Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!



Google Sues Mississippi Attorney General For Conspiring With Movie Industry

Bite The Pillow Re:Another Chris Dodd faux pas (109 comments)

Didn't Sony just tell the uber US hacking corps to fuck Korea in the goat ass for the recent hacking attempts?


Because if Hollywood had the power you are talking about, the would have immediately.

You have a very specific definition of power, and one that you should elaborate on or just stick a sock in your mouth for the rest of the week.


Google Sues Mississippi Attorney General For Conspiring With Movie Industry

Bite The Pillow Re:In case you're wondering (109 comments)

why does every he-done-bad story involving someone remotely associated with the Republican party lead with "Republican so-and-so...".

Because Republicans are the party of the moral conservatives, fiscal conservatives, social conservatives, religious conservatives, and most other conservatives.

A typical Democrat, party of liberals, will not be outraged by a speeding ticket or drug charge or arrest for gayness. But a typical Republican will be mortified by an arrest for anything, or a charge of darn near any wrong-doing.

Because Republicans have vilified behavior that Democrats do not see as being wrong. So when a Republican does it, it's hypocritical, but when a Democrat does it it's anti-establishment.

Also, party doesn't really matter here, since this is non-partisan wrong-doing. Republican caught with gay porn is partisan wrong-doing. "Democrat, colluding with typically liberal Hollywood, except when copyright is involved then Hollywood votes Republican, involved in Republican scheme to squash liberal-type information sharing site that doesn't do what libereal-cum-conservative Hollywood wants" doesn't really beg for a party line distinction.

If there was some wrong I'd want righted, and I thought that the arm of government responsible for looking into the matter was low on resources, I'd want to be able to "help out"

You sound like bribery. Or stepping outside of your appointed duties. Look, in an organized government you can't just go around doing whatever you want. You can pass information to the appropriate people, but you can't just be a renegade. The Judge Magistrate can't just go around knocking on doors and arresting people. That's for barbarians like England.


Google Sues Mississippi Attorney General For Conspiring With Movie Industry

Bite The Pillow Re:Dear Mississippi (109 comments)

The only way to get elected is lie your ass off about what you intend to do once elected. You can't be honest about that and expect to win.

The people who truly want this probably would vote you in, but they don't vote. The people who don't want this vote.

People already on record as someone you would vote for will not get the funding. They will not get past the first round to the primaries where voters get a choice.

What the USA needs is voters who understand that we have a capitalist economy, and who understand at least a little bit how capitalism works. The things you mention about trust busting are anti-capitalist, and we need voters to send the non-capitalists home.

I'm not talking about de-regulation and free market and libertarianism - those are facets of capitalism that can be, and will be, debated by an informed public. I'm talking about a basic understanding of these types of situations:

1) I drive 45 miles one way to work because it's the best job I can find in my area. Now I get trained to handle an additional "job". Why am I not paid more?

The answer is most likely that if you were, as a group, paid more, your business would move to a poorer part of the country, or the world, and you would be out the best job in the area. Or for fuck's sake figure out what skills you need to apply at a better job and go apply. There's no cost to apply to a reputable business, so go do it.

2) We will always have "the rich" in capitalism.

Even if we start out equal tomorrow, there will be people who make good decisions and bad ones, and lucky ones, and we will have back the rich and the poor. The trick here is to remember that pricing your employees out of your market as a general rule does not go well. Unless your market is overseas, and exchange rates suggest that is a poor decision. Specifically, anything that negatively impacts the middle class is an economical time bomb. Screwing the rich is something they will not forgive - but convincing them it is an investment in future profit will fly among the members who follow your argument.

I could go on, but it's clear you don't understand Capitalism, which is the basic economy. It is a modified Capitalism, not a pure one, but you have to understand it. You also do not understand the politics of getting elected. We need a straight up old school confidence man who will then have a "bully pulpit" -- a phrase coined by Teddy -- to push his/her agenda.

So here's where I get all preachy, and I'll be concise to the point of eliminating some data. America was built on the idea that if you're not doing provable harm, then you should be left alone. If you are committing crime after crime, but in no way suspected, then the Government should not read your papers, nor put you in jail without a lawful trial, unless a Court agrees that you are clearly suspect.

The Industrial Revolution inspired many abuses, and most were proven, and laws or regulations passed to prevent such. Gradually, the abuses evened out but many still remain. In different words, if you can prove that your employer is harming you, you have a case. We still have unions and we still have class action lawyers, and a lot of other things that, in a perfect America, would not exist.

But this is not a perfect America. This is one where you must be guilty before any serious investigation is done. We have crack dealers and prostitutes and murderers and red light runners and drunk drivers and counterfeiters and meth labs - why? Because they are legal? No, because we do not authorize law enforcement to knock on every door and search if a crime is being committed.

As an aside, keep your national surveillance comments to yourselves, I know the objections and you didn't undermine my point about having crack dealers and prostitutes and murderers and red light runners and drunk drivers and counterfeiters and meth labs so just STFU.

Same for businesses. Regardless of whether businesses are people, business is run by people, and those people have the same rights as the rest of the people. If they didn't, our Constitution would read differently.

Ms Warren will not be elected. Hillary, in the unlikely event of being elected, will not change much. A mommy in the white house will do absolutely fuck-all for restoring order, because "whatever enforcement is needed" is basically tramping on the rights of the business owners.

If you think this is a great idea, then go back to the part where you need to understand Capitalism, because you don't. If you hate Capitalism and think you have abetter system, then by all means start your own business and treat your employees like you want to be treated.

At some point in your life, you will realize that the difficulty or infeasibility of starting a business means that you are grateful for someone else having the balls to do so, and you will accept both the rewards and the restrictions that entails. I don't want the risk, but someone else took it and here I am, able to afford internet service so I can read rambling ass discharge from the internet.

Take your idealism, combine it with knowledge and experience, and you might, one day, have something. For now, you might as well have said, "I fart rose petals."


Ask Slashdot: Is an Open Source .NET Up To the Job?

Bite The Pillow Re: Here's a question... (324 comments)

Umm. Are you using Dragon speech to text? Because otherwise you need to learn how to communicate.

Clearly you don't know much about .NET, and clearly you don't know about huge parts of the web, which would not do fine without it.

The open source parts of .NET are not the entire CLR. If you don't use Windows, you don't care about this news. And if you don't use Windows, your only interest is curiosity.

If you were curious, you would try it out and see if you like it. Ergo, I can tell you, the argument for avoiding .NET is that you haven't already done otherwise.

Specifically, read the announcement page and see if you have questions about this. "Working on" means "not open source".


These are areas weâ(TM)re working on:

        More libraries. Consider the subset we have today a down-payment on what is to come. Our goal is to open source the entire .NET Core library stack by Build 2015.

        Building and running on non-Windows platforms. We currently only provide the ability to build and run on Windows. We intend to build a public working group between us and the Mono community once we have enough code out there. .NET Core Runtime (CoreCLR). Weâ(TM)re currently figuring out the plan for open sourcing the runtime. Stay tuned!


Ask Slashdot: Is an Open Source .NET Up To the Job?

Bite The Pillow Re:MS has been late to every recent tech movement (324 comments)

PS. I use Qt for everything on Mobile and desktop, Node for server and Knockout/Angular for web client.

Fuck you with a rake, sideways. I understand that JavaScript/AJAX is the way to get things done, but I have never seen a good Knockout implementation. If you have a template that replies on AJAX, you either have a default text that doesn't apply if JS is disabled, or the user doesn't know if something failed to load.

Example, visit Youtube with JS disabled - you get a message that this video isn't available. I don't know if they use JS, I assume not, but the HTML does not give me useful information.

It is so easy to do knockout, but so hard to do it well. To rely on Knockout or Angular, both JS libraries, for a web client, is basically to tell your security minded users to just trust you.

Well, I can't trust you and I can't trust your advertisers, so go get a rake.


Ask Slashdot: Is an Open Source .NET Up To the Job?

Bite The Pillow Re:Why bother? (324 comments)

You ask why switch... but that is not the only option.

I have enough experience in Java to know how to write Java style, with Java conventions. And the problems it can cause. I have enough experience with Java developers writing .NET code to know which questions you have to ask to see if someone can code by copying Stackoverflow or Codeproject examples, or really knows their business.

If you have a .NET focused person who also claims Java experience, how do you know what questions to ask if you don't know .NET?

My focus is in hiring or interviewing. At a tech lead level you might have to decide whom to trust when deadlines matter and skillsets are a mystery. As a sole developer, you may have interview questions on both languages if you put them down, so they can decide where you are most needed.

Ca read .NET and write Java? What if they need someone who can read/maintain Java and write .NET?

I've always said that learning a competing language shows you the faults in your own. If there are no faults, you can defend that statement.

You say why bother, I say why not?

1. Is .NET up to the job?
As I understand it, only parts of .NET are open source at the moment. Platforms other than Windows may not be supported, and the CLR is not yet open. Your requirements determine if it is up to the job. I'm guessing that for most people, the closed Windows implementation may be, but the open source part might not be.

2. Is there an open source choice today that's popular enough to be considered the standard that employers would like?
Java, but it is hardly a standard requirement. I'm answering no to this one.

3. If the answer to 1 is yes and 2 is no, make the argument for avoiding .NET.
Answer #1 has already made that argument for you. I'm guessing you didn't understand what is or is not open source now.

In particular, some of .NET CLR is a managed wrapper of the Windows API, much like MFC was an object-oriented wrapper. I don't see those bits being valuable cross-platform without an abstraction layer like WINE in between, and then the utility to people who use GTK or wxWidgets will be marginal. Why use it if you already know another windowing library?

"Why not learn it?" of course, but since we're talking about OS-level internals now, and things that are not supported by the current state of the .NET release, it's fair to say that the argument to avoid it is obvious.

Disclaimer: I get paid to do .NET, but I don't get paid to convince you to do the same.


What Happens To Society When Robots Replace Workers?

Bite The Pillow Re:When Robots Replace Workers? (541 comments)

Then who maintains the robots that clean the shitter? Take turns? Let incompetent people maintain the robots that make airplanes?

Who makes the robots that make the robots that make airplanes?

There will always be a need to stratify, or ration work. Do we assume that, like open source software, someone will volunteer to work instead of lounge?

These problems need solved.


What Happens To Society When Robots Replace Workers?

Bite The Pillow Re:It's hard to take this article seriously (541 comments)

Automation means higher productivity with little more recurring expense.

Look at productivity vs wages. Productivity is up, wages are stagnant. Profits are up.

Automation explains it all quite well, making it the cause of the problem you highlight. I'm using data since 1970. It's easy to find and you can select your source. Form an opinion and then come back.

Is consolidation of wealth really unrelated to automation? Or do you just consider the effect more important than the cause?


What Happens To Society When Robots Replace Workers?

Bite The Pillow Re:Yet another clueless story on automation (541 comments)

The workforce has not included housewife, now called stay at home parents, or homemakers. This has not changed at all.

More women are looking for jobs, so they count in employment numbers. But the definition did not change.

And if you think that 6% now means there is no struggle, build a time machine and go back to 2008-2012. 6% means that the 95% of people who should have jobs have them, the3% who shouldn't don't, and there is some overlap where people are in the wrong area and won't move, or people who should be fired haven't yet been.

Restate your comment because nothing you said makes any sense, in context or out of context.


Hackers Used Nasty "SMB Worm" Attack Toolkit Against Sony

Bite The Pillow Re:Supreme Leader (167 comments)

Why in fuck would you take a highly visible attack with serious consequences to an international business homed outside this country, and blame the wrong people?

Other than conspiracy retards, I can't think of any reason why you would want to piss them off like that. I pride myself on arguing any side of any argument, but I can't see any reason other than "illuminati have their reasons" horseshit.

I don't even care about facts on this one, I just want to know what this serves that we couldn't otherwise accomplish really easily with a low level official and a vague press conference.

Falsely demonstrating NK cyber capabilities? Strain international relations? Short some stock and make billions?

You people really are crazy.


Hackers Used Nasty "SMB Worm" Attack Toolkit Against Sony

Bite The Pillow Re:Can we stop the embellishment? (167 comments)

You could take control quickly and hold it for a year. You could infiltrate and hold it for a year, then quickly take control.

You seem to say that the only reason your GoP source said it that way is that it took a year to execute.

Reading comprehension and citations; that's how discussion moves forward.


Hackers' Shutdown of 'The Interview' Confirms Coding Is a Superpower

Bite The Pillow Re:Huh? (220 comments)

Coding also had nothing to do with hacking. You can learn code all day long the rest of your life, and never learn one thing about exploiting remote systems.

Spear phishing is often in insert vector, and has nothing to do with code whatsoever.

And at the moment, code may be the superpower that everyone has access to. Meaning its not super, and will soon be not even power.

If a horse could take a shit directly into the intertubes, this summary would be indistinguishable

2 days ago

Why Didn't Sidecar's Flex Pricing Work?

Bite The Pillow Re:Duh. (190 comments)

Stop clicking, stop commenting.

As it is, Dice is getting a kick out of these replies.

Also, how long is your reply? Too long. I look for the factual correction, where Bennett didn't read the literature first. Now I'm going to point out that you are the problem. Don't click, don't comment.

5 days ago

Apparent Islamic Terrorism Strikes Sydney

Bite The Pillow Re:Should Allah be translated to God? (876 comments)

TL;DR no, it should not have been translated, but whomever decided to had some damned reason or another, so you'll have to ask that person to see if this was justified.

It's an interesting question, and I'm on both sides of the fence. God and Allah are both the God of Abraham, spiritual head of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam.

"God" in western Christianity seems to be nameless, with the generic "god" becoming a proper name. We capitalize the word because there is only one god, and that is the god to which we refer by "God". Same with the difference between "his grace" and "His grace", only "his" is not a name.

But you suggest God is a proper name. It's more of a convention than a proper proper name, but whatever.

Why is the Muslim god called Allah?

A better question is, why would a Muslim and a Jew worship differently, have different beliefs, and want to blow each other up?

It is not the same God. There is your answer.

The Muslim God spoke through Muhammad - and the followers are Muslim. The Christian God spoke through Jesus - and the followers are Christian. The Jewish God spoke through Moses, without further distillation.

The worship of Allah is not the worship of the Christian God. The worship of the Jewish Lord is not the worship of either one.
Yes, it is the same God, but not the same religion. All 3 refer to the same God of Abraham, but God is not Allah because the followers are not the same.

If you are a Copt, dominated by Arabic culture, the proper translation is probably "There is no God but God," because this is very definitely not Allah. But clearly the second half, "Mohammed is the prophet of God," tells us that this is Allah, not God.

"Allahu akbar" does, in fact, mean "God is great" to both people. That is, if I translate for you so you can understand, it means that my God, who is also your God, is great. The key is in how you use translation. Do you mean that you literally translate without regard for idiom? Because most people don't do that. If I translate as "Allah, who is the God of these people but also in many ways the god of Christians and Jews, is great" it gets wordy, leaves lots of holes for questions and disagreements, and generally is worthless.

It is much closer in meaning and sentiment to say "God is great." It is not "God who hates Jews is great" or "God who thinks America is the Great Satan is great." It means "God of our faith is great", and is more clearly translated as you said.

Now to the quote in question: "There is no God but God and Mohammed is the prophet of God." Should that mean Allah instead? As I read it, it does in fact exclude the Jewish God and the Christian God, specifically because it excludes other prophets. BahÃ'Ã is out because they recognize many other prophets in addition to the one claimed in the quote. Mormonism obviously as well.

So this is the God of Muhammad, which can be summed up easily by saying "Allah" instead of God. Of course, this is redundant since the quote says that directly.

Since the quote comes from CNN, which cites Seven Network, we must consider whether Seven Network was right in translating it the way it did. I'm not going to go into the complexities of deciding who your audience is and whether you want to slant the news or appear unbiased, or whether someone put this much thought into the translation. Because they probably didn't. And no one cares by this point. And unless you majored in another language in preparation to be a translator, with formal education, the subtleties would be lost.

The choice is always to color someone's perceptions or avoid coloring - there is rarely neutral ground. So finally your question: Should Allah be translated to God? The answer of course is sometimes. Not in this case.

about a week ago

Judge Rules Drug Maker Cannot Halt Sales of Alzheimer's Medicine

Bite The Pillow Re:I don't get it... (264 comments)

When your argument starts with something so ridiculous as hit squads, you should really stop to think if you have a point or not.

Actavis has a fairly huge industry employing ex-cheerleaders (I am not exaggerating) telling doctors all about how Namenda is better than whatever else was available. Doctors are free to look up the generic name, but they don't. That's the problem you want to solve. Nothing in your statement shows you understand the problem, so you won't have a solution.

Actavis now has pharma reps saying that Namenda is old hat, and Namenda XR is available. If the doc writes down Namenda XR, generics that can't be produced due to patents won't be.

The basis of this lawsuit seems to be that taking the old version off the market means telling docs that the old version is off the market so switch everyone to the XR version. The article says specifically that doctors prescribe the brand name, and that generics are only filled because state or local laws require substitution when possible.

It's true that this is "unprecedented and extraordinary", especially since critics refer to the practice as "evergreening" and "product hopping" - in other words it happens so often there is a name for it. As Actavis argues, there will be "unnecessary manufacturing" costs in keeping two lines open when only the newer one should be running. I don't follow the "marketing costs" argument.

This is a poor decision, and a poorly argued case, because it basically is trying to get around the Constitutionally granted protection of a patent, and flies in the face of how business has been done for 30 years (considering the U.S and legally done only). If you object to this decision, it should be on that basis. Or the doctor education process, or the lack of patient education as to their options, or any number of other problems in the pipeline.

Otherwise let me paraphrase what you said: "Dragons aren't real, so here are facts that, while true, demonstrate that I have no idea what's going on."

about a week ago

Fraud Bots Cost Advertisers $6 Billion

Bite The Pillow Re:Not sure who to cheer for (190 comments)

Spending time to do something doesn't mean you give it worth.

How do you figure that? More specifically, what worth would I give all of the things I didn't do while doing whatever I spent time on? Would that be negative worth?

Also, there are piles of databases and information sources that I am willing to pay X dollars per month to access, where X represents the cost of my internet connection. I am not willing to spend more than that, but it is worth the cost of access. If it were all worth zero, I would not have an internet connection. Why pay to access something with zero worth?

about two weeks ago

Fraud Bots Cost Advertisers $6 Billion

Bite The Pillow Re:Not sure who to cheer for (190 comments)

In the information age, is providing data an actual job?

I'm sure you meant something else, but your biases did not permit you to translate. Consider it again, and explain yourself more clearly.

about two weeks ago

An Algorithm To Prevent Twitter Hashtag Degeneration

Bite The Pillow Re:HashTags compress data (162 comments)

The original intent of Twitter was to be able to send and view the whole tweet on mobile platforms. 140 characters plus 20 for the username is the typical SMS limit of 160 characters.

If they converted the hash tag into a href={link} with angle brackets, one character becomes 16. As it is, the pound, hash, or number sign still represents a link, but in compressed form.

You are thinking about viewing on a web platform. The creators were thinking about transfer over SMS. Two entirely different platforms and problems. Without considering the original problem, you may find a different solution, because you are solving a different problem.

Now that you know, how would you solve the problem? When you convert a hashtag to a link you drop the hash? How then do you differentiate between actual links, hashtag links, and username links? By hovering? I don't have hover on my phone, and link shortening doesn't tell you where something will end up.

I like the shorthand of knowing if I'm clicking on a user (@) or tag (#) or user-supplied link (normal hyperlink). The last one works on the twitter app, and on the web, and in normal text messages.

about two weeks ago

Interviews: Rachel Sussman Answers Your Questions

Bite The Pillow Re:grr, "tenants" (24 comments)

Language evolves. And I understand that.

But I am going on record to say that mis-hearing and mis-understanding words means that you are either not talking to people about things you read, or not reading the same thing that the people you talk to read.

There is a disconnect in your linguistic vocabulary and your verbal vocabulary.

I'm not saying that one is deficient, but I am saying that you have not connected the two. And while that doesn't make you stupid, you really have to dig yourself out of that hole where I think you're stupid if you make that mistake.

Language does not evolve when people make stupid, obvious mistakes. It progresses when people misuse words or phrases honestly, and understandably.

about two weeks ago

Cultural Fault Lines Determine How New Words Spread On Twitter

Bite The Pillow Re:Did they look at 'lol'? (46 comments)

What you think is not really important.

If I spend a lot of time interacting with people in my geographic area, or in my age group, or in some other well defined group, people will take on my speech patterns or refuse to depending on things like familiarity with me, or identification with how much they accept or reject existing norms.

Ebonics, for example, is the kind of thing I would expect if a closed society (black folk) communicated with itself via rejection of white folk speech. A third cousin talking with someone in another state might spread some thing new, and people pick that up.

If you think that it's an artifact of twitter, then you have studied the least informative articles published on this type of thing.

Individuals are free. But according to people who study these things, geography is important. Yes, we can propagate things. But I have never heard "ard" - I have heard "aiit" and "right" and "ite", and I have relatives in the studied geography.

People pick things up from the people they communicate most frequently with, and especially with K-12 students, this is constrained geographically. As in my example, parents frequently interact with their children, and sometimes adopt (correctly or not), their language.

Think again. And this time, have something behind what you are saying other than your opinion.

about two weeks ago


Bite The Pillow hasn't submitted any stories.


Bite The Pillow has no journal entries.

Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?