Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



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

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.

Submission + - How Barnes & Noble stole the first e-book I ever bought

Robotech_Master writes: I bought my first e-book in 1998, before my e-reading hardware had even arrived yet. Yesterday I discovered that Barnes & Noble has effectively stolen that book from me, mistakenly replacing it in my Nook library with another title I never bought.

B&N's customer service rep's most helpful suggestion was that I could buy the e-book again—he even offered to give me the link. Is it any wonder Barnes & Noble is having such a hard time competing with Amazon?

Comment Re:Screw your gun rights (Score 1) 954

The problem is, all the pro-gun advocates ever only seem to see in pure black and white, absolute terms rather than paying any mind to actual reality. Very few people have actually suggested that law abiding people get to keep their guns. What's been proposed and talked about are policies that would help prevent whackjobs from getting guns and killing innocent people with them.

That's not most gun owners, it's only a very tiny fraction of them. Almost nobody wants to stop law abiding, responsible people from being able to defend themselves-- that argument is ridiculous.

What's fascinating is that the argument that the people clamoring for sensible gun laws want to do that is only being made-- not by the people lobbying for sensible updates to gun laws based on reality and data-- but instead it's always presented on a broad scale only by the pro-gun lobby as if that were the argument being made by their opposition-- but not actually being made by their opposition. That is patently absurd. How can pro-gun people expect to be taken seriously when they can't even logic? No, instead, the arguments always have to be made by irrational, insane people rather than all the reasonable, responsible gun owners. It makes it hard to have any sympathy for their cause.

Comment Re:Lovely summary. (Score 1) 1044

"Make sure a white male won" You appear to be spewing back whatever blog you last read that claimed the Puppies were racist and sexist.

Right there in the Wired article is a woman who was on the Sad Puppies recommended list. She excused herself when the politics showed up.

That Correia and Togerson are racists is also laughable. If you believe it, show some evidence.

The Sad Puppies opposition worked hard to push the narrative that Puppies are racist and sexist.

Their racist/sexist accusation comes down to "If Puppies are not FOR promoting Hugos for authors because of non-white race and non-male gender, then Puppies must be racist/sexist." Now there is a fallacious argument. The old "if you're not for us you're against us" nonsense.

Comment Re:Can Go still not load shared libraries? (Score 1) 221

Go executables are static by design. It is pretty great to be able to copy it into place and it just works. Add a couple other build options to remove the ability to bind to external C code and include a Go DNS resolver, and the binary can be put into a completely empty container. Now that's great. It's the difference between 8 MB and 300 MB containers.

The arguments about fixing bugs in shared libraries do apply, but that's a problem with containers too, so you need a policy for rebuilding containers with bugs as well as Go binaries with bugs.

Comment Browser must be safe even on dodgy sites (Score 1) 294

It should not, indeed it must not matter that Firefox loads data from a dodgy website. It has to be safe to read it, render it and run the Javascript.

Because if it isn't then the browser is doomed to be cracked and exploited anyway. Attackers can break into "safe" websites and put their scripts there. Or buy advertisements to their malware.

So all the worry over loading links from untrusted sites is foolish because you cannot trust ANY site on the Internet. Not really.

There's a better argument to be made over the privacy implications.

Comment Re:Honestly? (Score 1) 321

Oh sure, why not backport DX12 to XP.

It would only involve porting all of the internal kernel changes, driver support, DLLs, etc.

So then what, you'd have Windows 10 with a XP shell on top. Yay.

It would be almost exactly like porting DRI3 from Fedora 22 back to RHEL 5. You merely need to recompile kernel, glibc, Xorg, glib, gtk, gnome and KDE.

Get right on that.

Comment Re:Probably not bad (Score 1) 135

This is very true. I used to live in a small western city (OK, like 80,000 population) in Colorado where the only broadband options for residential consumers were CenturyLink and Comcast. Comcast said they couldn't offer gigabit internet to the city because it wasn't feasible. So the citizens put up a ballot initiative to install municipal fiber with gigabit speeds for something like $50 or $80/mo., and when the ballot initiative passed, low and behold it didn't take but 2 months for Comcast to change its tune and say they'd be offering 2.4Gb service for about $10/mo. more than their current maximum 105Mb service, but only within the city and only in areas where the new municipal fiber was going to be available. To everyone else, either the former maximum or no service at all.

In fact where I was living, my neighbor directly connecting to the back side of my lot could get that 105Mb service from Comcast, but I, on the other side of the property line could get nothing at all. Had I not decided to move to Arizona around that time, I'd have made a deal with my backyard neighbor to pay for internet service for him if he'd allow me to string a CAT5 cable out his back door to my back door.

For comparison purposes, the only broadband available at my house was through CenturyLink, and with no Comcast competing with them, the most I could get from them was 1.5Mbit/892Kbit, while my backyard neighbor could get 100Mb from CenturyLink and connected to the same demark because we were in the same neighborhood and the next nearest dmark was 2 miles away (our neighborhood was in the middle of the country, just outside the city).

The collusion, corruption, and extortion rampant throughout ISPs in the U.S. is way beyond the pale. There is zero excuse for any of it. Gotta love unbridled crapitalism I guess!

Slashdot Top Deals

RAM wasn't built in a day.

Working...