Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Trust the World's Fastest VPN with Your Internet Security & Freedom - A Lifetime Subscription of PureVPN at 88% off. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. ×

Comment Re: Backups? (Score 1) 131

"a simple rsync job offers an actual offsite backup"

You don't understand what a back up is.

Hint: if it is not fully decoupled from the original source (as in "air gap") is not a backup. So an off-site rsync is not a backup; an off-site rsync and tarring the result from time to time to an external device, *may* be a backup.

You are probably in the league of those that think RAID5 is also a backup strategy ("sure, not always, not perfect, but in some simple cases...").

"Only recently has the 'malicious modification of files' rocketed to the top of the list"

The "my dog ate my homework aka I mistakenly deleted a file can you recover it?" has *always* been the number one cause of checking out a restore, closely followed by "damn! all our boxes are infected by a virus/our main server has BSOD'ed, let's reinstall and recover from backups" in windows-land. Ransomware is -alike those "evolution clocks", a 23:59:59 event.

Comment Re: Backups? (Score 1) 131

"This is among the least expensive in terms of storage and in terms of time."

No, it isn't. In terms of time is much quicker to backup to /dev/null, and even backups to /dev/null get surpassed both in time and storage by not doing backup at all.

And, in this case, it seems they offer exactly the same result so, why don't they make it clear -and cheaper, what are they really acomplishing?

Comment Re:Yeah but (Score 1) 196

"Except if your salary is so low, the salary + bonus is the actual realistic baseline, and bonuses lost are actually penalties incurred."

And that's exactly why I said "that's part of the problem": bonus should never be counted as part of a baseline -because it isn't.

"bonuses lost are actually penalties incurred."

Only by the same logic than me copying a Sony film becomes lost revenue for them.

Comment Re:I feel conflicted about this (Score 1) 137

"On the other hand, having a few people involved like Musk are very sane and wealthy enough that Trump will listen to them"

It might be the case.

However, the article states "Musk is betting that job creation is more important to the new President than simply satisfying the oil industry". There has been quite a lot of fanfare about the "Trump's tycoons council" but, nothing abut representatives of the other side, you know, the labour mass. Why is it so? I mean, while job creation is surely important, the quality of that job is also important: USA had a civil war on labour issues, after all.

Comment Re:Belief versus fact? (Score 2) 183

"Science-based beliefs are the new bible. One is either a Darwinist [...] There is no longer room for discussion or dissent."

About species evolution by means of natural selection? No, certainly there's no longer room for discussion or dissent. Just like it's the case about thermodynamics or, say, special relativity. No, ignoramus douchebags' rants don't count.

Comment Re:Well Trump has one thing right (Score 1) 540

"the only way to combat it is by some incorruptible authority guarding against it with an eagle eye, and taking relentless vengeance against it when it does occur."

Exactly. The only problem being that such an "incorruptible authority" neither exists nor can exist, therefore we need a different system, one that understands that corruption is part of human nature and doesn't requires a subset of humans in specific positions to be incorruptible to work.

Comment Re:Well Trump has one thing right (Score 1) 540

"Ideally, democracy would be the mediating factor, ensuring that government limited capitalism to the extent that such limits benefited the majority of people, resisting both the tyranny of government and the tyranny of monopoly capitalism and oligarchy"

But then, specially from Goebbels onwards, we have marketing. "Pure" capitalism/liberalism sits on three basic assumptions in order to work:
1) Hobbes' "man is wolf to man". Any political system we want to design need to take this into account or will fail. And this capitalism seems to be quite spot on or else basically anything would be better than capitalistic democracies, be it communism or anarchism or even dictatorship.
2) Agents within the system act (on their own selfishness, see point above) rationally and are perfectly informed. Here start the problems. While "people" are more or less the way we have always been, marketing as a science has successfully evolved with the explicit goal of understanding and manipulating people for a particular gain and now can quite effectively make masses to act irrationally and on biased information.
3) Despite point one, capitalism expects that those in command are somehow different in that both they are incorruptible and what they have (power) is not to be put in the marketplace just like anything else. And that's what is utterly wrong. USA's founding fathers more or less saw this, therefore the "checks and balances" trying to make their corruptibility as ineffective as possible but it becomes obvious they came sadly short.

So, in the end, capitalism/liberalism as a socio-political system has shown itself to be better fitted for the advancement of society to what we, humans, really are than other theoretical frameworks but it's still too short to cope with the task: "better fitted" still doesn't equates to "good enough". The faster we understand this, the sooner we can start looking for better alternatives.

Comment Re:Well Trump has one thing right (Score 1) 540

"Umm, it's NOT "unfettered capitalism" if you can buy governments."

Yeah... because you say so. Any system goes the way it goes even if you try to put unreasonable limits to it. Capitalism is rightly based on the observed fact that we all are egotistic and takes that to the advantage of the common good (let's allow everyone to work for their own egotistic profit and the invisible hand will make that into the advancement of society as a whole). But then, you go with "hey! but this system we already understood as being composed of egotistic and corruptible individuals will only work if a subset of them, those making the rules, are *not* egotistic and corruptible". Surprise, surprise, those in command are moved by the same interests and profit motives as anyone else.

"the kind of government you can buy monopolies and such from is strong enough that capitalism is pretty much automatically fettered by the government."

And then remember that when the government is not strong enough for that, power ends up concentrating in other individuals/organizations that make their strength to be the rule of the land -go, i.e. to Somalia to see how well the "not strong enough government" works.

"So what you're describing as "unfettered capitalism" is actually "corrupt government" pointing fingers away from themselves..."

No: just the natural and unavoidable evolution of capitalism to its last consequences.

Comment Re:Well Trump has one thing right (Score 1) 540

"The word is evolve, not evolution."

Yes, you are right. English is not my mother language and I made that mistake. Sorry.

"And neither capitalism nor communism is what corruption comes from. Corruption comes from human nature"

Yes, that's true. But, supposedly, "ideal" capitalism works *because* it takes into account that fact: it based on the notion that somehow, individual selfishness can be made to work for the common good.

"the only way to combat it is by some incorruptible authority guarding against it with an eagle eye"

Exactly that: the "ideal" free market (more or less the Adam Smith way) hits the bull eye in the "hey! let's take into account that man is wolf to man, so let's see what can we do with that" but then it commits the stupid mistake of forgetting that and setting the system in a way that, well, everybody is corruptible and egotistic *but* those making the rules: you can buy this and that at "its market value" except politicians. Ha!

Comment Re:Well Trump has one thing right (Score 4, Insightful) 540

"Right now the US has a huge crony capitalism problem"

Back in the tycoon days you had basically unfettered capitalism. Because of that, big tycoons were able to set their way even to buy government -and that's how you got today's "crony capitalism problem".

Now: is there a way unfettered capitalism doesn't evolution into crony capitalism? I don't think so.

Comment Re: It *can* be right... (Score 1) 126

"Yes, I get what you're trying to say, but it's a philosophical point only, which is another way of saying it's no bloody point at all."

It's philosophical only since it obviously is a mind experiment, but it wouldn't be philosophical at all for the astronauts: for the first one the Earth would expend millions and the astronaut would survive; the second one would die alone (without costing a dime) and the difference between both cases would certainly be our knowledge of (special) relativity and what "when" means within its frame.

Yes: it is "philosophical" what happens out of the light cone of an event; no, it doesn't mean we can't make meaningful assertions about events at relativistic distances/speeds.

Comment Re:It *can* be right... (Score 1) 126

"Anyway, adding a radio into the mix is pure fluff, and so is the notion of precision. Neither say anything about when it is meaningful to say "Z happened" according to any particular "reference frame.""

So, say, the astronaut is at Mars and suddenly he says to himself "Damn! I have food for only four (earth) years and I'll starve after that" and then he immediately presses the big red button that will summon the cavalry to the rescue back from Earth.

Now, on the other hand, our hero is on a planet orbiting Alfa Centaury when the same situation happens.

Now, tell me again there's anything meaningful to say about when "Z happened" for both scenarios from Earth's particular reference frame.

Comment Re:It *can* be right... (Score 1) 126

"Move far enough from earth and you can follow WW2 radio traffic live and relive Hiroshiima as if you were there.."

Except, of course, you can't.

Which is exactly the point.

On top of that, I can ASSURE you that no, an hypothetical observer far enough to still knowing nothing about Hiroshima won't experience it as the unlucky ones that were in fact there.

Slashdot Top Deals

You can tune a piano, but you can't tuna fish. You can tune a filesystem, but you can't tuna fish. -- from the tunefs(8) man page

Working...