Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Conflict of interest (Score 4, Informative) 234

The escrow idea really is very good. It's not supposed to be about money, after all. It's supposed to be about safety.

The lie that "it's only about safety" was disproven in Ohio. When the governor lost the first court battle with banning cameras, he proposed reducing state funding to cities who used cameras by the amount assessed in fines by the cameras. The immediate howling by the cities who obviously only cared about money was hilarious.

But... But... But.. It's about safety, not money... You get to keep your safe streets, but you can't profit from it. Bastards. It was obvious to everyone that it was always about the money.

Comment Re: bit rot (Score 1) 475

Multiple copies may be one solution, but it introduces another problem that doesn't have an elegant solution... you need a tool that can verify the integrity of your data (across the multiple copies). How do you choose which one is "correct" when you migrate and copy to a new system? In addition, how are you sure that any given copy is actually complete? What if you want to permanently delete a file from your archive?

This is how I mitigate bit rot my home photos. My personal policy is that all changes must be made against a master folder on one designated computer. I have a script that recursively runs an md5, sha1, and sha512 checksum/hash on all the files in that master folder. I run a verify with all three hashes prior to making any changes to the master folder. Once changes are made, I recreate new hashes and rsync to multiple locations on my home network including on one portable drive I keep offsite. Each copy is independently tested with the hashes to verify it is correct. If at any time, any of the hashes fail (they have not yet) on the master folder, I (would) recover the failed file from one of the other copies after verifying it is correct with the hashes. I have considered adding some type of versioning scheme, but I only add, never delete. It is possible that a bitflip could occur between deleting the old hashes and create the new, but since I have never had an error trapped despite making multiple copies and potential drive wear, I think this is a remote possibility.

Back in the old days before it got so big, I would tar and gpg the entire archive and put a copy to Dropbox too.

Comment Re:Celeron? (Score 1) 157

No the OP, but I'll spell it out for you:

I can install Linux AND update it in less than a half hour. This includes installing all my desktop apps.

I have NEVER had Linux run 100% disk usage for 35 minutes after booting by something called "CompatTelRunner.exe"

The last brand new Windows 10 laptop I set up (three weeks ago) out of the box after creating the new account ran for hours and hours sucking all bandwidth available in a low bandwidth home for Windows Updates. I could not pause or stop this insanity so I could download and install Chrome and an Antivirus of choice. I had to leave it with instructions of "call me when it finishes the updates and I'll come back and finish setting it up for you."

I have worked on many Windows 7 machines which prior to Summer 2016 would run 100% CPU on one core for hours (sometimes days if far enough behind) to get the current updates.

My Linux installs do not take 5 minutes to boot because they lack things like Adobe Updater Startup Utility, Acro Tray, Java Platform Updater, Send to OneNote, and all the various speedlauncher autostarts to mask the true amount of time it takes a program to really startup when clicked.

I have been given systems to fix one small problem only to wonder how in Hell the owner ever used such a slug of a machine. I would have junked something that ran like that. It's not the Windows Kernel. It's all the shit that comes along with it. Those equivalent applications may run with similar performance on a clean system, but very few Windows machines are lean and clean. And God help you if Windows decides it needs updates then-and-there and whatever you want be damned.

Comment Re:Why only new drivers? (Score 1) 180

There is a reason why younger drivers have massive insurance premiums (insurance here is specific to a driver and their car - you cant simply jump in any car and be insured) - an 18 year old driver driving a 1.6 litre car could easily be quoted more than a thousand pounds for insurance. Thats because they have more risk attached to them

Please explain. Are you saying the a 1.6L engine is considered a risky engine for a 18 year old or that 1,000 pounds is the low end for a 18 year old driver's insurance or that your 18 year old drivers just suck that bad? Normally aspirated, non-hybrid cars are never equipped with an engine that small here.

My teen son was paying less than that for high risk insurance after some difficulties a couple years ago.

Comment Re:It all makes sense (Score 1) 180

This isn't abstract you stupid jerk. People are dying because other people are using mobile phones rather than concentrating on driving.

I hate to break this to you, but dying is your ultimate fate as well. People die all the time because other people drive drowsy. Or make mistakes by pressing the accelerator instead of the brake. Or just not seeing that motorcycle coming down the road. Where are the laws against that?

You have failed to demonstrate exactly why this law is necessary when there are already existing "distracted driving" laws on the books. I have clearly stated that my argument is that this law is crafted solely to allow lazy law enforcement an easy way to fail to do their jobs properly while appearing to be "solving the problem" of distracted driving. They should be watching for ALL the cases I mentioned above and in my last post, not just stroking out when they see a cellphone in a car like you apparently do.

Comment Re:It all makes sense (Score 1) 180

It's perfectly simple. Holding a mobile phone whilst driving reduces your control , and makes you more dangerous to other road users. People are killed because of assholes that do that every day. Therefore there are laws against it. You demented libertarian fucknut.

Just the act of "holding a mobile phone whilst driving reduces your control?" So does picking your nose, changing the radio station, rolling down the windows, turning on the heat, getting out your wallet at the toll booth, setting the cruise control, and so on. So fucking what? Picking up a rectangle of plastic, glass and metals doesn't magically make it instantly evil. And exactly how does checking your phone while stopped waiting in a line/queue reduce your control of the vehicle? (i.e. Can't have people looking at their phones at traffic lights or while waiting in lines) You dictatorial authoritarian Nazi. You see, I can throw ad hominems too. The point still stands. The behavior you want to punish is driving recklessly, not looking at a cell phone.

One morning as I drove to work on the freeway, I saw an 18 wheel semi-truck driver with a magazine draped over the steering wheel, turning pages as I passed him. Maybe you should lobby your representatives to make a special law against that too. I drove past a couple once and the guy was getting a BJ on the road. Are you going to jump up and down frothing at the mouth until there is a specific law against that too?

Comment Re:It all makes sense (Score 1) 180

I am pretty sure that Franklin didn't mean to impose anarchy and Might Makes Right rules.

I think Franklin would be appalled at the way we allow our government regulate and micromanage every aspect of our lives. We create whole new classes of crimes and ever increase penalties for existing crimes. We live in a world where the law has grown to such a degree that no human being could ever know all the rules and laws they are subject to. Just carrying cash makes you a suspect subject to forfeiture and the bank is required by law to report you for withdrawing or depositing "too much cash." We live in a world where where the average man unknowingly commits three felonies a day (https://www.amazon.com/Three-Felonies-Day-Target-Innocent/dp/1594035229) We are a long way away from anarchy. And we have been living under "Might Makes Right" rules for a long time. You just haven't been paying attention.

This law against cell phone usage is just another example of overreach simply to create new laws just to make it easier for law enforcement. The problem really isn't cell phone usage, it's "distracted driving" or reckless operation. Yet we have so many people ready to jump on the bandwagon, clapping, because "They are finally doing something." There was no reason drivers could not be penalized before, but it's so much easier to punish someone who is holding a phone rather than someone who is not paying attention to the road. This law is the equivalent of penalizing someone for sleeping late rather than for speeding while driving to work because they were late.

Law enforcement is LAZY and citizens are way too eager to hand over more power to make their jobs easier without thinking about the consequences. New generations are then acclimated to the way it always has been without thinking about why do we allow this? People get accustomed to telling others how to behave for anything they do not agree with, regardless of the logic involved or the actual harm to others. (i.e. Can't have people looking at their phones at traffic lights or while waiting in lines) It nurtures the belief in new generations that anything that is not expressly allowed should be denied, instead of the reverse.

And yes, I realize this was a British law, but there are some states with similar laws on the books, so the principle still applies. I also fully expect to be modded down by those who won't read my post or just don't get it because they "saw someone texting on the road just this morning."

Comment Re:ever think why (Score 1) 257

There is no "mass piracy" going on. There are pirates who won't pay for anything, because they thing they are awesome and don't have to be functioning members of society, because they think they are better than all those "idiots" (everyone else). I know of a guy that pirates movies he never watches, because he thinks it is cool. He has thousands of movies in his "collection", more than any human could watch in a lifetime. He is a mass offender.

I assume from the tone of your post that you have contempt for this individual. I'm just curious as to the degree of harm this "mass offender" is doing society or the creators of these works? He copies but does not watch and would never pay for anything. How is the net effect any different than a different individual who does not watch or copy anything? I know someone who hasn't been to a theater in years and does not buy or rent DVDs. He just doesn't care about movies.

I suspect that a lot of people just harbor unfocused anger that pirates just don't play by their rules.

Comment Re:ever think why (Score 1) 257

I have a 14 year old kid and he can find any movie you can name to stream within a minute or too. I challenged him one day and he surprised me at his success. He says the kids all watch them in study hall. Google or not, once one kid in a public school knows the secret sites, they all know them.

Comment Re:Simple (Score 1) 503

And this is also a problem I encounter a lot where people are engaged in black and white thinking.

I find it humorous that you accuse others of black and white thinking when I merely quoted you verbatim doing the same. You responded to the original parent who claimed

"The whole reason my company still has Windows 7 is due to having to support an application that ONLY works in IE9."

and you said

"Any company that developed their web application using home grown quirks mode javascript is going to reap what they sow. They better upgrade or be put out to pasture."

Those are your words, not mine. You have no idea the circumstances of why they are using that application or what alternatives exist. It is arrogant to assume you know more and can offer unsolicited, unilateral, and coercive advice to that one short simple statement. One of my clients was in a similar situation until late 2015 when they had to use an accounting package required by DoD for their contract work. The requirement was baked right into their contracts. The company owner hated that he was stuck running IE7 just so DoD could do tracking audits. There were NO ALTERNATIVES on the market at any cost at the time. The owner told me he would pay triple just to ditch their accounting system because he hated it so much. You see, the software company had bought up all the competition and shut them all down. My client had been a customer to one of their competitors prior to being abandoned.

I simply called you out saying that there are grey area cases you must consider before insisting on upgrade at any cost, but you replied to me stating:

That mindset translates to leaving a big door wide open for competition to come along and wipe you out. I can personally sympathize with your position but the free market doesn't particularly care. It's survival of the fittest. Get in the game or get wiped out.

Now I realize you have tried to backtrack and qualify your responses since to align more with what I said from the beginning. It must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Obviously, I hit a nerve when I noted your attitude. Why don't you step back and do a little self evaluation. Again; your words...

> You are being myopic. Look up that definition.
> I can tell from your arguments which have apparently become personal that you are inexperienced because people who are experienced don't talk like you.
> It's about track record. I have a track record of success. That's not arrogance. That's a fact.
> you might have an inferiority complex
> the difference between you and me is that I have a deep understanding of psychology

Now go reread the definition of arrogant. Pay close attention to the second entry. Better yet, have someone else read your statements and give you an honest opinion of whether or not they sound arrogant.

Comment Re:Simple (Score 1) 503

You seem to consider more angles than most, but the fact is there are no straight line decisions to be made.

My point exactly. You on the other hand originally wrote:

They better upgrade or be put out to pasture.

and

That mindset translates to leaving a big door wide open for competition to come along and wipe you out.

which makes your original position seem pretty cut-and-dry in favor of upgrading in spite of other circumstances.

Be careful with ad hominem attacks and fundamental attribution error ("Don't be arrogant"). I'm well educated on the subject matter domain.

Definition of arrogant
1: exaggerating or disposed to exaggerate one's own worth or importance often by an overbearing manner
2 : showing an offensive attitude of superiority : proceeding from or characterized by arrogance

Arrogance and education are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they often go hand-in-hand. Reason can often get clouded by proselytizing when the two intersect.

Any company that developed their web application using home grown quirks mode javascript is going to reap what they sow.

Sounds pretty arrogant to me...

Comment Re:Simple (Score 1) 503

That mindset translates to leaving a big door wide open for competition to come along and wipe you out. I can personally sympathize with your position but the free market doesn't particularly care. It's survival of the fittest. Get in the game or get wiped out.

Yes. It is survival of the fittest and survival means not spending capital on unnecessary expenses. I have a client with a half million dollar NMR running on old software. Are you going to pony up $50,000 for them to upgrade to Windows 10? Another client has a specialized GC/MS in an analytical lab running on Windows NT4. There is no upgrade path and so upgrade means throwing it away. Will you front the cash to replace it? I worked on a computer two years ago still running Windows 95 interfacing to a custom semiconductor testing machine on a IEEE-488 bus. A couple years before that, I had a client was still running Windows 98 on tube bender machines. Honda was their biggest buyer and they didn't care it was produced on old software. Another client is currently running an old insecure version of Java 7 on a Windows 7 machine that can't be upgraded because the software which runs the HVAC in their building won't run on anything newer. Honeywell won't update it and It has to stay on the network to talk to them. To "upgrade" means replacing all the HVAC equipment including all the sensors, controls and dampers throughout the building. You gonna pay for that upgrade?

Don't be arrogant. Not every "upgrade" is hindered by some simple home grown Active X web application or some bean counter not wanting to spend money on new Windows licenses. It's a big world out there and there are lots of small businesses that do just fine without being "wiped out" by running older software.

Comment Re:Not news (Score 1) 503

I have been reading a few books on the evolution of English from the "Old English" Anglo-Saxon roots, through the Norman Conquest and the infiltration of Danish, Celtic, French and Latin influences and though major shifts in grammar, pronunciation and vocabulary and I am AMAZED that anyone can learn English as a second language. There are so many inconsistencies and irregularities which we native speakers take for granted that I don't know how you guys remember them. Of course, we have issues like American/British spelling differences and word choices such as learned/learnt or kerb/curb or lorry/truck or brilliant/awesome. Even in the UK there are dialects of English that are almost incomprehensible to native English speakers in the US. Of course, I'd guess that native Brits from Aristocratic England would have a lot of trouble understanding someone from the Ozarks over here too. :-)

Slashdot Top Deals

Veni, Vidi, VISA: I came, I saw, I did a little shopping.

Working...