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: Fake news (Score -1, Informative) 78

You do know America isn't a direct democracy, right? It's not even actually a democracy.

The US government is a representative republic.

You vote for people who run the country, they vote on the laws. They are called congressmen. Have you been so far under a rock that you are unaware of the electoral college?

Comment Re:Enforcing rights (Score -1) 101

Not sure what country you live in, but if you're an American, you're just an ignorant idiot who doesnt' know how his/her country works. If you aren't American, fair enough, let me see if I can point out some places where you're incorrect about how it works here.

But all these forums actually *are* public

No, they are not. You are 100% wrong here. Twitter is a private company. It is in fact you who are wrong here. You don't get to tell twitter what to do because you don't like it any more than you get to tell me. You don't get to tell me that I can't kick people out of my store for any reason, you don't get to tell twitter. They are a corporation, not public property. I'm sure you think its okay for them to discriminate against things you disagree with, but not against things you think are okay.

This is where you show us you're a hypocrite.

Allowing companies to censor speech will follow that same arc - eventually the government will be able to "request" that a site suppress some news article or opinion or whatever, with a wink and a nudge, and it'll be the companies doing it and not the government.

Businesses and the government censor speech ALL THE TIME. The FCC for example censors the speech that can be said on public television. BY LAW. Free speech does not mean you get to do whatever you want, whenever you want, whereever YOU want. We both know this, you're just making the choice to ignore it because you disagree in this particular case. This again shows you're a hypocrite.

Secondly, we don't allow a company to only hire whites (14th amendment) or only men (19th amendment), because that would be a violation of their rights. We don't allow a company to deny services to gays (such as wedding cakes) either.

And this is utter and complete bullshit. This IS CENSORSHIP, you just agree with this form of censorship. You are a hypocrite.

Why do we allow companies to deny 1st amendment rights?

Congratulations, you've show us you dont' understand any of the amendments you've listed, how they work and what their purpose is or where they came from. You need to go back to US History I in middle school.

To have those sections monitored and curated is a violation of free speech by the public. Companies shouldn't be in the business of curating free speech, and their response to illegal speech should be to alert the police.

Oh just fuck off asshole. Companies can do what they want with their property. You don't like it, don't use them. If the actual population agrees, the company will go out of business because no one will use them. What you want is to force EVERYONE to do what YOU think is the ONLY way things should be. You're just like the people you think you're against, the only difference is that you think you're way is right and they are wrong. Explain the actual difference between you and them, and keep in mind for everything you say one must be allowed to do, you're telling the other one they are not allowed to do something. If its your way, its cool, if its not your way, its hateful, prejudice, censorship. Hey pot, you're so black -- the little black hypocrite kettle

And just to help your ignorance, comments ARE moderated on the sites you mentioned and no not anyone can login and post, the very reason that you're required to login is so they can block you if they choose to via repeated moderation, so ... try again, and get a clue on the next trip by please.

We're rapidly approaching the point where *no* opposing speech or controversial ideas will be available

Yea, and its because idiots like you are leading the charge. You're just too stupid to realize it. Read what you fucking wrote. You're all for controlling what certain groups of people do, which is exactly what you're bitching about. LOOK IN THE FUCKING MIRROR.

I think we're losing freedoms here. Free speech means literally *all* speech, including speech you disagree with, or that disagree with you.

You should make up your mind. Re-read your post. You're calling for companies to be censored in what they can do, because you disagree while saying its not okay for them to do something because they disagree. hypocrite

We shouldn't let companies run public forums without enforcing free speech.

Yet we do. By law. The FCC censors radio and television already. OMG THE COUNTRY IS GOING TO FALL APART TOMORROW!?@!%!@#$^!#@$^

Except it hasn't. Because its not a purely black and white world like you seem to want to pretend it is.

Private businesses do not have to do business with anyone for any reason, even the cake thing you pointed out isn't finished, the appeals are already in process and it won't be upheld in the higher courts anywhere except maybe in California where they have a tendency to cut off their own nose to spite their face while lowering taxes and increasing welfare and wondering why they can't pay their bills.

It could be the downfall of our republic.

. . .

You really need to learn a few things about 'our' republic, you've really demonstrated that you think 'our' republic is one that fits 'your' personal opinion rather than actually being a republic and representing the whole.

I realize you're not trying to be a evil person, but your rant sounds just like hitler and mussolini in the late 1930s. Freedom and equality for all ... of the people that agree with me and are like me. You're just changing which variables define 'like me'.

And lets be clear, I'm not claiming to be any different in most aspects, the only one I'm different in is this delusion that I'm the one that has 'the right way'. I'm just a guy who has 'one specific way' of viewing the world, and it may conflict with some others view of the world, so we all work together to get along and not fight. Some people will do this with me, you're probably one of those people that would get along with me even though we disagree and do things differently. You may not like me, you certainly are unlikely to 'hang out' with me, and then there will be people like ISIS who want nothing to do with getting along with each other and expect the world to all behave the way they define.

I know you don't want to be like ISIS, but if you listen to what you're saying, you sound just like them, only you want a different set of rules and don't accept any other version. Thats a problem you need to think about and resolve about yourself.. Does my post sound like that? YES! Its intentional. My post is also meant to demonstrate what its like dealing with a polarized viewpoint such as you started out with.

Comment Re: Relevant xkcd (Score -1) 189

If you had half a clue about the statistical likelihood of a note catching fire actually is ... You wouldn't make such ignorant statements.

There are literally hundreds of things YOU do on a DAILY basis that are over million times more likely than your note catching fire and FAR more dangerous.

If you EVER get into an automobile then you have utterly and completely blown your own point out of the water.

You're taking internet sensationalized crazy over reaction and making it out to be the truth.

Statistically, the notes battery is barely a blip of difference compared to any other lipo battery.

You're overreacting out of ignorance. Go crawl back in your bunker and hide like a terrorist is going to get you, even that is statistically more likely to happen than owning a note that just randomly catches fire without being damaged

Comment Re:ARM Server CPUs, x86 on ARM (Score -1) 85

They probably love the idea: Replace you're functional buy virus ridden Intel CPU based Windows PC with a ARM based tablet that 'can run full windows 10'. Wait 2 days until the buy realizes that emulating x86 on ARM is absolutely shitastic and that the whole thing is a retarded idea, they'll return the stupid ARM 'pc' ... then they'll go back out and buy a new Intel laptop. Intel wins.

Reality check:

When intel cares, they'll do something about it. They can make ARM processors (Intel even did at one point, think they stopped) as good as anyone ... and they can make ARM processors as good as anyone that include REAL x86 hardware, which will then wipe out anyone else trying to get anywhere near the same performance per watt.

Intel missed mobile by dumping ARM, but ARM isn't going to replace real processors anytime soon for servers that do real work. Sure, it might replace the one dinky little server that some company puts a website on that should have been a VM on some cloud, but thats not exactly a high dollar market right there nor is it more than a handful of people.

ARM server CPUs will not be anything like what you think of as 'ARM' CPUs, at which point, they'll be a lot more like Intel CPUs with the same performance and issues.

ARM CPUs are built for different purposes than x86 CPUs. They will never have the exact same level of capabilities and you'll never use them interchangeably.

ARM CPUs from different fabs can be used the interchangeably because they ARE the same CPU. Its all from the same initial designs, just different configurations. A Qualcomm ARM CPU is never going to be ridiculously better than a Samsung ARM CPU because they are both ARM designs, same cores, same roots, same everything, hell in reality, probably Fab'd in the same plant on the same production lines!

Comment Re: what about not giving a printer an public IP (Score -1) 83

If you want to be a technical asshole:

Telnet has 0 authentication built into it. It just connects you to a port and has some extensions to relay environment variables such as term type to the remote end. The remote host MAY use something like 'login' on most UNIXes to authenticate you after the fact, but it has nothing at all to do with the Telnet protocol.

FTP (by RFC) supports any authentication type, which is why you can use FTP securely when you use proper authentication protocols like say Kerberos. If you use plain text password for FTP on an unsecured network, yes it's unsafe. Kerborized FTP? At no point will you get my password because I never send it to the server! And if you DO get my ticket ... It's time sensitive and only valid ONCE ... Since you had to get it when I was using it ... That means the ticket you stole from me is worthless.

Now stop for a second and look in the mirror,. THAT is an epic fail. Wipe the arrogance off your smug face and you'll probably stop getting schooled by people who have forgotten more about security than your entire total sum of knowledge.

Comment Re:Those who something, something (Score -1) 588

. . . Twitter making a claim that they can not possibly back up. If congress passes a law to make it a legal requirement, Twitter will do it.

All that they've done here is made a political move that people like you have believed, yet it has exactly 0 substance behind it.

We already KNOW they sell data feeds to surveillance companies, and we already KNOW that even when they cut them off ... they sell the exact same data to a 'new' company, that just happens to have all the same employees as the old one last month ...

Twitter didn't do anything but lie and you bought it. The biggest failure in this discussion is you, for believing a word they said. Shame on you.

Comment Re:Zuckerberg created one thing, Bezos two (Score -1) 119

Bezos created amazon, a real company (an absolutely slime ball one, but different story) that provides services and goods. Bezos did something.

Zuckerberg stole someone elses idea and has lied, cheated, and otherwise fucked people over to get to where he is and the people who actually run his company are the ones that came from the funding he got. Zuckerberg didn't and does't do shit.

Musk was there for the founding of Paypal. Paypal was a .boom winner. He's nothing more than a lottery winner who then invested ... and by invested I mean lobbied congress for subsidies for Tesla, SpaceX and SolarCity. He didn't create any of them, he funded people who knew what they were doing to create those companies using money he got by dumb luck.

If you think any of these people are impressive business men or people then you have no idea who much of business is shear dumb luck versus actual skills.

Bezos has creds, they other two have dumb luck and timing, nothing more. All of them are slimeballs.

If you pay attention to how they actually treat the world around them and turn off your fanboy long enough to realize they really didn't actually create any of the shit you give them credit for and a bunch of men and women you've never heard of actually are the ones who did it.

Do you think Kennedy is why we went to the moon too?

Comment They will do what the law requires (Score 0) 588

They can say whatever they want, but the truth of the matter is, if Trump makes it happen, if there is a law requiring it, twitter will fucking do it.

Reality: Money is more important than morals to the people who run twitter. If the law says they have to do it, and they don't, they will suddenly cease to exist as a business

The other tech companies didn't answer for that reason. Given the choice of 'comply with the law' or 'go out of business', they'll comply with the law. So will twitter, but twitter is openly willing to lie to you about it.

What that should tell you is that twitter is probably already doing it cause they clearly have no problem lying to people about what they will and won't do, consider them already compromised. We already know they do it and pretend to 'cut off' companies that get caught doing it. Ironically those 'cut off companies' go 'out of business' and all the employees suddenly start working at a new company with a twitter feed ... but twitter somehow doesn't notice.

Seriously, twitter IS ALREADY DOING IT.

Comment Jesus fucking christ NO ONE CARES (Score -1, Troll) 191

Just because you're too stupid to realize your political favorite wasn't any different doesn't mean that Trump is any different.

Your team lost. Deal with it, and shut the fuck up about who Trump appoints because not a fucking thing matters without the approval of congress, and as the democrats were kind enough to show, you can have a super majority in congress, and your guy in the white house ... and you still can't get a one fucking useful thing done.

You guys actually like your guy/girl would have been so much better, all that means is that YOU personally are too stupid to realize they are both exactly the same.

Oh my bad, slashdot isn't news for nerds, its BaeuHD and the other 'editors' personal blog. Thought you guys were going to fix it ... you just made it another tabloid.

Comment Re:Here come the science deniers (Score 5, Insightful) 560

On the contrary, I want to see real science on the subject. I want to know what the REAL dangers are.

Unfortunately, the down side is that getting any real research on pot in the USA is pretty much impossible. If you give any hint that you don't INTEND to find something wrong with pot, good luck getting approval and funding for your study.

If you want actual research on pot you have to leave the US. You'll find a different view in any country outside the US, so you have to approach any study in the US with very very high skepticism. I'm not saying its wrong, but you know its biased from the start, so you have to be careful to pick out the facts from the implications.

When the people who make money off Alzheimer's studies start saying pot causes Alzheimer's type affects on the brain, you have to determine if thats true in any meaningful form or if its just another scary title to get more research money, or if its being promoted by others who don't want pot to be legal.

Remember, legalized pot destroys MANY industries. The prison business is fucked in states that legalize pot, thats half their population right there. Illegal pot growers ... they don't want it legal either, and invest LARGE sums of money keeping it illegal, as silly as that might sound cause legalization kills their sole reason to exist. California, as an example, doesn't have legalized recreational pot because THE GROWERS DON'T WANT IT TO BE LEGAL, its not as profitable that way. Police in certain places don't care, so legalizing it would kill profit.

I have no delusions about the dangerous side effects of inhaling smoke, but I would like some facts about what the end results are, from people who aren't biased by a preconception.

I.E. I want real science, not bullshit spewed by people like you who have made up your mind before you even read the summary. You don't know what science is, you treat science like a religion.

Slashdot Top Deals

If I'd known computer science was going to be like this, I'd never have given up being a rock 'n' roll star. -- G. Hirst