Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


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

Comment Re: Why even have elections? (Score 1) 367

And if your argument is "I'm not supporting either of them" - if you don't vote for one, you're supporting the other. Not to the degree of voting directly for the other, but you're still supporting them. Because that's the way the US electoral system works.

I could say the nonsense about your vote for your candidate. How would you like it if I said your vote for Clinton supports Trump or Stein? Because by voting against Johnson, it sure looks like that's what you're doing: preventing Johnson from winning, so that we get stuck with whoever else wins instead.

Please don't vote against Johnson. Don't throw your vote away like that, voting on a spoiler. Your vote could have been against the Republicrats and instead you're going to help one of them win again.

(See how condescending that is? Please knock it off.)

Comment Re:8% (Score 4, Insightful) 104

it's kind of amazing how they managed to do that and not have anyone tell them that their ideas were stupid

I have no doubt that plenty of people have told them exactly that. It would not surprise me to learn that they fired anyone who did so, though.

If Twitter were an engineering-driven company, they wouldn't be lousy with SJWs.


Comment Re:Role Reversal (Score 1) 39

Public officials are under more scrutiny than ever.

By a foreign government and not our own 4th-estate or oversight, and current US leaders are willing to rattle the thermonuclear sabres over it...but not Crimea, Ukraine, Syria, etc etc...oh, no! Those little Russian military faux-pas are not sufficient reason to threaten reprisals. But, just release some emails that were supposed to be "polished...with a cloth" and suddenly it's 1962 Cuba.

Kinda tells one where their priorities and loyalties lie, doesn't it?


Comment Re:The Police State expands (Score 3, Insightful) 39

And "privacy experts are concerned!" And the useful idiots think that Mrs. Clinton is their friend.

For decades it's been: "But if we vote 3rd-party/write-in the wrong lizard might get in! We'll just keep voting for the same 2 of them will eventually listen to us!"

"Doing the same thing over and over yet expecting different results is one definition of insanity."


Comment Re:Follow the money... (Score 1) 524

Obamacare reformed the healthcare system.

Obamacare was designed to fail so that the ultimate goal...full government-run, single-provider healthcare...could be rolled out in the US. It was a "Trojan horse" but without any real subterfuge other than propaganda ops shouting down anyone who tried to point this out.

My monthly bill went from $500 per month to $150 per month.

You seem to be the exception rather than the rule. If we actually met IRL you'd be the first person I've ever met whose medical insurance rates went down for a comparable level of coverage due to the ACA.


Comment Re:Population control (Score -1, Offtopic) 342

So, that's it: how to save the world: bring people out of poverty, give them education, and give them access to birth control.

You don't need the totalitarian bullshit.

But that's hard to do, and besides, it doesn't give TPTB ever more control over people's lives and yet another excuse to pick their pockets at gunpoint while not doing anything that actually addresses the 'problem' but merely transfers wealth to those they favor.

You expect any politician worthy of the name to work to empower and lift people out of poverty? Maybe if we had some statesmen instead of politicians, but Trump!/Clinton!

We're SO hosed!


Comment Re:The IoT as a connection? (Score 1) 159

But cant they just keep on adding heavy RF shielding?

No. R.F. doesn't work that way.

It's the inverse-square law of transmitter strength versus distance and relative signal strength at the receiver. Possibly comm equipment in a communications van at the scene *might* be powerful enough to punch a signal over the noise, but regular car radios and hand-helds would not be powerful enough. Then, even if the radios at the scene could get a signal to the station/HQ somehow (other than leaving the area or disabling the jammer), there's no way those at the scene will be able to hear a reply nor communicate between themselves over the nearby jammer.

The only practical way they could even partially mitigate such a strategy is to go to full hardened military comms with frequency-hopping, strong encryption, and designed specifically for use in theaters of operation where jamming and other electronic countermeasures can be expected. There isn't a lot of that kind of gear just laying around, and it is far from cheap and requires a system-wide re-tooling of perfectly-functional existing police radio systems at even further expense (and wasted tax dollars).


Comment Re:The IoT as a connection? (Score 2) 159

Ahuxley, I appreciate the thought that went into that, but all that isn't necessary.

Just put a couple of car batteries in a drug house to power a brute-force broadband R.F. noise generator and broadband amplifier to be kicked on when the lookout gives the signal a raid is incoming.

Not only no remotely-controlled drones, no police radios, no cellphones, nada. If it ain't wired together it ain't talking, at least within a few blocks. No tactical comms, no calls for backup, no alerts about fleeing suspects, no calls for med-evac for wounded.

And, it's a lot cheaper, far easier to make, and less labor-intensive.


Slashdot Top Deals

After the last of 16 mounting screws has been removed from an access cover, it will be discovered that the wrong access cover has been removed.