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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Compare cell phone plans using Wirefly's innovative plan comparison tool ×

Comment Re:It's Sony - duh (Score 1) 349

Bullshit as from all reports it would take quite a bit of time to get towards the center (where the devs said in interview after interview was where all the faction system and battles would be taking place) only to find...its not there, its all been ripped out or was straight up vaporware.

At the end of the day? No Man's Sky is fraud, plain and simple. in interview after interview, some being given mere DAYS before release they touted features that did not exist and showed content that simply did not exist in game. Since the game has procedurally generated worlds? Its quite possible you get started on some shit world where it takes dozens of hours to gather the resources required to get really up and running just to find out all those features, the faction system, big space battles, planets where you have day/night cycles and weather based on its place in the system, an economy where you can be a trader or miner or make runs for various factions....they just do not exist.

A the end of the day I see NO difference between this and Aliens:Colonial Marines. In both cases you had devs showing content that didn't exist, hyped features that didn't exist, and the footage shown turned out to be bullshit. Sorry but they deserve a refund if they ask for it because at the end of the day what was shown and what they got? Couldn't be more opposite.

Comment Re:Sixty Years Ago... (Score 1) 46

What do you need wings for?

As I said. What my OP was suggesting was that we have not seen the most optimized design for a space plane, or more specifically, a space glider. We have never implemented a low mass glider from space.

Note: "to operate from an airport" is not an answer.

To reduce ballistic forces on re-entry, to not carry volatiles for landing, to carry more than three tons of payload back to earth, to build a simpler vehicle. Perhaps to use some of the launch energy on delivering a product produced in orbit to a specific place on earth. I don't know what possible future requirements there are. Any improvement to ablative heat shield technology, as the Dragon V2 will produce, can also be applied to a space glider.

You might be right or wrong. I'm not religiously connected to the idea of having wings in space enough to care. I accept all of the reasons you point out as pretty good reasons for not having winged space vehicles, however it still doesn't change what I saying: we have not seen the most optimized design for a space vehicle of this kind, specifically a space glider. That has nothing to do with the obsolescence of a design, idea or concept, simply a statement of fact.

My other suggestion was if there is a reason to have a space glider then the emerging market economy for space products will produce one.

Thanks for the conversation, I'll be in surgery and out of action for a while.

Comment Re:If they're going to do this... (Score 1) 175

Because creating further artificial labor scarcity via work week restrictions will fix a labor scarcity problem.

Labor restrictions restrict productivity, raising prices and reducing what people buy, thus reducing employment. In short: you have less to barter with, therefor there is less you can barter for, therefor somebody who produces something will find nobody can pay them for the product, and so he becomes unemployed.

Imagine you spend 10% of your income on food, 4% on clothing, 2% on personal care, 30% on housing, 18% on transportation, and 36% on entertainment and other non-essential spending. Call it by dollars: $100, $40, $20, $300, $180, $360. You have a total of $1,000 to spend.

Now imagine everything just got 20% more expensive because everyone working 5 days making $1,000 is now working 4 days making $1,000 and, for every 5 such people, we hire another worker making $1,000 to fill in the gap (i.e. that last day costs an extra $200 per person now). I suppose you got this far and then determined there's that extra worker now, right? Let's look at it further.

So now nobody's getting paid more; they're working less, and MORE PEOPLE ARE BEING PAID to make the products you buy. Your expenses are $120, $48, $24, $360, $216, and $432. That's $1,200--or $200 more than you were able to spend before, and even more than you're able to spend now.

Well let's tie it all together. Food, clothing, personal care, housing, transportation... that's $768 right there. You have about $232 to spend on the other stuff you were buying--about 64% as much. 36% of the production related to those jobs is now unsustainable (there's no revenue to pay all those wages), and so those jobs vanish.

That's the point. You create a situation where people have more money to spend than there are workers to supply, and then you boost the labor expense of anything they want to buy by restricting labor hours. Suddenly everything becomes more expensive, but nobody has any more money; the capacity to buy products beyond what our labor force can supply goes away, because we're suddenly all poorer.

Comment Re: AV only helps if you are bad (Score 1) 107

The trouble is, all of that remains true if you have anti-virus software installed. Your odds might be slightly better overall, but AV software doesn't catch everything. In a few cases, AV software has even opened additional vulnerabilities itself.

It's surprisingly difficult to be sure that you're only running what you think you're running in 2016 and that your data is safe and private. That's a real and serious problem regardless of which if any AV tools you run.

Comment Re:Google's reply? (Score 1) 164

I agree it's unfortunate that so many people just rely on headlines, and that those headlines are sometimes less than perfect, but that's just the reality of what happens. Did you hear the one about the Slashdotter who actually read TFA before commenting?

So as long as that remains the reality, news organisations could plausibly be losing a significant amount of the value of their work if others are allowed to literally copy and paste the headlines and maybe some introductory snippets and republish them without doing any of the real leg work required to get the stories.

Comment Re:Captain Kirk says... (Score 2) 200

Given a young healthy pain free body, you would never finish your interests.

There would always be new "pokemon go"'s coming along to get excited about.
New musical instruments to master.
New places to see (because they are changing if you live long enough. The world today is almost completely different than it was in 1935.
New inventions to be excited about.
A much longer investment horizon mean you'd probably go through being wealthy and being poor multiple times (I was wiped out in the panic of 2160, 2310, 2470, the big one of 3107, and was broke again in 3705. But today in 4212, I'm comfortably wealthy.)

People who are old, people who are unhappy, people who know they will be old and unhappy in only 30 years make it sound bad to live for a thousand years. But the last 1000 years rocked.

Even with the expected collapses of non-renewable resources and likely associated rapid population collapse, you'd then have an awesome world with fewer neat things but less crowding and get to see all the areas ruined by overuse recover and see the seas verdant with life again as it was in the 1870's.

Comment #1 source of malware is ads on mainstream sites (Score 4, Insightful) 107

> If you spend your time avoiding visiting unsavoury websites and have the knowledge not to downloading/open questionable files

The number 1 source of infections is compromised ads on mainstream sites like Slashdot. Avoiding "unsavoury websites" isn't protecting you. Noscript and an ad blocker would provide much more protection, along with automated offsite backups in a pull configuration (your computer must not be able to delete/overwrite the backups, for ransomware protection).

Comment Different protections for different threats, envir (Score 3, Informative) 107

If he did -nothing- about security, that would be true. That's not likely the case. More likely, he's using protective strategies that are appropriate for his environment and the threats most prevalent in that environment. The most common threats for Linux machines aren't viruses. Viruses specifically are more of a Windows thing. Not that there are no threats that affect Linux, they are -different- threats.

On Linux, he may use the firewall, Tripwire or another IDS, some form of IPS if only fail2ban, SELinux, etc. Also of course browser-specific things like an adblocker and NoScript. Linux has long had good support for good partition and file encryption, so he might use that, and scheduled offsite pull backups protect against ransomware.

ClamAV runs -on- Linux, but normally -for- Windows - you install on on your Linux mail server to remove viruses before your Windows clients download their mail, etc.

Comment Re:RAID is not backup (Score 3, Informative) 264

The problem with cloud-based solutions is that the cost for backing up several terabytes of data is typically several orders of magnitude higher than building your own RAID array, and the performance of Internet-based backup absolutely sucks beyond measure unless you're the sort of person whose data needs are measured in tens of megabytes.

  • To back up 2 TB over a typical cable modem (say 3 megabit upload speed) will take you 61 days. Over typical DSL (300 kilobits per second), it will take almost two years.
  • If you lose your original copy, getting the data back will be almost as painful. On a fairly fast cable modem (30 mbps), assuming the cloud-based backup server can completely saturate your downlink (which is by no means guaranteed), it will take you 6 days of continuous downloading to restore the backup. Over 3 megabit DSL, again, that number goes up to 60 days.

The ideal solution, if you can pull it off, would be to build a small concrete bunker in your yard, run power out to it, put a UPS and power conditioner in there to protect against bad power, put a RAID array in there, wire it with Ethernet to your house underground, put a watertight door on the thing, add a power cutoff that shuts down power if water does get inside (e.g. a GFI breaker and an unused extension cord whose output end is lower than your equipment), and hope for the best.

But more realistically, I would tend to suggest an IOSafe fireproof RAID array loaded up with five 6 TB drives (or maybe even 8 TB drives). Put it in a closet somewhere, and hope for the best. If you want to increase your protection a bit, you could also get two RAID expansion cabinets, store them at work, and periodically bring one home, clone your main RAID array to it, and bring it back

Slashdot Top Deals

The most difficult thing in the world is to know how to do a thing and to watch someone else doing it wrong, without commenting. -- T.H. White

Working...