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


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

Comment Re:Lucky he got off so light (Score 1) 44

Somebody still owns that ISP's assets. Two things, though...

1) Good luck getting $26K from an inmate - at a buck or two a day, twenty-six grand will take a lot longer than two years, and

Assuming he had zero assets before the trial. Any down payment on a mortgage, a car in good shape and you're pretty close.

2) If the courts determined that he only did $26,000.00 worth of damage, I'm guessing this ISP was probably already circling the bowl. After all, if he was solely responsible for breaking this ISP, one would expect a far higher award for damages, regardless of (1), above.

Probably. It could also be that it was easy to prove he did at least $26k worth of damage, he has no more assets and the trustee wants the bankruptcy settled and think the practical value of a higher judgement is zero. Except for when the RIAA/MPAA/BSA want big numbers for PR reasons, they're often willing to settle for what you have.

Comment Re:What do you need? (Score 1) 239

Those specs look nice but I noticed that it's yet another notebook with the trackpad offset as far to the left as possible. Why it's so hard to get a decent notebook with a centered trackpad? I usually use my right hand to operate the trackpad so a left-aligned trackpad is rather unergonomic - but I wouldn't want a right-aligned one either because I often switch to my left hand when I'm holding something in my right.

It's one of the reasons why I liked Apple's designs until Jon Ives went insane in 2012. Unfortunately my Mid-2012 non-retina MBP won't last forever and at some point I'll have to replace it. I'd like to do so with something that doesn't require me to lug around a portable trackball when I'm on the go.

Comment Re:Predictable... (Score 1) 309

>All they're doing is hiring critical US journalists and satirical comedians to report facts however they want to (as long as they're not critical of Putin or the Kremlin). It's not that hard to do.

RT, DW, BBC, Al-Jazz, etc., don't have to make shit up to make the US look bad. This "hurr the Russians were fucking up our election" bullshit pales in comparison to the actual shenanigans (seals on WI voting machines *visibly* broken, the latest news... and going back to the restriction on voting venues in many states, even my home state, Rhode Island, during the primaries, as just two examples off the top of my head) that took place during the election season.

And the US media mindlessly repeating Clinton gas lighting was particularly infuriating to Bernie voters so much that much of them stayed home, because ... "fuckit, we don't need your vote" and "deplorables."

The only people who buy this "russian" nonsense are low-information people that get their news /only/ from the OTA broadcast networks. Or something. I don't know. Whoever keeps forcing this issue expects everyone to be dumb, I guess.

And one of the latest "we don't fucking get it" things is that Nancy Pelosi is now Minority Leader. Because the public didn't shout loudly enough that they're tired of the same old shit by electing Trump.

So yeah, it's all the fault of the Russians.


Comment Re:Bad Headline (Score 1) 520

As opposed to the media failing to make clear that if anybody but Hillary! with access to classified information had done what she did, they'd be in jail?

As opposed to the media failing to point out that the lack of safeguards on Hillary!'s illegal private email server likely allowed every damn intelligence agency in the world access to it?

There MAY be "fake" news regarding Trump, but there is CERTAINLY a whole plethora of news about Hillary! that ISN'T fake, but the media refused to report it simply because it accurately cast her as a corrupt felon.

Yeah, I guess Hillary's email server wasn't all over the news and there was no Hatch Act violation about 11 days before the election about those same emails and a "renewed" investigation splattered all over the news. Revisionism of this magnitude borders on delusion.

How about equal focus on Colin Powell's email server and the 20+ million Bush era emails that are, well, how do we put this? Gone? And we're just to take their word for it that there was nothing classified on any of them?

Comment Re:Security is an illusion (Score 1) 153

There's just too much volume to track all the content everywhere.

There are 350 million people in the USA, more or less. Including kids not of age to use computers. One computer, just one, operates at billions of instructions per second (when the code is written in anything efficient, like c.) The NSA has a newish huge data center located on the main trunks.

You do the math. If you still think they can't sieve that amount of data effectively, why then, good on you for your optimism. :)

Comment Re:Those who something, something (Score 1) 520

>Left-wing government-funded "news" service

If you think that NPR is left wing, you are a fucking idiot. It hasn't been left wing since the end of the Clinton administration. Indeed, it has become completely corporatist since then.

There isn't any"left wing" on media today except outside of the us and random YouTube channels. It's all corporate oriented programming, especially considering that the mainstream media is owned by just a handful of companies.

Lastly, the Koch brothers are major donors to NPR.

Wake the fuck up.


Comment Re:Trump Derangement Syndrome (Score 1) 520

Trump is assumed by some to have won based on (anticipated) EC votes. However, three facts:

1 - The EC hasn't voted yet.

2 - The EC does not have to vote for Trump.

3 - Clinton got (a lot) more votes from, you know, the people.

Trump may well end up to be president. But he isn't the president yet; he isn't even the president-elect yet.

Comment Re:Bad Headline (Score 1) 520

2. A renewed effort into making journalism a trusted source to get information free of trying to push a political bias.

I would love to see #2

The Fairness Doctrine was killed by Republicans, and this current set of so far right they're falling off the plank group hates it. Wish I still had the links to the set of stories related to Trump, Breitbart, and some Trump supporters. The statements they made during a recorded interview are truly scary. Things like "the media reported 3 million illegals voted for Clinton" and other whacked out statements which, when all was said and done, were based only on Facebook posts. That FB is not a media source in the journalistic sense seems to be completely outside their understanding. And that is frightening. Goebbels is drooling right now.

Comment Re: Woosh. (Score 1) 97

Hydrogen, on the other hand, requires dedicated infrastructure to support 100% of fuelling requirements. Not just the stations, but the generation, storage and shipping.

And maybe not such a big deal or practical for trailers travelling the same corridor, but if you miscalculate or there's detours or you run into defective equipment or whatever you're not dead in the water with an EV as long as somebody got a working extension cord. Or even a modified generator if you just need enough juice to limp to the nearest grid connection, seems a few have done that as insurance. Emergency services have also started having charge service instead of tow service if you've run out. With hydrogen that shit had better work all the time, because there's no plan B. I think that alone will put a huge cooler on interest except for very limited niches. You also have a bigger variety of options, like say hotels providing parking with overnight chargers and other locations super fast charging, with hydrogen either you got it or you don't. Which is not to say EVs are without problems... but if we really hit that oil crunch and gas prices doubled-tripled-quadrupled they'd clearly be the ones taking over.

Comment Re:So much for biodiesel use... (Score 4, Interesting) 221

They pollute more, even as they consume less.

This is not really true. The type of polution from engines is heavily influenced by politics. And politics determined that minimising CO2 was more important than the consequences for NOx. Diesel engines used to run without making ANY NOx. However, because of the political need to reduce CO2, they were modified to minimise CO2 regardless of the consequences for NOx.

Totally separately, if you don't have a particulate filter, the particulates are pretty bad. The type of filter that has been widely used depends on burning off the particulates. It is quite easy to design other kinds, but, AFAIK, this type is mandated by law. And it has major problems.

Petrol (Gasoline) engines are significantly worse with regard to all types of emissions but the clean-up solutions in use work a bit better.

Banning diesels will not turn out well. Banning older diesels instead of fitting them with an effective particulate filter is what has caused the current problems. But there is no way the world's politicians will admit they caused the disaster when they can blame the auto industry. And no way America will admit gasoline is worse than diesel.

Slashdot Top Deals

Remember -- only 10% of anything can be in the top 10%.