Slashdot: News for Nerds


Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!



The Secret Government Rulebook For Labeling You a Terrorist

stoploss Re:How does the current POTUS fair ... (152 comments)

That's a Stanley Kubrick kind of question and I can picture something of a Kubrickian rendition of an answer...

Kubrick? I'm thinking this is more of a David Lynch work, presuming we're constraining ourselves to use film analogies. Otherwise, this is effectively the definition of Kafkaesque.

2 hours ago

Firefox 33 Integrates Cisco's OpenH264

stoploss Re:Is anyone left to care? (166 comments)

"Living 4 years ago" is a claim that's incompatible with you referencing features that aren't officially released yet. Thanks to your flame I actually googled again about it, and like the past 7 years I have checked, there are "plans" to multiprocess Firefox.

However, multiple process Firefox doesn't actually exist in practice yet. Go ahead and enable your multiprocess flags in about:config. Spawn a bunch of tabs and windows and admire the "pretty underlining" on the tab titles. Now check your task manager and count the number of Firefox instances. What's that, you say? There's only one?

Now kill the single Firefox process that's there and see how many FF windows stay open. Zero is the answer.


Instead of astroturfing for FF, perhaps you should sit down at your desk at Mozilla and get back to coding your has-been product.

11 hours ago

Firefox 33 Integrates Cisco's OpenH264

stoploss Re:Is anyone left to care? (166 comments)

I may have control over this plugin, but I don't have control over my whole browsing experience the way that I did 8 versions ago.

AKA "last month". Mozilla really lost the community's goodwill with that move. There was no compelling rationale to support FF after that. Their insistence on using a single-process model really destabilizes their browser, for example. Every release seems to remove functionality or force you to change the way you use the browser in ways you don't want. It's like they hired Gnome 3/Unity/Windows Metro program managers and asked them how best to fuck up their main product.

Thanks to this change to their support model I relegated FF to rare use when I need to check to confirm if another browser is being flaky or if the site itself is to blame.

13 hours ago

Australia Repeals Carbon Tax

stoploss Re:it is the wrong way... (288 comments)

It is usually expected that highly-developed countries will use less power in the future, because of more efficient technology.

O rly. I'll just leave this here: Jevons paradox.

5 days ago

Microsoft CEO To Slash 18,000 Jobs, 12,500 From Nokia To Go

stoploss Burning platforms (382 comments)

I guess Nokia's platform really was burning after all. It's just that it was arson.

about a week ago

Pseudonyms Now Allowed On Google+

stoploss Re:This is bad (237 comments)

"Fallacies (sic) logic and inaccurate claims"? Geekoid, I suggest you consider your own self-referential sig regarding the Dunning-Kruger effect, as once again it applies to your own posted content.

I hope that was sufficiently clear to get through your addled mind.

I can perceive why you might seek out others who are discussing matters logically, as observing those people may allow you to someday learn how to engage in logical discussion yourself.

about a week ago

Pseudonyms Now Allowed On Google+

stoploss Re:This is bad (237 comments)

having to use real names has made it far less trollish then other places.

Enjoy yourself over there with the other people like you. Personally, I don't perceive why you would be trolled when you can just make an insular group of associates and block everyone else.

FWIW, I don't think that having your identity known by others has influenced you to dial back your trolling on this site. Then again, given that it's you, I'm not surprised that you prefer a highly structured social construct with many regulations.

about a week ago

Predicting a Future Free of Dollar Bills

stoploss Re:Useless coins (751 comments)

Just an FYI, all those stamps you buy from the APC kiosk at a Post Office have unique serial numbers printed on them and are linked to your credit card and photograph. Couple that with the Mail Covers program the USPS has been running for the government since the 70's, and they know exactly to whom you are mailing that stamped letter (you know, because they literally log every single one of them).

Just look at the QR code-looking eIndicia barcodes on the stamps. Postal documentation indicates they are unique, but each APC printed stamp is obviously different upon close visual inspection.

Oh, and try covering that black plastic window by the keypad when you're using the APC... it will give you a nonspecific error message when you try to complete the transaction if you do that. It wants your photo for the log.

Buy your stamps from the counter or the grocery store.

about two weeks ago

Slashdot Asks: Do You Want a Smart Watch?

stoploss Re:Congrats! (381 comments)

My wife bought me my dream watch: a Citizen solar powered watch with auto synch with the atomic clock service. I have wanted atomic time synch in a watch since 1996, but only recently found this one.

It's nice that it has a sapphire face, because I want this thing to last me for 20 years and my old watch's face got rather scratched.

My perspective is that if the primary reason one is excited about a possession is its features and capabilities, then it's not a status symbol. It may be a luxury, of course. If this watch is still working/synching in 20 years, I will probably be as happy with it as the day I got it. Happier, probably, because I like durable and reliable possessions.

You know, I have never discussed my watch with anyone in person. Perhaps others who have the same watch are treating it as a status symbol. Maybe it is to them.

about two weeks ago

FTC Files Suit Against Amazon For In-App Purchases

stoploss Re:too bad for the FTC (47 comments)

Don't they have this right under the "Commerce Clause". [which is indeed known to have been abused, but still]

Your opinion, publicly stated, might negatively affect commerce, which could have ripple effects in the economy of another state. Ergo, your ability to state your opinion publicly is regulable under the commerce clause. Don't worry: you're free to express your ideas in your mind, so long as you do not communicate them to anyone else in any form.

This line of reasoning is consistent with the Supreme Court's ruling in Gonzalez v Raich, Wickard v Filburn, et al.

The Commerce Clause has been blatantly twisted into an unconstitutional interpretation. They baldly lie and say it means something it clearly does not (remember, those decisions I cited defined commerce as including "not commerce"). Once you assert B AND NOT B == TRUE, then you can apply this logical fault to reason to any conclusion you wish.

So, to answer your question: yes, they assert they have this power under the constitution (technically, it's improper to say the government has "rights").

It might even be one of those rare constitutional applications of federal enumerated powers if it were limited to interstate commerce, but we all know that's not the case.

about two weeks ago

Ode To Sound Blaster: Are Discrete Audio Cards Still Worth the Investment?

stoploss Re:They have a great fab process (502 comments)

Don't forget the RF shielded optical fiber interconnects, for true fidelity at high frequencies, and a mellow bass.

Old and busted. I don't know how you can tolerate listening to the harshness and small sound stage caused by RF shielded optical fiber interconnects that aren't impedance matched as well.

about two weeks ago

Autonomous Trucking

stoploss Re:Inherent problems (142 comments)

£10 surcharge is equivalent to the tax on £15.63 of fuel... somehow, I am guessing that 2400 L costs more than that.

Unless there is some sort of tax recapture reciprocity/equalization between the UK and the rest of Europe, that fee doesn't do much of anything to level your playing field.

about two weeks ago

ESA Shows Off Quadcopter Landing Concept For Mars Rovers

stoploss Re:Well done everybody (104 comments)

... on completely missing the point. This project is about testing autonomous visual landing site selection and guidance, NOT proposing that quadcopters can fly on Mars. To be fair, the linked article isn't especially clear on that point either.

To be fair, the ESA's own site insinuates that this project is a quadcopter for Mars.

"The dramatic conclusion to ESA’s latest StarTiger project: a ‘dropship’ quadcopter steers itself to lower a rover gently onto a safe patch of the rocky martian surface."

about two weeks ago

Study: Global Warming Solvable If Fossil Fuel Subsidies Given To Clean Energy

stoploss Re:all for ending subsidies (385 comments)

every time someone tries to use that term they start claiming things like military spending, business expenses, etc.

Precisely. Don't simply accept their disingenuous talking points. The "subsidies" for fossil fuels are a lie. These people include things like "the cost of road congestion" when they are fabricating their claims.

They refuse to honestly report the direct subsidies to fossil fuels, because their imaginary number is close to $2 trillion per annum, whereas the actual amount is many orders of magnitude less.

Read the IMF's "fossil fuel subsidies" definition and decide for yourself.

about two weeks ago

U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Religious Objections To Contraception

stoploss Re:Gee Catholic judges (1330 comments)

You fail reading comprehension.

I swear, I don't understand how people can miss the first sentence of a post and then draw conclusions that blatantly contradict that.

In case you missed the first sentence of the post (again): you fail reading comprehension.

You have an interesting set of definitions, though. If W changed none of his politics, but he officially joined the Democratic party and became a card-carrying Democrat (again, while retaining his well-loved-by-liberals neoconservative values), apparently you would allege No True Scotsman if I claimed he wasn't a Democrat.

Bloomberg was alleged to be a RINO (a term which people here claimed is a No True Scotsman fallacy). Turns out, he wasn't actually a Republican after all.

Oh, hey, in case you missed it before: you fail reading comprehension. I specifically said I wasn't debating Sotomayor's claim of being Catholic.

about three weeks ago

U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Religious Objections To Contraception

stoploss Re:Gee Catholic judges (1330 comments)

I see you agree with me, then. As I have stated before, the present national debate context (suppressing employer religious beliefs or employee self-determination wrt contraception) is a false dichotomy predicated on the retarded idea that people should obtain their insurance through their employer.

We have spent 50+ years shoring up this brain-damaged paradigm. I support this Supreme Court ruling while also supporting contraception choice... the real solution is that we need to terminate the employer insurance model with extreme prejudice.

If someone insinuated that people should be practically forced to obtain their housing or groceries via their employer, and in order to ensure people didn't starve or freeze we would pass myriad unconstitutional laws to keep the model even semi-viable, everyone would rightly mock the idea as absurd. The employer health insurance model is no more or less an absurdity.

It needs to end.

about three weeks ago

Microsoft Opens 'Transparency Center' For Governments To Review Source Code

stoploss Re:What's the point? (178 comments)

How much does the Discordian Society pay for you to post that?

about three weeks ago

U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Religious Objections To Contraception

stoploss Re:Gee Catholic judges (1330 comments)

What gets me is that fools believe that the only serious belief is a religious one. That is garbage. You don't need to be part of a religion to believe something, and nor is your belief any less true.

You have insinuated I believe something that I do not.

These exceptions are unfair, anti-freedom, and mean we don't have a true separation of church and state.

Your belief about the unexceptional nature of conscience is taken under advisement, and I'm sure you're well aware that your view is a minority position. Feel free to change the culture, then change the Constitution (it won't work any other way). Until then, you are "wrong" in practice: religious beliefs are—and have been—treated as special by our culture and laws; barring fundamental changes in the culture, the system will continue to operate that way, as it always has.

But in case you haven't noticed yet... you don't need to try to inform me about the current state of things, as that's exactly what I'm criticizing. Telling me about how things work right now is useless.

Fair enough. I'm glad you understand that you truly have your work cut out for you if you honestly wish to effect the change you advocate.

about three weeks ago

U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Religious Objections To Contraception

stoploss Re:Gee Catholic judges (1330 comments)

You've again missed the point by changing the goal posts. A Muslim businessman chooses to open a halal butcher, pigs never enter his shop.

No, it is you who has missed the point. If the Supreme Court asserts people and companies can be forced to provide health insurance as well as force people to buy broccoli, the government can indeed force a Muslim businessperson to purchase and provide bacon to their employees (whether they are a butcher or not, and whether their employees want it or not).

You cannot buy what is not sold.

Who said anything about buying? This idea of a "mandatory bacon benefit for employees" is no different logically than a "mandatory health insurance benefit for employees". Both concepts are equivalently absurd and are unconscionable if it violates religious liberty.

Repeat after me: there is no reason that health insurance should be obtained through one's employer. The present, specious debate is a false dichotomy: there is no inherent conflict between employer religious liberty and individual access to contraception. These considerations are only in tension in an absurd scenario where employers provide health insurance. I mean, the whole paradigm is as retarded as people getting all their groceries via their employer.

A jewish (or any buisness for that matter) can close any day of the week they please. You see the difference with these choices? They don't affect anyone else.

Ah, but those choices do affect others. Or have you never attempted to shop at a store that was closed? A store that is closed on certain days is also theoretically depriving employees of the potential to earn money while the store is closed. In a post Wickard v Filburn legal landscape, that is enough of a rationale to allow federal regulation of when businesses can and/or must be open.

This scenario, of course, is absurd (though I assert it is plausible under present legal doctrine), but so is the idea of forcing employers to provide mandatory health insurance benefits, especially against their conscience. Besides, the employees can go get insurance from the exchange, so by your logic they are unaffected.

My employers religion requires prayer 7 times a day, therefor all employees will stop work at designated times and join the prayer group.

Then perhaps you shouldn't work at that religious organization, where such regulations are very legal:
Churches and religious organizations can discriminate on the basis of religion for all jobs. This includes and is not limited to secretaries, accountants, and janitors. The basis for permissible religious discrimination is the First Amendment's guarantee of religious freedom. The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of this in Corporation of the Presiding Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. Amos,483 U.S. 327 (1987).

about three weeks ago

U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Religious Objections To Contraception

stoploss Re:Gee Catholic judges (1330 comments)

It is unconscionable for them to be forced to provide benefits that are in opposition to their morals.

So Christian Scientists should be completely exempt?

Yes, because no employer should be providing health insurance as a "mandatory benefit". You are operating within the context of a false dichotomy that derives from the nonsensical idea that we should be obtaining health insurance through our employers.

I want universal health care, and I don't want employers involved in this at all. Just like I don't want to buy my house or groceries through my employer or myriad other aspects of life that have no fucking rational correlation with employment.

If you want to advocate for single payer (public/private, NHS-style), then I'm right there with you. I'm not going to be constrained to making a choice within a false dichotomy, though.

about three weeks ago


stoploss hasn't submitted any stories.


stoploss has no journal entries.

Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account