Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


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

Comment Re:To be fair, a pretty easy run (Score 1) 229

Not to mention there was no traffic on the road that late at night, and more importantly, you don't learn anything scientific from doing this (and afaict, they don't even claim to have learned anything), it's just a publicity stunt. And Uber has been doing a lot of these kinds of publicity stunts lately. My theory is that they are trying to pump up their valuation for an IPO (or another round of funding or whatever).

Well, it's obvious that post-SDC somebody will be operating this huge fleet of self-driving taxi/transport vehicles. At some point it's just about being the most hyped company to get the funding to ride the bubble like say Amazon did. Sure, they lost 96% of their share value in two years when it popped but those who never got on the hype bandwagon mostly lost everything and are nowhere to be found. To be honest I don't really mind a SDC bubble where everyone goes crazy because it will also accelerate change, the dotcom boom/bust might not have been good for investors but the transition from offline to online went pretty snappy.

Comment Re:like in the movie? (Score 1) 229

And there is a large feedlot right next to it, where they collect the piss.

The GTA V beer is spoofing Budweiser's anthem, I wonder why... of course they also say it's German but I think they got it confused with Bismarck, North Dakota or something. They might be responsible for World War I, World War II, blood, sweat, tears and gas chambers but bad beer is simply inhumane.

Comment internal memo from Satya Nadella... (Score 1) 208

My friend works as a developer within Microsoft and he just texted me saying he and his coworkers have all received a memo from the CEO using a metaphor of being on a 'burning platform' and asking if anyone knows of another company that can buy Microsoft and then after spending more billions of dollars just close the whole thing down out of frustration.

Any ideas?

Comment Re:No you don't (Score 2) 208

No. You don't. Because that isn't possible to do. The fact that this guy even said that means he is clueless about mobile. He needs to be replaced.

Ah our resident doofus. If he said he had a PC to replace your phone, obviously he'd be clueless. A phone to replace your PC? Why not, for most people their phone now has way more power than the PC had ten years ago, it just has bigger input/output devices. Microsoft could make a x86 phone with a HDMI/DisplayPort/USB dock (or just an USB-C cable hookup) and it'd make a perfectly satisfactory PC for most people. His problem will be that nobody wants the phone side of it, they want their iApps or Google Play-apps.

Comment Re:Who needs them anyway (Score 1) 319

I stopped wearing a wristwatch 10+ years ago. It was annoying to wear while using a laptop. There's clock on my phone, computer, car, radio, egg timer.. I don't see the point in carrying extra one on my wrist.

To me it's exactly the opposite, sure there are all these different context-dependent places I could see the time but my watch is always there and I can just glance down 0.2 seconds to see how long do I have to get somewhere or be somewhere or have spent on something or have left of something. I feel it gives me more control over the day than if I don't wear one because the overhead is so small, if I have to pull my phone out of my pocket I don't really do it unless I need to know the time. I put it on in the morning, take it off when I go to bed and it runs years on a battery so that very little "nice-to-have" is balanced by a no-fuzz experience. Don't know how your watch is or how you type but I don't have a problem using a keyboard all day with mine.

Comment Re:I hear Hillary participated in this study (Score 1) 177

I was thinking the same.

Lies like the whole leaving the airplane under sniper fire sounds nice, but is so easy to discover the truth and the realization of the lie of that you fail to see any point to the lie, ditto for there not being any classified info on her server (both a pair of many).

I guess this means her next big one will be "no, we are not going to war with Russia if I win"

Comment Re:Best attempted on Earth first! (Score 1) 216

I think automated mining is more viable than remote-controlled mining.

Terrastrial mining incorporates humans to optimize the energy / yield ratio. Since the target materials are not very valuable, energy efficiency is critical to the equation- earth mining operations can't afford to process a million cubic yards of material to extract a couple pounds of gold.

In a space / Mars mining operation, the input energy will have to be solar. The target materials will be as valuable as the cost of sending them from Earth to Mars, so very valuable- an ounce of water on Mars is far more valuable than an ounce of gold on Earth. These target materials (elements like iron or molecules like water) will likely also be easier to efficiently process out of the surrounding material. These dynamics make automated mining an attractive proposition in space (or on Mars).

Comment Re:No Von Neuman Machines yet (Score 1) 216

Raising babies takes a tremendous amount of infrastructure. An adult human is mostly self-sufficient; babies are not. As somebody said, it really does "take a village" to raise a child.

Reality check: Children have grown up all over the planet for all of history with no infrastructure with poorer parents often raising half a dozen of them. The way we raise western 21st century kids means most parents have enough with a few, but unless they quite literally die they grow up every other way too. The "takes a village" saying is about society's influence, everybody wants to fit in with their peers and prevailing norms, even if that is at odds with your parents.

Comment Re:What are we forgetting... (Score 1) 216

Okay, so we've got the mining robots, the auto-fuelling spaceship dock, the autonomous telephone sanitizers... I can't help feeling there's something we're forgetting... Oh! Right - people. Hang on. Why are we sending people again?

Because we're not smart enough to make a robot that could and would do what we'd do and telepresence would be hopeless with the delay. Take the stupidest person you know that can drive a car. Ask him to write the software for a self-driving car, might as well ask him to jump to the Moon. Not even many man-years of the best and brightest has managed to get their car a driver's license that millions of teenagers manage every year. If there's a real base there will be plenty that goes wrong or becomes defective and plenty to fix. If it's just to have humans in a bunker eating canned food until their return flight, then yeah there's not much point.

Comment Re:Should we be using TrueCrypt 7.1a instead? (Score 4, Informative) 72

I would like this answer too, please, someone...

If you have system encryption enabled (traditional BIOS, no UEFI support) and you have a strong passphrase and you are the only user and you're not worried that anyone can physically tamper with your system boot or rescue disc - in which case they might just as well use a key logger - then there's no critical issues.

There are several nice to haves that make weak passwords stronger by increasing iterations, close various attacks that other users/processes can do and cleaning up better if you only use containers. The ugliest is probably a privilege escalation attack, malicious software can use the TrueCrypt driver to escalate to admin but if malware is running on your machine you probably have big problems anyway.

Probably the most interesting part about VeraCrypt is the potential for UEFI boot but apparently there's no way to secure erase the keyboard buffer, all you can do is reset it (which they didn't do, but do now) and hope the driver actually overwrites it. But if you can dump the entire UEFI memory area it might still be there. Hopefully legacy BIOS mode will be around for a while longer, in this case simpler is safer.

Comment Re:how about 4A (Score 1) 427

They couldn't force you with out the lead pipes and rubber hoses, fortunately those aren't allowed in the US yet. What you do in a situation like this is refuse to comply, force them to arrest you and spend the night in jail so you can call the ACLU and get the warrant tossed. See they get away with it because no one refused to comply. Once everyone in the building complies there is no effective way to sue them and set a precedent that will stop this happening again.

Why not? If you think they have an illegal warrant, you sue them as if they had no warrant. Same way you don't sue GPL violators for copyright infringement and not breach of contract, because you have no proof they agreed to the license. They will bring out the warrant and say it's okay, we had a warrant. Then you can challenge it and appeal any dismissals. I wouldn't do it without the ACLU, EFF or someone like that bankrolling it, but it seems to carry less risk since if your challenge fails you were never "rightfully" arrested and perhaps even charged with obstruction of justice. I strongly doubt "Scary guys with guns and fancy papers said I had to or be arrested so I did" counts as consent, immediate compliance does not mean you lose your right to challenge it after reviewing with legal counsel. Same way I'm not about to argue with a SWAT team breaking down the wrong door, I'd comply perfectly. Then sue the shit out of them.

Comment Re:After watching (Score 2) 356

I don't think there's any way to stop gerrymandering other than the voters themselves waking up. California tried appointing a panel of retired judges to draw the boundaries, but it turns out judge panels can be rigged, too. Pretty much any system you can think of can be gamed.

Well the primary reason for gerrymandering is to cause "lost" votes. Here in Norway we have 169 members of parliament, 150 of them are traditional district-specific votes. Since we got 19 districts, there is 150/19 = ~7.9 seats/district though they're actually distributed by population. This means you need like 100/7.9 = ~12.7% of the votes to get a direct seat or even higher in the smaller districts, which is a high bar to pass. But all the spillover votes of parties that got at least 4% nationally - no limit on direct seats - and didn't lead to a direct seat are put in a pool and used to assign the last 19 seats. So the more lucky you got securing direct seats, the less likely you'll get any bonus seats. I'd say it's been quite effective at producing a strong local representation, while making sure it's close to proportional on the national level.

Comment Re:how about 4A (Score 2) 427

supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

You are reading way too much into this. If the police get a warrant to search a particular house for drugs that is a specific warrant. If it were all houses or to search for any contraband that would be a general warrant and unconstitutional. When they exercise that warrant they're going to search the whole house with everyone's belongings, they don't have to go through the coat rack and assign ownership first then come back with one warrant for Alice's jacket, one for Bob's jacket and not search Eve's jacket because she was just visiting. If they tried to search a whole apartment building because of one occupant that would probably be overreaching, but they don't have to be extremely particular either. And they may search anywhere drugs may be hidden, the only limitation is things obviously out of scope like opening letters, playing movies and other actions that can't possibly lead to the discovery of drugs. But if the evidence could be on the phone, the phone is free game.

I think the same goes with crowds, if it's two room mates they'll search it all even though eventually it might turn out only one sold drugs and the other was innocent. But searching a thousand people at a concert even though you have compelling evidence someone is selling drugs is probably not reasonable, though I can't find any precedent on how strong individual suspicion is necessary. If you're say raiding an illegal gambling club it might be reasonable to suspect all of illegal gambling no matter the size. Now this search may led to finding evidence of other crimes like illegal guns and anything they find specified in the warrant or not may give probable cause for arrest, but that is fine because they're not part of the premise for the warrant. The only time you need to name a person is when issuing an arrest warrant because you intend to seize that person, since you can't have a general warrant to arrest people. That said, we have some gray areas surrounding terror organizations where mere membership is criminalized that is bordering on general arrest.

Slashdot Top Deals

A language that doesn't have everything is actually easier to program in than some that do. -- Dennis M. Ritchie