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

 



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

Comment Re:Fine, power your bitcoin asic ... (Score 5, Interesting) 154

You gotta remember that you're dealing with idiots who tremble at even a hint of an idea that radiation is near them. In fact, there's a little device in your car (assuming it's powered by gasoline) where it's name was determined due to the fear of radiation. The "catalytic converter" has that name because of idiots who fear the concept of radiation. The correct proper name for that device is "catalytic reactor". But the word reactor is used in nuclear reactors so "obviously" a "catalytic reactor" is dangerously radioactive and should never ever be placed in a car because it might spread radiation all over the place and don't even think about what would happen in an accident. Because of that fear, engineers call that little device a "catalytic converter" because that doesn't have the dangerous radiation inducing effects that the word "reactor" has.

Remember your audience and compensate for their ignorance and/or stupidity.

Comment Re: A link that grabbed an IP address? (Score 2) 74

It's pretty obvious that you don't understand.

FBI -> Gave URL of fake article to suspect.
Suspect -> Clicked on URL.
Web server hosting fake article logged IP address of requester , then sent article to suspect using the IP that was just logged.

Note: ANY WEB SERVER WOULD HAVE DONE THE EXACT SAME THING. The FBI agent could have sent the URL of a real news article and on the log of that web server, the suspect's IP address would have been recorded. However, there would also have been a lot of other IP addresses recorded as well from other people who also looked at the news article rendering the issue into a needle in a pile needles search. The advantage of the fake article is that the only person who would request that article would be the suspect since the general public would have been unaware of the article and the URL to said article. No malware involved. Just a normal everyday web server with an URL known only to the FBI and given to the suspect. Suspect tricked into accessing the page and thereby giving his IP address to the FBI. They could have even make it so the web page didn't exist and having a 404 error sent back to the suspect. It would have had the exact same effect, but might have made the suspect cautious or aware that something unusual was going on.

Comment Re:Possible solution... (Score 1) 299

I would suggest you take a look at what the police actually do. The military uses the word "Police" in the following fashion. "Go police the area." in normal plain english, that means "Go to the area and pick up all the trash and generally clean the area up" and if you really think about it, that's also what the police do. They DON'T prevent crime. They clean up the area after a crime has been committed and if they're lucky, manage to apprehend the criminal. If you want to be protected, that is on you. NOT THE POLICE.

Comment Re:Small potatoes (Score 2) 115

Nope. It's not $150,000 per instance, it's $150,000 per "infringed work". So if Bitmanagement Software were to go the statutory damages route, they could only sue for a maximum of $150,000 since only one work was infringed upon. What they're doing is going for actual damages (the license fee for each copy of their program) and since the fee is about $1,000 per copy and they're talking about 500,000 copies, that's quite a bit of money.

Comment Re:DNA storage capacity seems to be wildly oversta (Score 1) 42

True enough. Although looking at the figures given in the summary, there's one hell of a lot of redundancy in their 2.2 petabyte/gram estimate. Looking up the molecular masses of the base pairs plus the sugar chain to make up a DNA molecule and assuming 2 bits per base pair, I get approximately 160,000 petabytes per gram of material (no redundancy), so the estimate given in the summary has a redundancy factor of about 73,000.

Comment Re:As little as I like Microsoft (Score 1) 70

Might want to reconsider your statement DarkOx, the real issue is that the US Government attempted to use a warrant where it should have used a subpoena. A warrant and a subpoena are two different legal documents with very different powers and limitations.

Warrant - Government is allowed to seize evidence without prior notice or opportunity to challenge, but the government is required to specify where the search is to occur and describe exactly what it is searching for. Additionally, the search location has to be within the United States.

Subpoena - Grants the government the power to require a person to collect items in their possession, control, or custody regardless of their location and bring said items to court. However, the one served with the subpoena may move in advance to quash the subpoena.

What the US Government was attempting with Microsoft was some sort of strange document that combined all the powers of both a warrant and a subpoena, but with none of the limitations of either.

Comment Re:I'm not a company (Score 1) 208

... Teach your children to use their brains. ...

Are you kidding me?!?!?!?

Actually having the population use their brains would totally undermine politics as we know it. Do you have any idea how much chaos would happen if people actually started thinking critically instead of reacting emotionally? What would our demagogues^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h statesmen do for a living?

Comment I propose a counter offer.... (Score 3, Interesting) 117

Require the "owning" company to move connections, etc., in a reasonable amount of time after being notified. If the connections aren't moved within the legally mandated time, then "ownership" of the pole is transferred to the requesting company. That would prevent the "we don't have time" or "we're going to ignore you" or the other kinds of slimy activities that the owning company would perform in order to handicap their competitor.

Comment Re: What's wrong with using COBOL? (Score 3, Interesting) 217

Yep, it's just a language. The thing I find oddest about it is how it handles subroutines. A long time ago, I attempted to figure out how I would translate from COBOL to assembly and figured out that the only way to actually do so and duplicate the behavior I'd see with COBOL would be to not use a stack, but instead have a little epilog at the end of each paragraph that was the last paragraph of a perform statement. In pseudo code, it would look something like this.

===========
PERFORM PARAGRAPH_A THRU PARAGRAPH_B.
CODE RESUMES HERE.
      Load address of RESUME in register temp1
      Store register temp1 in PARAGRAPH_B_EPILOG
      Jump to PARAGRAPH_A
RESUME:
    code continues here....

PARAGRAPH_A
        code....
PARAGRAPH_B
      code...
      Load register temp1 with contents of PARAGRAPH_B_EPILOG
      Load address of PARAGRAPH_C in register temp2
      Store register temp2 in PARAGRAPH_B_EPILOG
      Jump to address in register temp1
PARAGRAPH_C:
    code....

Somewhere in data
PARAGRAPH_B_EPILOG:
      WORD VALUE initialized to address of PARAGRAPH_C

================

Really odd and didn't require a stack. But would account for the behavior observed whenever some did a PERFORM statement and somewhere within the target paragraphs did a GO TO to some other section of code. If they did that, it would "look" as if things were OK, but if for some reason the code execution path later crossed the boundary between the last named paragraph in the PERFORM statement and the next paragraph, the flow of control would suddenly jump to the statement following the PERFORM statement. It would also account for the situations where PERFORM statements would be used on overlapping ranges of paragraphs. Definitely an odd language, but understandable since the S/360 didn't have a stack.

Comment Re:Very niche product. (Score 0) 171

To all those who think a transparent display would be useful as an automotive HUD....
You are wrong.

The focus issues have already been adequately addressed, but there's even a more fundamental issue. Namely, light. The transparent display is basically a selectively opaque display and it requires a light source on the opposite side of the display from the observer. This might work during the day, but would definitely not work during the night.

Comment I used to not block ads (Score 4, Interesting) 317

But I now use an ad blocker for a very simple reason.

I was looking at a web site for some information that I was interested in and in the middle of my reading, the page suddenly scrolled to somewhere in the middle and started playing a video ad. I stopped the video and then spent a fair amount of time attempting to actually resume my reading at the place where I was interrupted (not extremely easy since it was a long page with lots of dense text and I had been involuntarily scrolled away from my place without warning).Just as I resumed reading, the damn ad once again scrolled me away from where I was and started playing the video again. After a few cycles of this bullshit, I decided to install an ad blocker and then went back to the page and actually managed to get the information I desired. And since it's quite frankly easier to block all ads instead of configuring the ad block to only block on certain pages, I by default block all ads. And I have no desire to go back to having ads again. My web pages load faster and I no longer have the damn ads attempting to vie for my attention.

Slashdot Top Deals

Before Xerox, five carbons were the maximum extension of anybody's ego.

Working...