Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment waiting... (Score 1) 60

I have been waiting for something like this for a long time. Unfortunately I have no interest in "snap" nor *buntu. And having it in a container isn't really "running android apps natively on linux" although it might be close, depending on the container system used. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Other Android-under-Linux setups never seem to be free, open, stable, reliable, and compatible (especially when dealing with a touchscreen and trying to deal with screen rotation). At least not that I have tried.... and none were "native".


Comment Re:The only Reasonable Solution. (Score 1) 228

>"they are just lucky that the court ordered the responsibility be split three ways, and not half for using the wrong sperm,"

Imagine if they got the wrong sperm AND egg; which is entirely possible since it was in-vitro. Using this theory, the clinic could be held 100% financially responsible for the child until age 18!

Comment Re:Bullshit, Todd. (Score 2, Interesting) 228

>"The kid does have the wrong genes. They wanted their kid, they got somebody else's kid. It fucking matters!"

I will certainly say that in many ways it should not matter. It is their kid, just not their offspring. Semantics aside, one can provide the exact same love and joy for a child, regardless of genetics. Look at sperm/egg donors, adoption, even pet lovers- doesn't even have to be the same species :)

The only reason it might really matter is later when dealing with healthcare and hereditary diseases, blood and organ donation, etc.

But it was a mistake. And the company SHOULD be punished. And punished they were! Had the company done it intentionally (like they just don't care, or it saves them money) then the punishment should be even worse.... because then we are talking fraud.

Comment Hard switches (Score 5, Interesting) 96

If we [society] really cared about privacy, we would require that ALL devices that contain a microphone or camera contain HARD switches that can cut them on/off at will. Not soft switches under software/firmware control. The reality is that ANY device with hard switches that contains a computer and a mic or camera can be broken into and used as a spy device. Be it a TV, phone, monitor, laptop, car, Echo, refrigerator, toy, whatever. And often there is no easy way to really/truly turn "off" the device (and then, of course, you can't use any other function).

Although it is relatively easy to disable cameras by sticking tape over them.... the same is not true for microphones. Of course, the manufacturers would scream about it, since it would add $0.25 to their $800+ devices and increase the mass by 0.0001%.

And regarding microphones, it isn't just about what you might be saying- sophisticated software can be used to detect all kinds of things like when you are present, where you might be, who you are with, what you are doing, even what you might be typing.

Comment Re:Electric, or Jet? (Score 1) 158


"A jet engine is a reaction engine discharging a fast-moving jet that genenerates thrust by jet propulsion. This broad definition includes airbreathing jet engines (turbojets, turbofans, ramjets, and pulse jets) and non-airbreathing jet engines (such as rocket engines). In general, jet engines are combustion engines. In common parlance, the term jet engine loosely refers to an internal combustion airbreathing jet engine."

Not a word ANYWHERE on that or any related article in Wikipedia that ties the word "jet" to electric fans/motors. And the article is not about some theoretical engine, but a plane that uses electric FANS.

Comment Correlation is not causality (Score 5, Informative) 205

>"Cycling To Work Can Cut Cancer and Heart Disease"

Nope, that is not the article. Look at the title of the paper:

"Association between active commuting and incident cardiovascular disease, cancer, and mortality: prospective cohort study"

*ASSOCIATION*, which is another way of saying correlation. It is not a study of causality. This proves nothing. Perhaps people who bike to work also eat better. Perhaps they have more income. Perhaps the other parts of their life have lower stress. They can't possibly eliminate ALL other possibilities by "adjusting for" because those are just assumptions.

Of course, it is common sense that exercising regularly will cut your chance of heart disease and possibly cancer. But the title of the posting implies there is causality where that is not proven in the article.

By the way, I bicycle to work almost every day.... but it is only like 2/3 of a mile round trip :)

Comment Re: The problem with your explanation (Score 1) 304

If you look in the FEMA site, they say that they provide gramts to perform repairs not covered by insurance. And no, they don't do a needs test. Now, the typical rich person does not let their insurance lapse just so that they can get a FEMA grant. Because such a grant is no sure thing. They also point out that SBA loans are the main source of assistance following a disaster. You get a break on interest, but you have to pay them back.

Comment Re: The problem with your explanation (Score 1) 304

I understand your point about view land being desirable even though it's a flood risk. I live a mile or so from the Hayward fault. But I have California's risk pool earthquake insurance. The government wouldn't be paying me except from a fund that I've already paid into. I imagine that the government does pay some rich people in similar situations, but as far as I'm aware disaster funds go to the States from the federal government and should not in general become a form of rich people's welfare. Maybe you can find some direct evidence to show me that would make the situation more clear.

Comment Re:The problem with your explanation (Score 1) 304

What you are observing is economics. As a city or town population grows, the best land becomes unavailable and those who arrive later or have less funds available must settle for less desirable land. Thus many cities have been extended using landfill which liquifies as the San Francisco Marina District did in the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, or floods. Risks may not be disclosed by developers, or may be discounted by authorities as the risks of global warming are today.

Efforts to protect people who might otherwise buy such land or to mitigate the risks are often labeled as government over-reach or nanny state.

Comment Re:The problem with your explanation (Score 1) 304

Oh, of course they were caused by misguided engineering efforts. Everything from the Army Corps of Engineers to Smoky Bear goes under that heading. The most basic problem is the fact that we locate cities next to resources and transportation, which means water, without realizing where the 400-year flood plane is. Etc. We have learned something since then.

Our problem, today, is fixing these things. Which is blocked by folks who don't believe in anthropogenic climate change, or even cause and effect at all. They don't, for the most part, register Democratic.

Slashdot Top Deals

Anything cut to length will be too short.