Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


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

Comment Yes, selecting the US president isn't "gossip" (Score 5, Insightful) 141

Agreed. The article tries to cast this is "for gossip". No. Kim Kardashian's emails would be gossip. An inside look at the actions of the US Secretary of State, who is running for President, is far more important than mere gossip. As is bringing to public scrutiny the process used to select the candidates. The purpose of the DNC is to put people in charge of running a superpower nation, and to strongly influence the policies of the United States. How that's done, by whom, for what reasons and what the back room deals are is all information of importance to The People.

Comment One trusted model per hundred years. Model 1911 (Score 4, Insightful) 196

> You have NO IDEA how effective

That's a problem when your life, and the lives of your family and buddies depends on 100% reliability.

By far the most popular handgun ten years ago was the model 1911. So named because it was first made in that year, 1911. 20 years later, it had been proven extremely reliable so that's what professionals and careful civilians caried for almost a hundred years. Besides handguns, almost all trusted guns, from shotguns to ship cannons, were designs from John Browning or Samuel Colt. If you aren't Browning or Colt, we're not trusting our lives to your "clever", more complicated design.

  After about 75 years of different people trying, Gaston Glock came up with a design which might rival the 1911, so after it was proven in military and police testing and proven in the field for 25 years, a lot of people switched from the 1911 to Glock. That's the switch, from a model that stood the test of time since 1911 to somethinf better only 90 years later.

Take your "you have no idea if it'll work" and do the USMC testing to it - bury it in wet sand, pull it out, and see if it fires reliably, every time. Keep that up for 25 years and maybe we'll trust our kids' lives to it. Until then, save your "maybe it'll work, maybe it won't" for video games.

Comment Re:Showmanship (Howard Stern, Lady Gaga) vs sociop (Score 1) 112

> Donald is most assuredly a narcissist and again, it's gotten him to the Republican candidate for the President of the United States

Definitely. One staffer who worked directly with three or four presidents said is his book that all four had very similar personalities. The most striking thing was their arrogance, ego. The bastards all thought they could and should be president! Trump is no exception.

> The problem with your attempt to define Hillary as a psychopath / sociopath ... can only be really defined as a disorder when they cause harm.

Certainly you're not suggesting that Hillary's complete disregard of other people's welfare in the face of her own ambitions has done no harm. Ambassador Stevens and the others who begged for proper security would disagree. Certainly the typical "psycho killer" does sufficient harm to others that it qualifies as a disorder, one need not harm themselves directly. Though it seems rather likely that her marriage to philanderer Bill is probably not so much fulfilling as it is a tool of her selfish ambition, so I'm sure thatbtype of thing has done her sufficient personal harm. From what we've seen publicly, it doesn't appear that she's capable of normal close relationships with others; other people are merely tools, means to her ends. That's certainly harmful.

Comment Re:Showmanship (Howard Stern, Lady Gaga) vs sociop (Score 1) 112

The problem with your attempt to define Hillary as a psychopath / sociopath (both deprecated terms, they're not long enough) is context. In the setting of politics, media and business those traits are actually highly functional. That's how you get ahead in those fields. Then you run into the Peter Principle but that is another problem.

You missed the preamble to the personality disorders. They are spectrums and they can only be really defined as a disorder when they cause harm. As far as politicians are concerns both Hillary and Donald are at the top of their respective fields. For the rest of us, not so much.

Hillary is certainly sociopathic as it relates to the vast majority of humans - but that's why she is where she is. Donald is most assuredly a narcissist and again, it's gotten him to the Republican candidate for the President of the United States, something hundreds if not thousands of other people are actively aspiring to. The line between all of the personality disorders is a pretty soft one, there is often a lot of overlap.

It is an unfortunate part of the structure of human nature, but that's how we roll. We're not Vulcans. Which version of crazy to you want running the country?

Comment Showmanship (Howard Stern, Lady Gaga) vs sociopath (Score 2, Insightful) 112

> she just happens to be the only sane one running for President.

Howard Stern, Donald Trump, and Lady Gaga have quite a flair for being outrageous,a natural showmanship. In other words, they are clowns. None are good choices for president, IMHO.

On the other hand, we have Hillary. Here's how WebMD describes Antisocial Personality Disorder, also known as sociopathy:

Symptoms usually include antisocial behavior in which there is little concern for the rights of others such as indifference to the moral or legal standards of the region or community. A key to the disorder is long lasting, persistent, manipulative, exploitive actions and manners that determinedly ignore others

"little concern for the rights of others such as indifference to the moral or legal standards", " long lasting, persistent, manipulative, exploitive actions" - that sure seems to describe what Hillary has been manifesting since at least 1977. While Trump is most assuredly a clown, Hillary is very likely a sociopath, so "the only sane one" would have to go to the clown, Trump.

Comment Re: Wikileaks is a toxic organisation. (Score 1) 300

Um, have you seen their Twitter feed lately? It's a nonstop feed of anti-Clinton propaganda, half of it retweets, a lot of the claims so bad that even Wikileaks supporters on the Wikileaks Reddit sub have been calling them out on it. It's morphed into Breitbart.

They're even repeating Trump's "rigged election" lines:

There is no US election. There is power consolidation. Rigged primary, rigged media and rigged 'pied piper' candidate drive consolidation.

I'd say they have some pretty good reasons for repeating it.

Comment Ps many DNS lookups for ads, script slow loading (Score 1) 48

If this seems convoluted and slow, it is. In fact, doing DNS lookups for all the ads, javascript, and crap on a web page is a major proportion of the total load time. It's not that loading of the ad banner itself is slow, it's doing the (very indirect) DNS lookups for the domain that counts ad impressions, another domain with Javascript that loads the ad, another domain where the actual ad image is, etc. Plus the site logo is on a CDN domain, the html on the home domain, some other part of the page on, etc. Your browser can easily look up 20 or 30 different names to load just one page.

Comment Your ISP queries the Dyn (Score 1) 48

Your ISP's name servers don't have the records for each name. Instead, it goes like this:

Your computer asks your ISP for the IP of
Your ISP asks the root servers "which DNS servers know about .com names?" The root server says "ask, aka" The ISP asks "which DNS servers know about" replies " knows about names."
The ISP asks "what's the IP for" has the record for and sends it back to your ISP.
The ISP sends it to you.
The ISP caches the answer for a few minutes, in case your neighbor wants to access too.

Comment Re:Resonating with Americans (Score 1) 167

Other that during World Wars, when has a majority of the population thought 'we're going in the right direction'? The 1800's when we were moving west, finishing off destroying the rest of the indigenous flora and fauna (including humans) that European settlers started in the 1500's? Perhaps the Native Americans and the African slaves might venture to disagree if anybody bothered to poll them.

How about post WWII and the wonderful burst of economic growth that comes after destroying a quarter of the planet? If you were black, poor white trash or pretty much anybody in the South you might take exception to the idea that the country was doing wonderful things. If you were white, lower middle class and / or a veteran, you had a 25 year burst of economic Good Times. That bubble got popped a while back.

If you were of the moneyed class at any time you did OK. Amazing how that seems to happen.

So don't go so much on 'polling' data. That is a fairly new, fairly narrow view of how the country is doing. Of course, trying to come up with a better way to figure out which direction we should be going is pretty much of a fool's errand. There are so many different aspects to life in this country (or any other) that the simplistic rose colored glasses / Red, White and Blue / USA! USA! metrics are perfectly useless.

Unless, of course, you are Donald who sees a giant group of disaffected people who are just waiting for some demagogue to lead them out of the swamp. His campaign has rolled on two correct assumptions. First, there IS a fairly homogeneous and large demographic that feels downtrodden and upset. Perfect fodder for his cannon. Second, the Republicans have, yet again, failed to create a candidate that isn't a complete cartoon. And they failed worse than the last two times which is pretty impressive. And sad.

With all of that said, all the Dems could do is pick Hillary. I understand it completely, she'll make a fine statist president and Murphy's Law (along with the laws of thermodynamics) will continue to be the driving forces in the Universe.

Murphy was an optimist.

Slashdot Top Deals

Take an astronaut to launch.