Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


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

Comment If nothing happens it becomes negative feedback (Score 1) 58

Trump says X, traders jump on positions that would benefit from X to try and get out in front. However other than the speculative betting there isn't much movement. Then X doesn't happen, so there is no long term movement. The traders disengage from their positions trying to take as little loss as possible.

This happens over and over and more will learn that acting just loses you money. It's why markets don't do fuck-all in response to Alex Jones. It isn't like his message isn't out there for the world to see, and actually more widely watched than I can fathom, but they don't believe anything will happen based on it so trying to get a first mover advantage can't happen.

You only gain an advantage by getting in first if the move happens. If it doesn't, at best maybe you can get out without a loss but usually you are going to take a hit to some degree. Thus you act only on those things that are likely to generate a move.

Traditionally, things the president said would qualify. However Trump is anything but traditional. He shoots his mouth off all the time, regularly contradicts himself, and changes his mind often.

Comment Re:Since they determined autopilot wasn't to blame (Score 2) 130

You have to be a licensed driver and carry insurance to drive. Perhaps people with these new "features" should have to take a class and test and get an upgrade on their license (like I did for my Motorcycle). And they (like some states like Michigan do) should require additional insurance so when the driver of the autopilot gets sued, they have enough cash to pay out to the driver that was injured do to their inattention.

Comment Well with the "elite" schools it is often not that (Score 3, Insightful) 253

For a regular school, particularly state school, then yes it gets stacked a lot by test scores and other academic indicators. The better you do academically, the more they are interested in you and the more money they'll try to give you to get you to attend.

However the "elite" schools have a whole bunch of good old boy shit going on. If you look at admissions in to places like Harvard you find that there are some legitimately top performers who come in, but a whole lot who are not and are instead connected some way. They are kids of alums, politically connected, rich, whatever. They are the "right kind of people" and so get the invite.

That's also the reason why parents want kids to go there is the connections. You don't get a better education at Harvard overall. Any university with a good program will do at least as well, and in plenty of disciplines there are schools ranked far better. However it further gets you in to the old boys club and gets you connections to people that gets your opportunities that would not otherwise be available later in life.

Comment The Fourth Industrial Revolution (Score 4, Informative) 113

The subject came up a day or two ago, so i happen to have the wikipedia link handy:

In short:
1st IR was 18th and 19th centuries and was steam engines and iron and textile production.
2nd IR was 1870 to 1914 and was steel and oil and electricity and mass production.
3rd IR was 1980s to now, and is computers and networks.

The _theory_ is that the 4th industrial revolution is starting now, and will involve some combination of biotech, nanotech, AI, 3d printing, and (if you believe some people) the Internet of Things.

Personally i think that to the extent that you want to differentiate the current/upcoming situation from the 3rd IR/computer revolution, those first four items are all viable candidates for turning society on its head. I'm pretty skeptical about the IoT part though.

Comment Re:Now all they need is some actual content! (Score 1) 138

Funny that, I've been a subscriber for many years (since way before the dvd/streaming plan split), and still haven't watched all the content I want to watch. What makes it more difficult is that content I wanted to see (the grand tour) is amazon exclusive, so I now have even more to watch.

But feel free to call me a statistical anomaly, I think you'd be wrong now, given the huge subscriber based Netflix has enjoyed for years...

As Long as it remains commercial free, I will subscribe.

Comment Re:There are Times When... (Score 2) 86

Given your use of grammar i'm guessing that maybe English isn't your first language? If someone says "X was so Y" followed by a comma and then a statement, it is generally accepted that the statement following the comma is in support of "X was so Y".

So your original question "Really? How exhaustive was it?" was answered immediately after the bit you quoted, which is why everyone else who is more fluent in English was confused by you asking the question in the first place. To them the answer was right there in plain sight.

In full: "an investigation so exhaustive, the Krebs made a glossary of cross-referenced names and terms along with an incomplete relational map." In other words it was so exhaustive that he had to produce multiple kinds of reference material just to make the sum total of the data understandable.

Admittedly that doesn't provide a great deal of detail, implying the "exhaustiveness" of the investigation by the amount of data produced, but providing an answer that is light in details is not the same as not providing an answer at all. Also, referring to Brian Krebs as "the Krebs" is a little weird, but it's not entirely uncommon for people to refer to a notable individual in such a manner.

Comment And in fact you do the opposite (Score 5, Insightful) 249

You have a plan should you get killed or otherwise be unable to provide the passwords. Where I work, in addition to there being more than one IT staff, all the passwords are safely locked away where the Dean can get at them, if needed. We make sure that even if we are all gone, whoever comes after can get access.

These days the university has policies to that effect but we did it before then because that is what you do. You have a disaster plan, and that plan includes what happens if you aren't around.

Comment Re:Not Surprising (Score 1) 252

Why do you think a Russian tyrant with access to money and (political) power would need superpowers to subvert a man with a weak intellect, weak morals, and documented ties to Russian businesses?

And anyways, all but two of the original points still hold even if Putin doesn't control Trump. (Directly at least. Because if there's no direct control Trump seems to have some kind of weird hero-worship thing going on for Putin.)

Comment Not Surprising (Score 3, Insightful) 252

Putin has many reasons to hold on to Snowden and almost no reasons to turn him over to the US.

Turning him over to the US _might_ curry favor with Trump, however
A: Trump is too inconsistent for something like that to have a dependable long term effect, and
B: More importantly we're pretty sure Putin already owns Trump, probably along multiple lines. You don't need to curry favor with your pawns.
C: And whether Putin owns Trump or not, it certainly doesn't benefit him to _appear_ as if he owns Trump any more than he can avoid, and sending him Snowden as an "inauguration gift" would definitely lend itself to that appearance.

On the other hand, Snowden is an embarrassment to the US (or more accurately, he brought to light and continues to emphasize the way in which the US has embarrassed itself) which is valuable PR for Russia. Even if Putin owns the president it never hurts to have multiple lines of attack available.

Keeping Snowden in good standing encourages other people who might have negative information about the US or whose mere existence and freedom might embarrass the US to look to Putin for support, potentially giving him more ammunition in the future.

And as long as he has Snowden under his control Putin can always offer him up as a bargaining chip in the event that the puppet strings on Trump fail and he really needs to make a deal for some reason. (At which point of course the FSB will suddenly discover evidence that Snowden has been betraying Putin all along, so that it won't be a betrayal on Putin's part to return him to the US.)

Or alternately if he orders Trump to do something for Russia that is so outrageous that it strains credulity he can offer up Snowden as an excuse for Trump making the deal. (Again, shortly after the FSB "discovers" evidence against Snowden.)

Comment No, he wasn't (Score 2) 783

Assanage's offer was always empty, given that the US isn't after him, at least not publicly. Now he contends that the US wants to get him in secret, though he's presented no evidence of this and of course one would have to question if they'd agree to a public deal for something secret.

Assanage is wanted by Sweden and the UK. Sweden for a sexual assault case, and the UK for skipping bail in that case. The US has not filed any charges against him, though I'm quite sure they don't like him. If he left the embassy he would be arrested by the UK and shipped off to Sweden. Or they might not send him off, since he's broken UK law by skipping bail and try him there for that crime, then ship him off once she's served his sentence.

So this was always a stunt.

Slashdot Top Deals

6 Curses = 1 Hexahex