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

 



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

Comment Re:Down with Putin - Down with Trump (Score 1) 217

Actually the US caused the issue, by not acting in a rational manner.. All Snowden did was do what most people do.. read the signs (ie: "My life is in danger.. and the guys I thought were my friends are trying to kill me.. Let me go someplace they can't get to me")

You can't tell people "Come forward and talk with us" while grabbing your bat and gun when you don't like the answers given and expect them to stick around to be "silenced". In short, whistle blowers are treated like traitors when in fact, they are trying to HELP by talking with you instead of selling secrets to the highest bidder.

Comment Re:End of the glaciation was ten thousand years ag (Score 1) 184

1) The Earth is usually a lot hotter than it is right now. We are climbing out of an ice age.

We "climbed out of an ice age" (that is, came out of the glaciation) ten thousand years ago.

You didn't look at the graphs in the referenced article, did you?

By those graphs we STARTED climbing out of an ice age back then but we still have a long way to go. So they support the poster's claim, not yours.

Comment Re:EVEN TILLERSON says it's real. (Score 2) 184

The issue is settled, mankind's massive emissions affect mankind's environment, Earth.

a: If it's "settled", it's not science.

The only question now is what the fuck are we going to do about it, and who can we trust not to line their pocket on both sides of that line?

"Only" question? There are a HELL of a lot of steps between "mankind's activity affects the planet's temperature" and "It's a disaster that must immediately be fixed by crippling the economy and instituting totalitarian control on human activity by governments".

Submission + - How the Human Brain Decides What Is Important and What's Not (neurosciencenews.com)

baalcat writes: A new study in Neuroscience News sheds light on how we learn to pay attention in order to make the most of our life experiences.

"The Wizard of Oz told Dorothy to “pay no attention to that man behind the curtain” in an effort to distract her, but a new Princeton University study sheds light on how people learn and make decisions in real-world situations.

The findings could eventually contribute to improved teaching and learning and the treatment of mental and addiction disorders in which people’s perspectives are dysfunctional or fractured."

Comment Re:Wait - we still have an antitrust agency? (Score 1) 56

Wait - we still have an antitrust agency? I haven't heard much from it during the past few decades.

The entire FTC's budget for 2016 was only about $307 million. They only asked for $342 million for 2017.

If they're going to be given more responsibility and actually exercise it effectively (which involves bringing, and winning or settling, suits against multibillion dollar conglomerates) I expect they'll need some more.

Comment Re:Soon, the FTC will only handle spectrum licensi (Score 1) 56

That wasn't what the media reports said. What it said was that he wants to limit the FCC to spectrum control, and move the other functions to the FTC.

I've been advocating that for years - at least for the "Network Neutrality" issue.

The problems that network neutrality is trying to address are mainly anticompetitive behavior and consumer fraud, where ISPs selectively degrade service either to extort additional fees or limit users who make heavy use of their contracted bandwidth (consumer fraud - giving less than what was advertised or what "internet service" commonly means) or give a competitive advantage to their own "value added" or "content provision" services, those of other divisions of a media conglomerate, or of partners, (anticompetitive "tying", vertical integration, and cartel formation).

As the major federal-level consumer protection agency, charged with enforcing consumer fraud and antitrust law, the FTC is well qualified to handle this sort of thing. It also has a track record of doing so. Their antitrust actions, for instance, include the historic breakups of Standard Oil and AT&T, the opening of IBM's eased mainframe computers to peripheral built by other manufacturers, and the Windows Browser tie-in suit decision against Microsoft.

Among the things you might see from a move of such regulation from FCC to FTC might be media conglomerates forced to divest themselves of ISPs, ISPs forbidden to sell preferential fast-lane service, and bans on cuting off or degrading the service of heavy users.

After the way he was treated by the mainstream media - owned by these same conglomerates - I'd expect Trump's administration to be more than happy to penalize them by breaking up these conglomerates.
  - We get more network neutrality - by separating the ISPs from the media conglomerates that incentivize NON-neutrality.
  - The Trump administration gets to spank the media conglomerates that were completely in bed with the Democrats during the election - in the name (and actuality!) of consumer protection.

Win-win B-)

Comment Re:Not Surprising (Score 1) 217

Why do you think a Russian tyrant with access to money and (political) power would need superpowers to subvert a man with a weak intellect, weak morals, and documented ties to Russian businesses?

And anyways, all but two of the original points still hold even if Putin doesn't control Trump. (Directly at least. Because if there's no direct control Trump seems to have some kind of weird hero-worship thing going on for Putin.)

Comment Not Surprising (Score 3, Insightful) 217

Putin has many reasons to hold on to Snowden and almost no reasons to turn him over to the US.

Turning him over to the US _might_ curry favor with Trump, however
A: Trump is too inconsistent for something like that to have a dependable long term effect, and
B: More importantly we're pretty sure Putin already owns Trump, probably along multiple lines. You don't need to curry favor with your pawns.
C: And whether Putin owns Trump or not, it certainly doesn't benefit him to _appear_ as if he owns Trump any more than he can avoid, and sending him Snowden as an "inauguration gift" would definitely lend itself to that appearance.

On the other hand, Snowden is an embarrassment to the US (or more accurately, he brought to light and continues to emphasize the way in which the US has embarrassed itself) which is valuable PR for Russia. Even if Putin owns the president it never hurts to have multiple lines of attack available.

Keeping Snowden in good standing encourages other people who might have negative information about the US or whose mere existence and freedom might embarrass the US to look to Putin for support, potentially giving him more ammunition in the future.

And as long as he has Snowden under his control Putin can always offer him up as a bargaining chip in the event that the puppet strings on Trump fail and he really needs to make a deal for some reason. (At which point of course the FSB will suddenly discover evidence that Snowden has been betraying Putin all along, so that it won't be a betrayal on Putin's part to return him to the US.)

Or alternately if he orders Trump to do something for Russia that is so outrageous that it strains credulity he can offer up Snowden as an excuse for Trump making the deal. (Again, shortly after the FSB "discovers" evidence against Snowden.)

Comment 330 KILOwatt? (Score 2) 57

... 330 kilowatt sub-station ...

That's either a typo or the Ukraine has a VERY wimpy power grid, to have a "substation" that small.

330 kW is 440 HP, in the moderate-low range for a big rig's semitractor engine. In the US a typical household averages over a kilowatt 24/7, with peak hours higher. So a "substation" that small would serve a neighborhood of maybe a hundred houses or a bit more.

In my Silicon Valley townhouse's neighborhood, built back in the '50s or so, we have over a hundred houses served by a single-phase "bank" - a parallel connection of three "pole pigs" spread out around the neighborhood, with their primaries and secondaries tied. It doesn't even rate an independent switch. (When a goose shorted and dropped a primary line they just disconnected the primaries to the segment containing the bank until it was fixed.) Several banks on each phase are tied together before you have enough load to rate actually installing a switch on the feed, several of those before it rates a remote-controlled switch, and several small towns (or a substantial factory) before it rates a "substation" - a fenced-off chunk of land with big box equipment.

Comment Re:Human brain is NOT a computer (Score 1) 142

That article does a lot of assertion without much in the way of persuasion or offering an alternative model. It's got an interesting premise - that describing the brain in terms and metaphors that come from computing may obscure rather than illuminate its functioning - but the few examples given weren't persuasive.

Comment Re:Price has other factors (Score 4, Informative) 89

Being outraged by imaginary problems and not bothering to confirm anything before seems to be the new norm. You'll fit right in.

No, the problem was the summary: "The phones are attractive because they contain no bloatware, competing services, and a lack of software and security updates"

Parallel construction grammar fail. That should have read, "The phones are attractive because they contain no bloatware, no competing services, and won't lack software and security updates." The summary meant to negate all three parts.

Slashdot Top Deals

MATH AND ALCOHOL DON'T MIX! Please, don't drink and derive. Mathematicians Against Drunk Deriving

Working...