Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


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 Re:Android is nothing like a desktop linux (Score 2, Informative) 205

Linux is the peasant behind the scene on everything, including "Desktop Linux"!

Linux has always been a basic OS. While bootable without any additional applications or libraries it is not very functional. At the very least you will add a libc implementation and from there many other libraries, applications and possibly window managers to have a usable user interface. I agree that Android is not GNU/Linux (probably the most common form of CLI/GUI "Desktop Linux"), but in GNU/Linux, Linux is still the peasant behind the scene.

Linux is not *BSD/Windows/etc where the development team creates a whole package from the kernel up to the user interface, it is just the core, the "peasant" doing the hard work of managing system memory, networking and disc io, etc. Unless you are doing system development, or very low level application development, as a programmer you probably would almost never interact directly with Linux.

Yes, the media has turned Linux into a complete OS, but that has nothing to do with the actual Linux software and what it does. The media just did not like saying GNU/Linux which is generally what they were referring with when they would say Linux...

Comment Re:can't just yet (Score 1) 345

The Boeing 787 received the ETOPS 330 ratings in May 2014:

The Boeing 777 received ETOPS 330 ratings in 2011 (limited to certain Engines):

Both of the above are FAA ETOPS 330 ratings. I am not sure if there is a hold up in the South Pacific nations not certifying the aircraft for their national carriers.

I know from personal experience that the Chicago to Shanghai / Beijing Flights are being done by 777, but these go over the North Pole so are not subject to the political politics of the South Pacific.

Comment Re:What a clusterfuck (Score 2) 676

I'm not a particularly big fan of Obama, but he is definitely not the biggest user of executive orders:

The list*, as an average by number of executive orders per year:
1) Franklin D. Roosevelt (D) - 290.6
2) Herbert Hoover (R) - 242
3) Woodrow Wilson (D) - 225.4
4) Warren G Harding (R) - 216.6
5) Calvin Coolidge (R) - 215.2
20) George W. Bush (R) - 36.4
20) Benjamin Harrison (R) - 35.8
21) Grover Cleveland (D) - 35
22) Barack Obama (D) - 33.6


*The numbers for Barack Obama are probably skewed a bit since during the first few years for his presidency his party controlled the house and senate limiting the need for him to issue executive orders.

One could possibly argue that Barack Obama has used executive orders more aggressively/pushing the boundary of the power, but that would be a completely separate issue.

Comment Re:It's the base assumption that its invalid (Score 1) 392

Not everyone has doors that are easy to breakdown:

There are a lot of steel or rebar reinforced doors. Just because you choose not to reinforce the doors of your home does not mean it is illegal for others to reinforce their doors and windows.

Same thing can be said for encryption - it does not make it impossible for them to get the information (such as breaking down a reinforced door), but they have to be willing to try a lot harder (either finding a flaw in the encryption or brute forcing).

Comment Re:It's the base assumption that its invalid (Score 3, Informative) 392

There have multiple cases of warrantless domestic spying by both the NSA and the FBI:



Apple, Google and other tech/communications companies also believe that the USA Federal Government is abusing the FISA warrants for both domestic and international cases:

The USA Government has long used evidence that is gathered without a warrant to direct their case so that they know where to look with a warrant. If they get caught they have to prove that they could have obtained the information a different way. After you know what you are looking for that is a pretty low barrier to overcome.

Not saying this is write or wrong, but it is definitely documented.

Comment Re: IT WAS CRIMINAL (Score 1) 664

This is Slashdot, so I understand that you didn't read the linked articles. Here is a more general summation from the articles I posted above.

An entry into anotherâ(TM)s airspace is a trespass even if the trespasser doesnâ(TM)t touch the surface of the earth. Airplanes may trespass by flying low over a personâ(TM)s property, for example. An airplane trespasses by flying low enough over the surface to interfere with the ownerâ(TM)s reasonable use and enjoyment of her surface.

The only way to guarantee that you are not trespassing is to be in public airspace which is determined to be 500ft.

And no, you do not have to cause damage to be trespassing.

Comment Re:IT WAS CRIMINAL (Score 3, Informative) 664

Well, that is not actually correct -
"In that case the court held that a plane flying just 83 feet in the air—the commotion was literally scaring the plaintiff’s chickens to death—represented an invasion of property. The justices declined to precisely define the height at which ownership rights end. Today, the federal government considers the area above 500 feet to be navigable airspace in uncongested areas. While the Supreme Court hasn’t explicitly accepted that as the upper limit of property ownership, it’s a useful guideline in trespass cases. Therefore, unless you own some very tall buildings, your private airspace probably ends somewhere between 80 and 500 feet above the ground."


Dummies Article on the Topic:

Google Search With Many Articles:

What does all of this say - the Supreme Court has ruled you own at least 83 feet above your property. So no, all airspace is definitely not public. Hopefully this will lead towards a new ruling which will legal define how much airspace you own; opposed to it being left in a legal grey area for heights between 83 feet and 500 feet.

Comment Re:"sources," eh? "US officials" you say? (Score 4, Informative) 81

Odd how everyone makes a big deal of the russians shooting down a commercial airliner... the Americans did the exact same thing with USS Vincennes.

The USS Vincennes incident is also "indisputable" but thankfully was explained away by "scenario completion syndrome"

The USA Government did acknowledge that it shot down the aircraft and did agree to pay compensation to the families. "As part of the settlement, the United States did not admit legal liability but agreed to pay on an ex gratia basis US$61.8 million, amounting to $213,103.45 per passenger, in compensation to the families of the Iranian victims."


Slashdot Top Deals

The only perfect science is hind-sight.