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

 



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

Comment Re:hal (Score 0) 122

Before Professor Lewis became senile, he held a different opinion:

in his 1990 book Technological Risk, Lewis wrote that "all models agree that the net effect" of increasing greenhouse gases "will be a general and global warming of the earth; they only disagree about how much. None suggest that it will be a minor effect, to be ignored while we go about our business." Reducing the effects, including significant sea level rise, would "require global cooperation and sacrifice now, to avert something far in the future, and a conjectural something at that. There is no evidence in human history that is in the cards, but one can always hope."[10]

Hal Lewis is 93 years old. He retired 25 years ago.

And Montford is a fiction writer and blogger whose crackpot conspiracy theories have been well and truly debunked.

Comment Re:Doomsday Predictions (Score 1) 122

The problem is that everybody has been hearing Doomsday predictions for so long that they're all just sick of it.

No, the problem is that some people have the attention span of a housefly.

A lot of people also remember that it wasn't that long ago that climate scientists were predicting another ice age. A lot of older folks remember this so it's hard to blame them for taking the global warming scare with a grain of salt.

A lot of "old folks" remember when cigarettes were healthy.

There was never,,,ever a time when more than tiny handful of scientists thought there would be another ice age. You're bullshitting. This bit about how "not long ago scientists were predicting an ice age" is simply a denialist lie. As in not true. As in you made it up because you think it helps your argument but really makes you sound extra stupid.

Comment Re:The blame can be shared (Score 1) 122

Life: Record lows in winter

There have been no "record lows in winter" for climate. Are you talking about local weather? I'm sure we could get you some remedial understanding of "weather vs climate" if you feel you need it.

Until you demonstrate you understand the distinction, your comments are not going to carry the impact you want.

Comment Re:I have a out of this world solution (Score 1) 63

I can tell you exactly how much time a reverse engineer invests in a file that may or may not be malware: Zero seconds. There isn't even close to enough time to start looking at even a tiny fraction of all the potentially dodgy files that make it past the attention of an AV team. And there isn't also any need for this, we do have very sophisticated automated tools that do pretty much what you describe, create a VM environment and run the file. Well, it does a bit more than just run it, but let's keep it at that. ;)

Usually that's enough to flag a file as "interesting", even if the malware code isn't executed in the normal branch for some reason, and this one managed to escape that detection routine. But this is much like the original trojan horse: A great idea the first time, but won't work again. Ever.

(and yes, I know about the video where they showed that people still fall for that most ancient of all tricks)

Comment Re:How much do they vary? (Score 1) 229

One that comes to my mind without looking stuff up would probably be the "end of an age" - "end of the world" translation error in the KJV. Maybe that's why people in the US fear the second coming while everyone else is waiting anxiously for it. It was corrected in the NKJV in 79, but apparently it was too late.

Comment Re:How is this different from any university? (Score 1) 212

Mostly 'cause my degree costed like 5000 bucks. Our universities challenge your brain, not your wallet.

It's easy to get in, IIRC the financial investment is roughly 500 bucks a semester. Most of it is state funded. You'd assume that everyone and their dog takes that offer? You bet. So the university has zero, none, nada requirement or even interest to hold your hand and carry you through. You make it, great, if not, step aside you're holding the line up. Dropout rates are "insane" by US standards, but it has its advantages. First of all, those that do manage to get through this are good. Really, really good. And second, nobody has time for bullshit like "microaggressions" or "safe spaces".

Comment Re:Easy answer to the federal question (Score 2) 208

The answer to the federal question is easy. Get a few of these drones flying over the White House and see if anybody complains. Done.

The FAA has already designated a 30-mile-wide circle around the White House as a No Fly Zone - with serious penalties if you operate there. Bad example. You are not "done."

Comment Re:It's already known (Score 0) 208

Funny how you're asserting such specific details (anonymously) without something as simple as a link to this incredibly well established law. It doesn't exist. You're making it up. You're lying. And you know it, which is why you cannot cite even a general bit of guidance from the FAA (let alone a specific federal rule or piece of legislation) that to back up your hand-wavy assertion. Here's what we know: the FAA requires (without specific waiver) that operators stay UNDER 400'. The agency goes to great length to spell out dozens of specific rules that apply to newly certificed (part 107) commercial operators, and of course the rules for recreational operators are quite a bit looser. At no point, anywhere, does the FAA indicate the altitude below which you "own" the airspace around private property.

That doesn't mean operators should be jerks. But we know you're being one.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Trust me. I know what I'm doing." -- Sledge Hammer

Working...