Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Easy Fix (Score 0) 104

I think when this sort of event is for pride, then whatever, but when cash prizes get involved I can see why the people giving the prizes would want the rules followed. I feel like the obvious way to do this is to have each participant use software that does regular screen captures that can be reviewed by judges if they feel like there was anything goofy going on. I know that privacy is a concern, but in that case participants could feel free to turn it off while not working or at least commit to not producing any work in other screens.

Comment Re:No. (Score 2, Insightful) 257

I wasn't arguing how arbitrary it was. I was arguing that the people who created the definition were smart enough to define it in such a way that the classification can be determined on a case-by-case basis. A basis that won't be substantively changed by comparative measurements. Discovering anything about any new planetary body will not change Pluto's classification because the discoveries will not be about Pluto.

Comment Re:get a lawsuit (Score 1) 761

Nah, just use it against them. If it's legal for them to place the bug on your car with no legal processes, it's also legal for you to take it and put it on someone else's. Slap it on a shipping truck or a train, or hell, a boat heading to international waters. After burning hundreds of thousands of dollars chasing nothing watch them make it illegal.

Comment Re:Alright! (Score 2, Informative) 485

Agreed. If you carefully read the Maryland laws in question (which my IRC channel did, accompanied with a good deal of argument) it becomes clear that this the correct decision. It could only have been considered interception ("wiretapping") if the person recording the interaction was not a participant and did not have the consent of either of the parties to distribute the recording. Since Garber was the one who had the gun pulled on him and he was also the one who willingly posted the video, he is not in violation of the laws in question.

Comment Re:This question (Score 1) 362

I have a fairly solid physics background and I understand that there is a physical limit for a reliable transistor. The problem is that it's not the same thing as the theoretical limit we currently have, nor is it the same as the physical limit for the size of a usable transistor. Our understanding of the science continues to progress and as we learn more and more about the principles we discover reasons why the the theory is wrong. Additionally, there are some very clever engineers working on the project who prove over and over again that they can improve on their current techniques, fabrication tools, and materials to push the theoretical limit. Then, where these things fail, there are even more folks standing by with ever more sophisticated error correction techniques to efficiently and consistently use transistors that are not physically reliable. Don't get me wrong, there will be a time when the our current transistor model will stop advancing. What I'm saying is that until the point where advances have actually ground to a halt, or hell, markedly slowed down, I don't want science and tech writers cramming stories down my throat about how we'll never see another significant advance in computing power.

Slashdot Top Deals

You will be successful in your work.

Working...