Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Get HideMyAss! VPN, PC Mag's Top 10 VPNs of 2016 for 55% off for a Limited Time ×

Comment Re:It's heartbreaking that politicians don't do sh (Score 4, Insightful) 482

I don't have any evidence of Trump naming or implying any race at any time with any of his various immigration comments.

His focus has been on
- stopping _illegal_ immigration
- stopping the legal immigration of people that are at an increased risk of becoming terrorists
- reducing immigration that appears to have a negative effect on American jobs

There is a tremendous amount of racial confirmation bias about Trump, in part because that's what the left always resorts to, and because he hasn't adopted SJW phrases and talking points.

Contrastingly, there is historical evidence of him breaking _down_ racial and other bigotry barriers in his personal and business life.

Comment Re:It's heartbreaking that politicians don't do sh (Score 3, Insightful) 482

Perhaps Mrs. Clinton has observed that discussing any aspect of immigration in a negative way makes her more like Donald Trump -- a man whom she very often implies is pretty much the worst thing ever.

It's a bit interesting that when Mrs. Clinton talks negatively about immigration, she's described as empathetic for Americans.

Contrastingly, when Donald Trump talks about immigration, he's described as a racist.

I think people are wise to be suspicious of anyone running for public office. But, of Clinton, Johnson, and Trump, Trump is the only one that has ever said he wants to limit and reform immigration for the benefit of Americans who are seeking American jobs. He's also the one talking about punishing American companies who engage in behaviors that subvert American workers and jobs so replace them with foreign workers and jobs.

http://www.computerworld.com/a...

If you are upset with companies abusing immigration law to the detriment of American workers, and you wish someone would finally do something about it, Trump would seem like your candidate.

This election promises to be another "hold your nose" affair, but there do seem to be legitimate differences in what the candidates want to accomplish and how they want to do it.

Comment Re: Unsurprising (Score 1) 441

How does $2k USD strike you?

http://www.jetcatusa.com/rc-tu...

example in use:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

my post isn't really a new or novel idea:
http://www.interestingprojects...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

It occurred to me that you could adapt the airframe and application from cruise missile (the blog post), to ultra-low cost, man-deployable SAM.

A 350mph SAM isn't going to go very high, or chase down aircraft that have flown past. It won't work like a big expensive fixed SAM installation.

The current US application of airpower is flying low, slow, over and over, in repeatable patterns, because total air superiority is assumed.

And so if you watch US airpower fly over your burnt-out city, and then you see them turning to make another pass, you pull out your low-buck SAM, get it fired up, and, when the aircraft has heading back towards you, you fire at it, head on, from a field or building rooftop or whatever.

A 350mph object coming straight at an aircraft that is used to assuming air space dominance, and which is giving off no radar emissions, is going to catch at least a few super-power aircraft off guard and take them down.

This only needs to succeed once or twice. That will cause a significant change in the use of theater air-power..

Comment Re: Unsurprising (Score 1) 441

There has been very little air-to-air combat in a long time. The majority of combat has been developed super powers against 2nd or 3rd world states, or against entities that aren't even states at all.

The only fighter air power requirement is a few hours of work to make sure that there is total airspace superiority, and then every other attack/recon aircraft in the super-power's arsenal loiters over its targets unopposed.

The software & silicon revolution is going to throw a wrench in all of this very soon.

Suppose you are ISIS. You cannot build all the infrastructure to have an airbase with fighter jets and trained humans to operate and maintain them, etc, and even if you could, the super powers would just stroll by and put a crater in your runway.

So what you need is an assymetric response to air power.

In the Soviet/Afghan war, the US funneled stinger missiles and other man-launched AA and AT weapons to the jihadists, and they were able to cripple the Soviet war machine.

The folks in the middle east are already plenty good at making IEDs - they have the "warhead" part figured out.

What's to stop them from putting ArduoPlane brains inside of RC powered jets and putting IEDs on them, and then using optical seekers (e.g. no active emissions, so the big jets never know its coming), and then shooting down low flying aircraft of all types and configurations?

The per-unit cost for something like this would be under $10k per copy. The impact of shooting down just one super-powers aircraft would be tremendous. It would cause an operational re-think and might even change the balance of air-power in the theater.

The Superpowers are going to need to stop playing the manned-aircraft one-ups-man-ship game, and embrace low cost swarms.

For each ISIS fighter that launches a home-made SAM, the super-power will need to respond with a swarm of airbone hunter/killer drones... already nearby, on station.

I think battles between various super-powers competing 5th gen manned fighters are unlikely and will hopefully never happen. I desperately want to avoid a shooting war with Russia or China...

Comment Re:Yeah, right... (Score 1) 173

You may be thinking of Harper & Row v Nation Enterprises. The publisher of President Ford's memoirs sued the publisher of a magazine for printing a review of the book that contained about a page's worth of quotations from it. That much would normally be fair use (the book is about 500 pages), but the quotations contained the only information from the book that most people were really interested in - Ford's account of why he pardoned Richard Nixon.

Comment Re:The eternal meetings... (Score 1) 145

You could say that about a lot of things, but yes, Agile does seem to have more than its share of "you're doing it wrong."

The notion that if you have a fixed release date, you should sacrifice features for quality, seems counterintuitive to many. It's much easier for a sales or marketing person to say, "Our next release will be on this date and have these features," (and leave unsaid, "But we have no idea how good any of them will be.") than it is to say, "Our next release will be on this date, and we don't know yet what features it will have, but we promise they'll all be really good!"

Comment Re:The eternal meetings... (Score 1) 145

True. Fortunately we haven't found it necessary to limit an individual's speaking time - we just accept that some will be terse and some will be verbose, and it usually averages out. I sometimes deputise for our scrum master, and when I send him a report of the meeting, it's very rare that anyone gets more than one line, no matter how much they said.

Comment Re:The eternal meetings... (Score 1) 145

I have been at places where they go for 2-3 hours a day, with people doing little each day, and using "Wah, I'm blocked" as a way to blamestorm and shift responsibilities to other parties.

Then you're doing it wrong. Our company is officially agile (though really it's more like waterfall with daily status meetings), and the meetings rarely last more than 15 minutes. If person A says they're blocked waiting for person or team B to do something, we can normally trust them to sort it out themselves. Sometimes the scrum master will set up a meeting of just A and B (plus himself, to keep them honest), and then report the outcome of that to the rest of the team at the next stand-up meeting.

To be fair, I have been on agile teams where the stand-up meeting would last 30 to 45 minutes and tended to turn into a design meeting, with two or three people doing most of the talking. This was either because we hadn't understood the requirements well enough at the start, or had just got lazy and not done enough of the design upfront. The scrum master should've set up a separate meeting for the design work, or just told the rest of us we could leave once the design discussion started. I suspect the reason he didn't was because he was partly responsible for the design, so it was convenient for him to have just the one daily meeting. (Or he was coming up to retirement and had stopped caring about not wasting other people's time...)

Now, if someone is constantly using "I'm blocked" as an excuse to not do any work, that's a matter for their manager, not the team or the scrum master.

Comment Re:Digital hoarders (Score 1) 214

My music collection is almost exactly that size, most of it originally bought on CD over about twenty years. If I was to play all of it non-stop, it would take about 80 days.

As others have pointed out, the person in question is a composer, so I expect a lot of his collection would be recordings of his own compositions, at the highest available quality (uncompressed or losslessly compressed). There might be multiple takes or versions of them. If he recorded them as multitrack recordings (each performer or instrument is recorded into a separate file, so he can mix and edit later), that really adds up. 192kbit/s MP3 occupies about 1.5 megabytes per minute. Uncompressed 96kHz 24-bit audio occupies about 15 megabytes per minute in mono, double that for stereo.

Comment This isn't a victory for Behring-Breivik. (Score 3, Insightful) 491

Someone once pointed out that hoping a rapist gets raped in prison isn't a victory for his victim(s), because it somehow gives him what he had coming to him, but it's actually a victory for rape and violence. I wish I could remember who said that, because they are right. The score doesn't go Rapist: 1 World: 1. It goes Rape: 2.

What this man did is unspeakable, and he absolutely deserves to spend the rest of his life in prison. If he needs to be kept away from other prisoners as a safety issue, there are ways to do that without keeping him in solitary confinement, which has been shown conclusively to be profoundly cruel and harmful.

Putting him in solitary confinement, as a punitive measure, is not a victory for the good people in the world. It's a victory for inhumane treatment of human beings. This ruling is, in my opinion, very good and very strong for human rights, *precisely* because it was brought by such a despicable and horrible person. It affirms that all of us have basic human rights, even the absolute worst of us on this planet.

Slashdot Top Deals

Real Programmers don't write in FORTRAN. FORTRAN is for pipe stress freaks and crystallography weenies. FORTRAN is for wimp engineers who wear white socks.

Working...