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

 



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

Comment Re:Change the law (Score 1) 1424

Be serious. That thing is a total sham. Look who is in it - all the big states that normally vote the same anyway. Since it is practically impossible to win the popular vote without winning those states they have nothing to lose by being in this 'compact'. But, just in case, they stick in that little 'but only if enough other states do it' clause, which they know will never happen (because the other states DO have everything to lose).

If you think NY would EVER convert votes for democrats into votes for republicans just because other states did, I'll have some of what you are smoking. If that were to ever actually happen the legislature and governor would be replaced so fast it would make your head spin, and that would be the end of the 'compact'.

Comment Re:Change the law (Score 5, Insightful) 1424

It will never happen because the Constitution specifies that the president is to be elected by the states. The only way to change that is to change the Constitution, which would require 38 states to decide they should have no say on who is President, that whatever a handful of northeastern and west coast cities decide is fine with them. Ain't gonna happen.

Comment Re:*Raises Hand* (Score 1) 109

Blockchain is not bitcoin. The only thing computationally expensive in blockchain is an attempt to forge an entry. The expensive thing in bitcoin is the mining operation - there is no mining operation in blockchain. Blockchain is a template of what data is associated with something, and controls on who can see and modify portions of the data. There are 'smart contracts' which specify what parties must agree to a transaction (consensus). The stuff is all controlled by encryption, and does not rely on a central database.

Comment Re:*Raises Hand* (Score 1) 109

Of course it isn't 'the only' way to do it. There is seldom only one way to do anything. They could do it all on paper if they wanted. They don't have to justify anything to you - they just reached a business decision that this is what they want to do. I would like to hear your reasons why you think it is 'overkill' though.

Comment Re:Fact and Fluff (Score 1) 109

'Fluff' is claiming this could be done with 'a bunch of simple database joins'. For even a simple food product (say a bag a salad) there are many different companies involved. Farmers, trucking companies, processors, packagers, packaging suppliers, wholesalers, distribution centers, retailers. All with their own databases. All with their own database designs. All with their own database managers. All with their own database versions.

Yeah, I guess it would be pretty simple to just get authorization to all those databases and whip up 'a bunch of simple joins'.

Comment Re:*Raises Hand* (Score 1) 109

Decentralization is precisely the point. A farmer may sell his crops to dozens of buyers. Whose database is he going to update to say which field this particular truckload of lettuce was grown in? One of those buyers may make pre-packaged salads, provided to dozens of wholesalers. Whose database are they going to update to say which truck supplied the lettuce, and what factory/date/shift processed it? Whose database does the trucking company that moved the product to a warehouse update? What database does the warehouse update?

Today, the answer to all those questions is 'their own'. This is why it takes long to figure out the source of something. Retailer has to ask wholesaler to look up where they got it. Wholesaler has to ask packager where it was processed and when. Packager has to ask farmer where it came from, etc. With blockchain, that is all unnecessary, the whole chain is available at every point.

Comment Re:Barcodes are data - not a database (Score 1) 109

You are missing the entire point. The point of the blockchain (regardless of how it is identified) is that you have the ENTIRE HISTORY of that product in one place, and that history is cryptologically secure. Even if that one product had 5 steps in the supply chain, it is ALL there. Your magical UPS barcode tells you nothing except what UPS knows about the package. That is a HUGE difference.

Comment Re:Much more than barcodes (Score 1) 109

Who owns this database? Who can add to it? Who can modify it? Who can see the contents of it?

The way it is done today is with standard relational databases. That method is not ideal, as even the summary mentions (it can take quite a while to backtrack through all the individual suppliers databases to find a common thread). With blockchain, the entire history is right there, in one place.

Comment Re:Real Reason (Score 1) 74

What idiocy. The vendor did not 'deliberately make hardware incompatible'. They made hardware that worked for what they were selling, which was a laptop with Windows 10 installed. No, they didn't check if it would work with Linux, they were not selling Linux. They probably also did not check if it worked with any of the BSDs, or Solaris, or iOS, or Android, or AIX, or Z/OS.

Yues, the simplest way to avoid it is to not buy it. But that is not what happened, is it? No. Instead of admitting they bought the wrong thing, we have idiots claiming that it is some Microsoft conspiracy, or defective hardware, or some other such nonsense.

The world is not going to stop releasing new hardware just because some OS doesn't work.

Comment Re:Real Reason (Score 2) 74

Uh, no. This had absolutely nothing to do with secure boot. The laptops in question had an SSD controller from Intel. Linux could not see the controller when it was in RAID mode. The BIOS did not provide a way to turn off RAID mode, so Linux didn't see the disk. You could still boot Linux from USB, etc, which would not be possible under your wonderful conspiracy theory. Intel has now released patches for their drivers, and now Linux can see the disk. Amazing!

Comment Re:Why trust a cheap supermarket to be a bank? (Score 2) 65

You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. Credit unions have long term loans (eg 30-year mortagages), are regulated, and deposits are insured (by the NCUA). What makes them better is that they are non-profits owned and governed by the members of the CU. Therefore, the actions they take are for the benefit of the members, and not stockholders.

Slashdot Top Deals

A man is known by the company he organizes. -- Ambrose Bierce

Working...