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: We knew this going in (Score 1) 505

Hillary was obviously corrupt and knew how to get away with it to the point where we risked corruption becoming legitimized with more than just a wink and nod

Becoming? You must be new.

The choice was clear. The proper lizard for the next four years was selected.

He actually hasn't been selected yet, though of course I presume that he will be.

Comment Re:Why is this the case? (Score 1) 49

Okay so if it has the same range of native functionality then why isn't it a vector for exploits to the same degree?

There are probably two reasons. Reason the first, Adobe has always been legendarily bad at security, worse than even Microsoft. Reason the second, Silverlight apps don't actually run in your browser. They run on the server. Only the presentation occurs in your browser. That means they're not adding another scripting language to your browser, either. Any scripting that happens in your browser related to a Silverlight app is using the existing script host.

Comment Re:Why is this the case? (Score 1) 49

SO for example. In the first option, we can compare the functionality of adobe to other systems. Silver light or H264 is not the same thing since unless I'm mistaken Adobe flash is not just a codec but also a language.

Silverlight is just a SDK, and a plugin which lets you use stuff in windows from inside the browser so as to enable development of applications with web interfaces (defined in XAML) in Visual Studio. The things that it provides which aren't necessarily provided by the browser already (besides vector graphics and animations) are "H.264 video, Advanced Audio Coding, Windows Media Video (WMV), Windows Media Audio (WMA), and MPEG Layer III (MP3)". [wp] Thus, it's really more like Flash than H.264, although it's not actually like Flash. You develop Silverlight applications (or whatever they are actually called) which are hosted on an IIS server, and the user has to have the Silverlight plugin to use them. But it's all just brokered through the browser and then implemented using existing Windows functionality.

Comment Re:Lots of companies want Win10 (Score 1) 152

maybe no amount of assurances from Microsoft would reassure you, but if you're in charge of a hypothetical multi-year, multi-billion dollar R&D programme and you need a desktop OS to run your software on, who would you allow to reassure you? Apple? The Debian security team? A few hundred specialist developers you just hired to build you something from scratch on top of FreeBSD?

I'd do some sort of analysis to tell me which was best, and then I'd trust the best for which I could get the source.

Comment Re:Lots of companies want Win10 (Score 1) 152

But they won't give you what you need to build your own OS from source, so even if you had the resources to audit the whole thing (and enough barf bags to control the hazmat, in the case of inspection of Windows code) it would be completely, utterly, and totally worthless.

The real world doesn't work like that. Having independently audited the source code from a big provider, there isn't much difference between having your own background-checked people building it and having actionable assurances from senior executives at your supplier that their technicians with the same relevant background checks and security clearances have built it properly.

Well, to be fair, it is good for one thing: getting insurance. Or, presumably, ISO certification, so I guess that's two things. What it's not good for is verifying security. Microsoft in particular has demonstrated time and again that they are not trustworthy. No amount of assurances from them would reassure me.

Comment Re:So. 50,000 more H1-B visas need to be issued (Score 1) 296

We built the interstate highway system.

We built it with what were essentially defense funds, because that was the basis upon which it was sold. And it's falling to pieces even as we speak.

We sent rockets to the moon.

That was a long time ago.

Hell, China's got a wall.

Which didn't work. It was a halfway decent public works project, but inferior to doing something which would have benefited the people like building sewers or waterworks.

You can argue whether a wall is a good idea or not, but to say we can't build a wall is stupid beyond belief.

We can't build a wall in the same way that we can't run a nuclear reactor (PWRs on ships aside) safely. Once you account for malfeasance, you arrive at the conclusion that it cannot be done.

Comment Re:Sad (Score 2) 165

Well, I dunno. It seems like blaming Fitbit for Pebble's financial failure.

Let's take a consequentialist view of matters. If the rule is you have to buy the whole business and continue to operate it, even though it's losing money, Pebble goes out of business and it's customers and debt holders suffer. If you can sell of just the good bits without the obligation to continue running the failing as before, the customers suffer but the debt holders get some relief. Which approach is better?

Comment Re:A new golden age (Score 2) 296

I would cheerfully pay 10 times for these stupid electronic gizmos if it means I get back the standard of living that once made America the envy of the world.

Sure, who wouldn't? The problem is, it doesn't mean that at all. If the gizmos are assembled by robots in America and the money goes back to China or even better, gets hidden away in whatever country is the tax haven of the week, then the end result is actually worse than if the doodads had been made in another country because we have to eat all of the pollution. And as it turns out, Foxconn has a bad record even for a Chinese company.

Letting Foxconn build an automated factory in the USA, employing construction workers for a year or two and then only a mere handful of minimum-wage employees whose job is to clear jams from machines, is not going to bring back your grandfather's standard of living. That was based on being the last guys to enter WWII, after the rest of the world had the shit bombed out of it — and then bombing it some more. Producing all that stuff and then letting companies like Lockheed and Boeing keep whatever materials were "left over" at the end of the war to make stuff with (e.g. Lockheed not only made airplanes, but also AlClad travel trailers — we've got a 1962 Streamline "Duchess" here) is how we created that prosperity. Not to mention selling the Nazis fuel and the Japanese Aluminum during the early parts of the war, or the company Prescott Bush ran during the war whose purpose was to funnel funds to Hitler's S.S. — the seed capital behind the Bush family fortune was based on Nazi profiteering.

TL;DR: American prosperity was based on Nazi victories.

Comment Re:Now make it a requirement that it's US-owned (Score 0, Flamebait) 296

Now make it a requirement that it's US-owned
Only fair.

That's what Trump has said that he would like to do. Yet here he is brokering a deal for Foxconn to open a factory here without having to do that. It's almost like Trump is dishonest.

Comment Re: Americans? (Score 1) 296

Outsourcing your jobs to another country that does the work a hell of a lot more cheaply creates an enormous capacity to buy, but somebody has to transport all that shit you're buying once it comes off the docks. You can't sail a ginormous shipping friggate up the mid-western basin to Colorado.

No, you have to unload those containers onto autonomous trucks. It won't be long before the trucks are unloaded by autonomous pallet jacks. Amazon is already hard at work (alongside others) eliminating the humans inside the warehouses. They're going to have to have automated shoppers pretty soon, because nobody else is going to be able to afford to buy anything.

Comment Re:The jobs will be mostly construction jobs. (Score 1) 296

Yes but it's still better to have the construction and the factory here.

Better how? You have to assume they're only planning this because Trump plans to gut the EPA and make it profitable for them to operate here while polluting the living shit out of this country like they've been doing to China. We get one year of construction jobs in exchange for minimum four years of heavy industrial pollution serious enough to be noticed even in China? On what planet does that sound like a good idea? Planet Trump's Cock?

Slashdot Top Deals

"Today's robots are very primitive, capable of understanding only a few simple instructions such as 'go left', 'go right', and 'build car'." --John Sladek