The third party candidates allowed people who just could not stomach voting for Hillary or Donald an outlet. For some reason they refused to vote for Hillary. For another reason they refused to vote for Donald. But, they did vote creating a higher vote count needed for a pure majority. If forced into the binary decision they might swallow bile and vote for the turd in the punch bowl rather than the as yet unindicted criminal who played fast and loose with US secrets, killed an ambassador for her convenience, and so forth.

But that's all a silly argument. It would require a Constitutional Amendment to make the change. And that's not gonna happen any time soon. The barriers an prospective amendment faces are very high compared to mere electoral college hurdles.


Comment Re:Free speech != right to be heard (Score 1) 191

This judge has just declared that you and I and everybody else has a requirement to pay for somebody else's political soapbox, sit there, and listen to it. This is NOT what the first amendment says if you exercise a few brain cells a few minutes. If it did then there is no right to privacy in your own home. A saner interpretation is that a person may pay for and erect his soapbox any place that is legal without invading other people's privacy and speak his piece. Then he must clean up any mess and leave. He may not force you to listen. He may no force me to listen. He may not force anybody else to listen.

Given the way robocalls and telemarketers invade your privacy at their whim if this judge's verdict is allowed to stand I feel sorry for the poor sods reduced to taking telemarketing jobs. Their lives won't be worth 2 lousy cents when the vigilante squads find them.

Meanwhile, it is sort of fun to listen to the reactions when I declare, "If you call me again I will climb through this telephone cord and rip your g., d,,, throat out." A sweet little girl accent works best.


Comment Asian reaction appears favorable (Score 2) 535

I suspect the Asian nations will be pleased with brexit simply because they get access to the British market and goods without the EU getting in the way. Maybe this will be the end of expensive DSLR cameras that are limited to 29'59" of recording because the EU arbitrarily defined 30 minutes or more as a video camera and slapped much higher tariffs on them.

Maybe the next couple years will be time to invest in Britain rather than try to escape. Look at both sides of the possible effects before you jump.


Comment And when the drone count reaches 187 million? (Score 1) 176

If one drone means one accident in 187 million years of continuous operation what happens when we have 187 million drones out there up in the air at any given time? It's like 640k. People will perceive a need for more leading to hundreds of millions of drones some of which will be operating at any given time. Somehow one accident a year does not sound appetizing to me even if that's a world wide accident rate.


Comment Gee, memories are short these days (Score 1, Interesting) 183

About 20 years ago my partner took me into his workplace at UniSys in Mission Viejo. He showed me a nice modular computer system, video module, disk drive module, CPU module, memory module, etc. It was designed some 30+ years ago now by Convergent Technologies. Burroughs bought then and sold the computers for a few years. And there was still a working example at the UniSys labs in Mission Viejo. (Burroughs plus Sperry became UniSys rather than Spurroughs.)

I suppose 30 years is long enough for the reinvention to be seen as something brand new and unique and patentable. However, in a real world I suspect this prior art, documented on Wikipedia (the model number to look for is Burroughs B25) should not be patentable by any stretch of the imagination.


Comment RAID 5 solution? (Score 1) 101

I wonder if I can "fix" my RAID 5 system with a one disk at a time approach. Pull a drive. Use Linux to zero the drive. Use Windows to build the requisite NTFS partition to prevent complaints. Run the update. Rezero the partition information. And finally reinstall the drive in the RAID and let the RAID rebuild. Lather, rinse, repeat three more times for the other disks.

Of course, methinks I'll take a complete disk image backup of the RAID just in case.

Any thoughts regarding this approach? Is there anything simpler that can be done?


Slashdot Top Deals

"There is nothing new under the sun, but there are lots of old things we don't know yet." -Ambrose Bierce