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:Wait what? (Score 1) 409

How to look stupid - take a readonable comment, totally exagerate it so that it no long makes sense and then pretend that's what your opponent said.

How to look smart: Take the actual words and apply them.

So a 15 year old making fries at McDonald over the summer must still be paid the MINIMUM WAGE.

Which is exactly what I said. But you don't care about what I said, you just care about whether your own fascist ideas can be used to insult other people.

Hopefully the Kremlin pays you more for your trolling than an Uber driver gets.

Comment Re:Look up laws on booby traps (Score 1) 243

You ALMOST have a point. But you don't. You clearly have no idea how it happens in court. The courts do not have a 'reasonable man' law that lets the judge do whatever he wants. It doesn't matter how clever you are it's what the LAW says, not what some reasonable man says.

The law is not reasonable and has never been so.

What matters is what the lawyers can convince a judge. If you are broke and can't afford a good lawyer, then the DA will run roughshod over you. If you have money and can afford justice, you can get it.

Reason has nothing to do with it.

Comment Re:Wait what? (Score 1) 409

Irrelevant. That's kind of like saying "Yes, I am breaking the law, but I was only borrowing, not stealing it. I fully intend to give the bread back after I eat it." It's still illegal, and making that argument makes you look like an fascist claiming its not a 'real job', it's just something I pay them for working for me.

There is no "I don't expect my employees to earn a living from the amount I pay them" exception. There are exceptions for family, charity, and internships (and a few stupid ones for farm work). That's about it. None of those apply.

Comment Re:Look up laws on booby traps (Score 2) 243

Lighters exist. Their sole purpose is to set things on fire, aka 'destroy flamable stuff'.

They are not illegal. You can carry one on your person.

If a cop takes one from you and then lights his car on fire, that is HIS fault, not yours.

The thing is, 'destroying' stuff is not illegal. It is only illegal to destroy something you do not own.

I have lots of computers and I do not want other people to steal the data on them. I could purchase the USB killer for that legitimate purpose. If the cop stupidly uses it to destroy his own stuff, that's on him, not on me,.

Nor am I required to warn him. I have the right to remain silent.

I personally would state specifically "I hereby order you not to plug that device into anything. I now exercise my right to remain silent."

Comment Worst social media site EVER! (Score 1, Troll) 90

Look, the only reason I have been posting on Slashdot is that the threatened to sue me if I told the truth. Their posts are made of the parts of pigs that butchers throw away. The force their threaders to work 16 hour days, with no overtime, for only $5 a day. Their vowels are purchased from east Asian pirates, who when they are not stealing them, are kidnapping small dogs and harvesting all the vowels from their organs.

God that feels good to get off my chest.

Comment Re:Says more about him then other people (Score 1) 168

Please describe to me a job with that kind of massive tech use requirement but ALSO lets you go 24 hours without being in any contact at all (not even phone).

I propose that job is so rare as to be irrelevant to a general discussion of the issue. They can talk about it on an industry specific site.

Comment Says more about him then other people (Score 1) 168

Look, if you are the type of social media obsessed fool that constantly checks your phone every minute of every day, then YES, 24 hours of no electricity will keep you sane. It also means that 6 days after you do it (the day before you next free day), you will be a bit insane.

Or you could simply engage in moderate, sane levels of e-use throughout the week and never get to that point.

You could for example merely kill the privacy stealing Facebook, keeping your twitter, phone, text, internet search, and probably get the same effect.

Or perhaps just use facebook/twitter once a week rather than every single hour of the day.

When lunatics moderate their behavior, they appear sane. Better to be moderate through the entire week, rather than go hog wild 6 days and abandon it the 7th.

Submission + - SPAM: Pennsylvania May Be the Most Vulnerable to Voting Hacks

rmurph04 writes: As reported by CBS News, the battleground state of Pennsylvania might as well have a target on its back as Election Day nears, the cybersecurity company Carbon Black warned in a new report released Thursday.

Across the state, most Pennsylvania counties use particularly high-risk electronic voting machines that leave behind zero paper trails, which could be useful to audit the integrity of votes cast. In addition, many of these machines — called “direct-recording electronic” machines — are running on severely outdated operating systems like Windows XP, which has not been patched by Microsoft since 2014

Link to Original Source

Comment Re:Would you rather they SHOOT YOU DEAD? (Score 5, Insightful) 185

You display ignorance and a misunderstanding of statistics.

Police are not angels, they are human beings. They are almost EXACTLY as honest as your average employed civilian. Studies show that 96% of them are not criminals, with another approximately 10% doing unethical but not clearly illegal things (such as 'not following protocal').

You look at that and stupidly say wow, 96% is great.

The rest of us look at that say 4% crooked means one in every 25 cops is an outright theif, and 10% shadey means that if you walk in to a police station and you will see a shady cop in every single squad room.

We realize we need to write the laws based on those 4%, not the 96%.

We also realize that that 96% - they are not the ones that end up shooting unarmed civilians. When a cop hits the news for questionable behavior, the odds are not 4% crooked or even 10% shady, but more like 30% crooked and 70% shady.

Comment Re:Probably actually illegal (Score 1) 250

You are falling for the fallacy of scale.

Everyone knows that a candy bar is worth about $1-$2. So when you see someone get one for 50 cents, you know they underpaid, and when someone pays $10 for one, they overpaid.

But you have no idea the value of something like stakker. So they got a huge amount of money, it was their BUSINESS, and was beyond doubt worth a huge amount of money. If they had a $200 million company, but settled for $20 million, you would see that same thing as if they had settled for $400 million.

Usually you settle for a fraction of what you deserve, and the lawyers take 1/3 minimum to 1/2. The longer the suit, the higher percent they take.

Basically, you are some shmuch that looked where I pointed, saw a large hill and said "That's big" without ever realizing I was pointing at Mt. Killimanjaro behind the hill.

Submission + - What is employers obsession with programming languages? 1

An anonymous reader writes: Just got off the phone with a recruiter for a company and the lady asked if I had 3-4 years C++ and 3-4 years Java experience. Okay, so first off, C++ and Java are two different programming languages used for two completely different purposes.

C++ being used mainly for low-level platform specific programming and Java being platform independent. My response was I programmed in C++ throughout college, but haven't worked any jobs specifically writing C++ and I've had Java experience in past jobs, but mostly used C# which was similar.

She said, "Oh well we are only looking for those two languages so thanks anyways". Is it just me or is this absolutely insane? It's like wanting to hire a mechanic who has 3-4 years experience working with just 1978 ford trucks. I mean really? How did we get to this point as engineers?

As any developer worth their weight in salt can attest, the languages are so similar it's kind of difficult to distinguish between them looking at syntax alone and if you've got a computer science background or equiv what's it really matter if the underlying OOP concepts are the same.

Is this just a result of incompetent managers and ignorant recruiters or as engineers have we set ourselves up by succumbing to a label such as Java Engineer or C# Programmer.

Should I just say yes, and move forward with the interview? I mean, I could probably answer most C++/Java programming questions unless they are truly looking for people who spend all their time memorizing specific libraries or API's which in my opinion is insane. I equate that to trying to memorize a phone book. You can but why would you want to?

Not only is it frustrating as a job candidate, but it seems to really be limiting your hiring pool to a small few who by chance happen to work in a couple different programming languages over the course of their career. How do most of you handle this sort of thing?

Comment Re:Questions to Hillary's fans (Score 3, Informative) 375

1) No, truth is not relative, but INSULTS are. When you say things in one context, they are bare truth. In another, they are discriminatory and insulting. For example, saying "I don't accept stolen food" is always true, but saying it after I offer you a sandwich is insulting because it implies that I stole the sandwich. You damn well better have a video of me stealing it, or you are just an a-hole.

2) (Followed response) You strongly implied, which is just as bad as saying it.

3) You want evidence that tRump kept the issue going? Birth Certificate released in 2011, Trump kept the issue alive in 2012 and 2013, and did not publicly announce that tRump was wrong about the Birther issue until 2016.

4) I knew Obama was born in Hawaii because I was not stupid nor paranoid enough to believe that his mother - an American citizen - would falsely put birth announcements in BOTH the Honolulu Advertiser and the Star Bulletin. Only a total moron or a virulent racist would think that was faked.

5) You have lied about what my position is. I do NOT claim that a white person would not have been questioned, I claimed that two specific white people were given cursory examinations while the black person was put under a microscope, looking for every possible flaw - and none was found. I gave TWO white people who were running for Presidency whose birth was questioned then accepted - Cruz and McCain.

The fact that you still do not see something is racist merely reflects on how badly your own logic works.

My logic works fine, it is a flaw in your understanding of what a racist means. Racist does not mean "I hate X and patently consider myself superior to X". Instead merely requires a belief that different races should be treated differently - or that the different treatment is 'acceptable'.

Cruz and McCain were given MUCH easier times than Barack Obama were given. That alone is racist.

Comment Re:Questions to Hillary's fans (Score 5, Informative) 375

1) It's controversial because of how and when he said it. Specifically, one of his campaign managers fired a woman for being pregnant, and Trump was excusing this inexcusable behavior.

2) The birther lie was rascist. (Also if you FOLLoWED that link you posted, it has snopes saying Hillary did NOT bring it up first). The reason it is racist is multiple issues. Trump kept the issue going long after Obama presented his birth certificate and stated that he only stopped doing it because black people said it was racist. The McCain and Cruz issues were in fact far more relevant, as neither was born in the US, while Obama was born in Hawaii. In addition, they were only brought up AFTER the Democrats complained about all the racist bullshit being done to Obama.

Basically, they gave Obama a lot more trouble than any of the white people. When a cop pulls over a black guy and a white guy for the same crime, with the same evidence, and the white guy gets off immediately, while the black guy gets strip searched and repeatedly brought into court, that's racist.

No, the cop can't say "He got off eventually" and pretend he wasn't racist.

Trump tried to pull that with Obama - he dragged an obviously and patently false complaint on for years after it should have been settled. Why? Because Obama was an African American. They could not magically get rid of the "African" part, sot hey attempted to lie and claim he wasn't American.

Comment Almost exactly reflect voting preference (Score 5, Interesting) 375

Back in July, Slashdot did a poll that said 33% of slashdotters were in favor of Hillary, and 21% were pro Trump.

The current vote seems directly in line with that earlier pole, with a slight correction for the lack of Johnson as an option. Currently the numbers are 31% Hillary, 16% Trump.

People are voting for who they like, not who won the debate. (unless the numbers change as today goes on). Which means no one clearly won the debate.

Slashdot Top Deals

Pascal is not a high-level language. -- Steven Feiner