Slashdot Mirror

Then that simply changes the question to why didn't the reporter comment on the fact that ALL PRESENTERS at the open source conference used a MacOS?

Your trying too hard too make an excuse, it is quite common for conference organizers to get a a podium with VGA/Audio jack at the podium for presenter laptops.

If you clicked on the link provided you would see that the person in question was seen using a MacOS TO CREATE THE SLIDES, not just present them.

You may have some good points scattered about, but as the bloody summary stated, the title of presentation was "2017 Year of the Linux desktop". Their offical twitter account boldly stated: 2017 is officially the year of the Linux desktop!

It doesn't frankly matter what he personally works on, whether he fully believes in the virtures of FOSS, or really even the state of things, he stood up there claiming that it's finally the year of the Linux desktop while using a goddamn Mac.

And he wasn't some guy off the street, he is the President of the Linux Foundation!

You espoused a clear and concise argument that is logical. As a fellow C/C++/Java programmer who believes in using the right tool for the right job (each tool has its advantages) you don't seem to understand modern "brogrammer millenial culture:" It has nothing to do with being an effective tool to solve a problem and everything to do with popularity and coolness.

Building something that works isn't necessarily the goal anymore; it's "likes" on social media. Or however that stuff work.

Relevant: Resume Driven Development

(NTTAWT, as long as it doesn't interfere with the quality of the output)

how about you give the real numbers - that'll really rile up the trolls to see the huge amount of money you're making.

https://twitter.com/cdreimer/status/908354293031473154

The "entire Russia thing" is the epitome of fake news? Well, you're not necessarily wrong. Here's some research which shows that some of these bots, identifying themselves as British people or whatever, post exclusively between 8am and 8pm Moscow time. People pushing out propaganda which favors Russia and their goal of destabilizing the Western governments set up after the fall of the Soviet Union, doing their work during 12-hour days in Moscow time.

All of this whining is coming from the same open-source community leader (Torvalds) that has publicly shunned GRSecurity

Do you mean this grsecurity? Anyway, your characterization is total bullshit. Torvalds is willing to accept grsecurity features piecemeal, but not willing to accept grsecurity as a monolithic patch. The grsecurity team cries about how that's not feasible because they've been developing grsecurity in their free time, but the real problem is that they were developing it in a vacuum. They failed to take the linux kernel project seriously, and now they want people to take grsecurity seriously. They're arrogant, hypocritical fucks who, by the way, are also shit at documentation. If they wanted to enhance Linux security, what they should have done was write decent tools for selinux. That's what it's missing.

All of this whining is coming from the same open-source community leader (Torvalds) that has publicly shunned GRSecurity

Do you mean this grsecurity? Anyway, your characterization is total bullshit. Torvalds is willing to accept grsecurity features piecemeal, but not willing to accept grsecurity as a monolithic patch. The grsecurity team cries about how that's not feasible because they've been developing grsecurity in their free time, but the real problem is that they were developing it in a vacuum. They failed to take the linux kernel project seriously, and now they want people to take grsecurity seriously. They're arrogant, hypocritical fucks who, by the way, are also shit at documentation. If they wanted to enhance Linux security, what they should have done was write decent tools for selinux. That's what it's missing.

Credit Twitter

2006: "Hurricanes are going to be worse and more frequent!"
2007:
2008:
2009:
2010:
2011:
2012:
2013:
2014:
2015:
2016:
2017: "Told you so!"

If you are curious about why the TrustedID site returns false answers when you input bogus info, here is a pretty good hint. https://twitter.com/rayjwatson...

Accepting Equifax's help forfeits your right to sue;

Nope. New York's attorney general demanded they clarify the wording on this.

Probably because they are asking for information typcially found on phishing sites, such as name and (partial) SSN. It's also apparently running a stock WordPress installation and their production site throws debug messages and stack traces. Ugh.

Two seconds with Google: https://twitter.com/ticki_/sta...

Brave uses Apple's WebKit - which has none of Google's Blink updates since the April 2013 fork

That's only true on iOS. On the desktop and Android it does use Blink, see https://twitter.com/brendaneich/status/701019625006489600.

Eric Columbus who worked under Obama on DACA and how it effects POTUS Trump had a good overview on twitter.
He really explains how DACA and DAPA are illegal, and how DACA would fail under same court scrunity.

https://twitter.com/EricColumb...

THREAD: As a lawyer who worked for Obama on DACA issues, I’d like to explain what’s on Trump’s plate, how it got there, and what may happen.

2. DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) was created in 2012 to protect “Dreamers” – who came to US as kids but aren't here legally.
3. Essentially, DACA enables DHS to notify Dreamers formally – via a two-year permit – that they won’t be removed from the US.
4. Just as importantly, it renders them eligible to work legally and be eligible for certain benefits.
5. Candidate Trump promised to “immediately terminate” DACA. But he hasn’t, and in January he said DACA folks “shouldn’t be very worried.”
6. But on 6/29, ten state AGs wrote DOJ threatening to sue to kill DACA unless Trump agrees by 9/5 to phase it out.
7. Sad to say, I agree with the Trump administration that such a challenge to DACA is very likely to succeed.
8. The legal issues are *identical* to a suit that 26 states filed in 2014 to prevent us from implementing a new program called DAPA.
9. DAPA would have provided deferred action, and work authorization, to parents of US-born kids.
10. The 2014 suit also challenged an *expansion* of DACA announced at same time as DAPA. But it didn't challenge the original DACA program.
11. States won in district court and by a 2-1 vote on appeal. SCOTUS, after Scalia died, split 4-4, so the court of appeals decision stood.
12. We can presume the 4 who voted to invalidate were Thomas/Alito/Roberts/Kennedy. I'd bet a large sum that Gorsuch would join them.
13. It’s theoretically possible, of course, that someone – most likely Kennedy – could have a change of heart and save DACA.
14. Because SCOTUS doesn't bother writing opinions in tie votes, Kennedy’s slate is clean. He’s famously changed his mind in other cases.
15. But this is a slim reed on which to stake the hopes of the 780,000 people who benefit from DACA.
16. If the issues are identical, why didn’t the states try to kill DACA entirely in 2014? Probably because the Dreamers are too sympathetic.
17. They came here as kids, most brought by their parents. For many, the US is the only place they’ve ever considered home.
18. This may explain why, of the 26 states that sued in 2014, only 10 signed on to this letter.
19. Alas, the apparent opposition of 40 other states is legally irrelevant to whether DACA is valid exercise of federal executive authority.
20. What happens now? Oddly, the states’ threat isn’t consistent w/their request. They ask Trump to stop issuing DACA permits/renewals.
21. They’re *not* asking to rescind existing permits. So DACA folks would still be able to work legally until their 2-year permit expires.

Unfortunately, even the people who drafted DACA admit that Trump's in a bind here because the order is unconstitutional.

10 state sttorneys general gave Trump a September 5 deadline for ending DACA or they would sue to get it overturned. This same group had DAPA (the parental version) thrown out due to unconstitutionality and the argument against DACA is essentially identical. They would win in court, barring a reversal by the Supreme Court. The SC split 4-4 on DAPA, so the Appeals Court 2-1 against is the law of the land and no one expects that Gorsuch would find DACA constitutional.

Any dispassionate look at DACA sees that it's plainly unconstitutional. Unlike orders that deferred or gave a low priority to enforcement of immigration laws, DACA actually grants (temporary) legal status with no legal basis. Any attempt to find otherwise is really ends-oriented. Plenty of that sort of thing on both sides - but this would be really bad precedent.

The truly sad thing is that the "Dreamers" have supporters on both sides of the aisle - Republicans are pretty sympathetic to their plight as well. But, like anything, politics gets in the way - Democrats want a "clean" Dreamer bill while Republicans want something in return (either wall funding or mandatory e-Verify). Neither side is budging much at the moment (there are a few bipartisan bills out there, but each of the main conferences are waiting).

I don't tend to expect much from Trump (other than crazy uncle-style Tweeting at all hours) but even he seems to want to do something for the Dreamers. Hopefully, a deal can get done soon.

Apparently you've been able to since 2014. I haven't tried.

So the people marching with swastikas and shouting "Heil Hitler", "blood and soil" and etc aren't Nazis?

I'll think I'll take this chap's opinion over yours.

https://mobile.twitter.com/Har...

So they've managed to isolate their "miracle worker" safely away from the productive staff, and cleverly stashed you in a storage room and called it your office.

That's because I'm regional and not local. Plus my office has a window with an excellent view of the roof.
https://twitter.com/cdreimer/status/858056822648750080

To the point of parody. ;)

That said, Neuralink is not new. It just hasn't made the press as much. I definitely recommend the earlier-linked Waitbutwhy article, which is based on interviews with people involved in Neuralink. It's a very long article, but very detailed and thought provoking.

Neuralink is probably Musk's most ambitious project - the least likely to succeed, but with the most profound impacts on the future of humanity if it does.

Someone made a cake, but some compiling needed.

Even if it is by one of the HL writers.

https://twitter.com/marc_laidl...

Trump signed a disaster proclamation to help:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/901259509632573440?s=09

Uhh, he already freed-up money and federal help:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/901205593054162945?s=09

It's already on this years Bullshit Bingo https://twitter.com/paulbuitin...

You made the right choice.

I made the mistake of buying a few Sonos speakers last year, and they gave a bad impression even before taking them out of the box. I tweeted Sonos about it with this photo.

http://www.winamp.com/

Although it's been a bit of a quiet decade... The last release was version 5.666, in 2013, but the bits I use it for still work just as good as ever.

According to DJ Egg, who appears to be the only developer left, the latest public beta appears to be stuck in the dread Swamp of Legaldepts

MilkDrop is still the best visualiser, bar none, and the LineIn source still works perfectly.

It runs on a laptop plugged into a projector that paints the ceiling at our band's gigs with a 1920x1080 screen at 60fps. It is frequently admired and commented on.

One of Breitbart's most senior editor just tweeted #WAR, suggesting the publication isn't happy about Bannon's firing, and there's rather a lot of speculation on Twitter that it's about to do a 180 and oppose Trump.

Rats/ship?

One of Breitbart's most senior editor just tweeted #WAR, suggesting the publication isn't happy about Bannon's firing, and there's rather a lot of speculation on Twitter that it's about to do a 180 and oppose Trump.

So... my advice, BUY ConAgra stock, they own Orville Redenbacher's. Also BUY Diamond Foods, who own "Pop Secret!"

And you probably want to buy some popcorn too.

There is NO evidence to link Seth Rich to the leaks. None. Not a vestige. Even FOX retracted their story saying otherwise, and for FOX to retract a story you know it has to be pretty fucking sketchy.

How can you even say that when we have this information supplied by such a good and trustworthy source?!!! It's almost as if you believe this whole Seth Rich spiel is a diversion from the Russian cyber-attack on the US election.

If you can't tell the difference between Nazi's and other people, then either you're an idiot, or you're intentionally trying to make some point that doesn't make any fucking sense

I sure as fuck can't tell the difference between people being labelled as Nazis and other people.
https://twitter.com/Rosie/stat...

It's not a "slippery slope" to deny Nazi's web hosting.

Well according to you and Rosie most of the US Government should lose its web hosting then.

That's how fucking farcical this is.

You forgot the obligatory "I'm gonna build a bigger thing... With blackjack... and hookers..." steps.

I believe he is referring to the excellent and well researched Youtube videos:

FEMINISTS BUSTED11!! - by unpcgamer82
Sarkeesian - EXPOSED! - by CARLOFSWINDON772
SJWS REVEALED!!! - by nogirlsallowed81

Also this is covered extensively in the book "SJWs and Feminists? Am I right? Right?" by Milo "Account suspended" Yiannocannohavotwitto. He comments extensively on the subject here.

If you look at societies that are less sex-egalitarian, like India or China, you see that women are more equally represented in tech. But the reason is mostly that "Fathers think CS is good job for girls."

Face it, the reason there are so few women in tech is the same reason there are so few women in plumbing or trash collection. It's not that there's no sexism or discrimination, but the biggest reason is that women just aren't that interested. Have you ever met a girl who wanted to be a garbage truck driver when she grows up? I definitely know at least one boy who does.

I know a couple women that grew up with the family electrician business. They know the ins-and-outs of every aspect of the business, from billing to running conduit, and everything in between. Having grown up doing it, they are just as good as anybody else and were not only encouraged but expected to participate. Yet they decided they'd rather become teachers or writers while their brother wanted to stay in the business. Had this been some decades ago, they'd likely be electricians now, at their father's behest.

Sure, it's just one anecdote, but it illustrates the point that just because a woman is every bit as good as a man at something doesn't mean that she wants to do that thing as a job.

dom

"She was murdered by an individual with disgusting views"

Looks like said murderer was running from a violent mob - https://twitter.com/brennanmgi... in the video you can clearly see that the guy was attacked seconds before (you see someone smash something against the car and the car get swarmed right before anyone gets hit).

20:1 this is about to turn into a self-defense trial.

Increase thy ability to earn -- instead of spamming ad links for pennies, build your skills to make your work more valuable.

https://twitter.com/cdreimer/status/897516205216604160

Sure, I believe you. Maybe you should post a pic with proof of that on your blog, creimer. Then maybe we'd believe the utter bullshit you spout here!

https://twitter.com/cdreimer/status/897516205216604160

I'm sorry, I thought you were talking about white supremacists.

Which according to someone at MSNBC would appear to be pretty much every white person on the planet and many of the others:
https://twitter.com/MaryEmilyO...

What he actually says is on average. Average doesn't imply all women or for that matter even most women https://twitter.com/sentientis...

There's an elephant in the room that no one's talking about.

"Unite the right" was not afforded the protection of law during their rally.

Furthermore, law enforcement purposely directed the rally-goers into the antifa crowd, putting them in significant danger.

The Antifa crowd was flinging urine, poop, and one ralley-goer suffered permanent eye damage from having acid (!) thrown at him. The police were widely observed as doing nothing to stop the fighting.

Think about this for a minute: The government withdrew the protection of law from a group based on their political ideals. The state governor and the mayor simply decided not to enforce the law for an ideology they don't like.

This is a profoundly scary thought - that a political faction within the government can simply decide not to enforce the law in order to promote their narrative.

I'm going to have to side with the ACLU on this one. Hate speech is protected speech, and UniteTheRight should have been allowed to peaceably assemble.

https://twitter.com/FuxNet/sta... They get banned there too.

Hmm, not peaceful by default? Really? Would that be because displaying the swastika* is violence in itself, or because someone seeing the swastika displayed is automatically impelled to violence?

Is "neither" an option? How about because they show up looking like this?

They have the right of that as they want, including doing the same to anyone else who uses their service. Right there in their ToS. Maybe next time it'll be someone else, because they wrote a blog post and the next moral outrage will be misogyny.

But let's not forget some things, she was an idiot. She went out of her way to jump on the back of the car and got killed because of it. Search the videos and pictures if you want to actually see it. Why? Who knows. GoDaddy had no problems with having them for years, but now it's suddenly a moral outrage. And there's a whole lot of really weird shit going on with the entire thing, everything from the "nazi's" showing up with their brand new flags with creases on them. To the police being ordered to stand down. And then the UTR which had a permit, being funneled into a group of antifa who further attacked them. Or that the police were sitting on their hands, doing nothing, nor separating the crowds.

Not to mention the absolute freakout by the media, and left calling for this to be "domestic terrorism" and blaming the "alt-right" or "neo-nazis" or "white nationalists" whatever the catch phrase is in this news cycle. I've even seen media flapping heads claiming that this was all because gamergate. But, a muslim guns down a bunch of gay's, but it's "not all muslims." Yeah, just fuck that whole thing you sacks of shit.

Here's what a Hugo award actually looks like.

As I recall, the memo is not claiming proof of anything, merely evidence. There is plenty of evidence, as you concede, that women and men tend to have different preferences. Is it unreasonable to think that maybe some of those preferences result in more men than women wanting to be programmers?

Understand that I'm not saying anything about women being qualified to be programmers or even liking programming. All I'm suggesting is that women may have valid reasons for liking something else more than programming.

Do you really want to go back to the 1960's, where women's carreers were chosen for them? Heck, if you want "equality", just look to India, where practically half of CS majors are women. Why? "Varma finds for Indian women, parental support is key. Teachers and advisors play lesser role. Fathers think CS is good job for girls."

That's right, India has gender equality in CS because their fathers tell them which jobs are acceptable to have.

In other words, when you tell your kids "you can be anything you want to be", you'll get a whole lot more boys who want to be programmers than girls.

dom

a haven for anti-Science Inquisitors.

Anyone supporting libertarians, conservatives, classical liberals, or scientific gender differences will be fired, humiliated publicly, excoriated on twitter, made a target in the Mass Media, then lied about repeatedly.

Wecome to the #Goolag

Chinese Goolag https://www.flickr.com/photos/...

SJW Goolag https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DG...

The fact that so many men line up to express outrage and hysteria over every single Slashdot story like this is the best proof that there is a serious need for more women in tech jobs.

That's known as Lewis's Law: "The comments on any article about feminism justify feminism." Because, after all, any comment that agrees with feminism justifies feminism, and every comment that disagrees with feminism proves that more feminism is needed to stamp out the disagreeable opinions.

That's what's so great about feminism--feminists can never be wrong! No matter how well thought-out, every argument against feminism actually justifies feminism!

We've gotten to the point where Google thinks that asking tough questions and seeking answers is less valuable than ideological conformity

Well, that didn't take long.

Crazy ideas inspire the best people. And with the best people on them, they aren't so crazy anymore. #HowGoogleWorks - @ericschmidt, 2014

And this is how big tech companies die - they become places where the best people don't want to work.

A vocal minority can create an ideological echo chamber and keep it resonating with dopamine hits until Twitter goes bankrupt, nerds trying to use a sense of power brought about by the company's market position to exert their social preferences upon a disparate society, but the inevitable outcome is that either people leave because they aren't uniform in nature or, even worse, people within the company become uniform in nature and then nothing innovative gets done because unconventional thinking comes from unconventional thinkers.

As a public company, Google should care about its productive quality which will return value to investors, but even at that level many managers will damage their company to placate a few activist investors. If Google's culture can't even handle one employee who has unpopular opinions that's probably an indication of internal fragility which can lead to poor performance after some period of time.

Continuing skepticism in the face of overwhelming evidence doesn't make you look clever or thoughtful. It makes you look like a partisan zealot refusing to admit when you're wrong. Here, you can read it right on their own Twitter feed:

https://twitter.com/KHayhoe/st...
https://twitter.com/KHayhoe/st...

https://twitter.com/bobkopp/st...
https://twitter.com/bobkopp/st...

The scientists who authored the report are confused as to why this is a story, and you're going to quibble over "publicly available" semantics? No, it was put up on public sites for "public comments". That's hardly equivalent to a "leak", and you damn well know it. I can't believe you're seriously making that argument. Or else, you're doing an awesome job of trolling me right now.

And seriously, "fake news" is an alt-right conspiracy? Are you kidding me? That was a narrative started by the left/mainstream media to explain how Hillary could have possibly lost the election. But the left gets hoist by their own petard whenever something like this happens, as reporters occasionally demonstrate a complete disregard for the most basic fact-checking before they breathlessly run a story that just happens to show the current administration in a bad light. We saw it happen with the Washington Post and the "Russians hacking the electrical grid" nonsense (they didn't even bother contacting Burlington Electric for a statement), and we see it now again with the non-existent fact-checking of the New York Times before publishing a completely made-up story.

Would I call that "fake news"? No, not really. Just plain bad journalism. But in the end, it really amounts to the same thing - misinformation presented as news.

Continuing skepticism in the face of overwhelming evidence doesn't make you look clever or thoughtful. It makes you look like a partisan zealot refusing to admit when you're wrong. Here, you can read it right on their own Twitter feed:

https://twitter.com/KHayhoe/st...
https://twitter.com/KHayhoe/st...

https://twitter.com/bobkopp/st...
https://twitter.com/bobkopp/st...

The scientists who authored the report are confused as to why this is a story, and you're going to quibble over "publicly available" semantics? No, it was put up on public sites for "public comments". That's hardly equivalent to a "leak", and you damn well know it. I can't believe you're seriously making that argument. Or else, you're doing an awesome job of trolling me right now.

And seriously, "fake news" is an alt-right conspiracy? Are you kidding me? That was a narrative started by the left/mainstream media to explain how Hillary could have possibly lost the election. But the left gets hoist by their own petard whenever something like this happens, as reporters occasionally demonstrate a complete disregard for the most basic fact-checking before they breathlessly run a story that just happens to show the current administration in a bad light. We saw it happen with the Washington Post and the "Russians hacking the electrical grid" nonsense (they didn't even bother contacting Burlington Electric for a statement), and we see it now again with the non-existent fact-checking of the New York Times before publishing a completely made-up story.

Would I call that "fake news"? No, not really. Just plain bad journalism. But in the end, it really amounts to the same thing - misinformation presented as news.

Continuing skepticism in the face of overwhelming evidence doesn't make you look clever or thoughtful. It makes you look like a partisan zealot refusing to admit when you're wrong. Here, you can read it right on their own Twitter feed:

https://twitter.com/KHayhoe/st...
https://twitter.com/KHayhoe/st...

https://twitter.com/bobkopp/st...
https://twitter.com/bobkopp/st...

The scientists who authored the report are confused as to why this is a story, and you're going to quibble over "publicly available" semantics? No, it was put up on public sites for "public comments". That's hardly equivalent to a "leak", and you damn well know it. I can't believe you're seriously making that argument. Or else, you're doing an awesome job of trolling me right now.

And seriously, "fake news" is an alt-right conspiracy? Are you kidding me? That was a narrative started by the left/mainstream media to explain how Hillary could have possibly lost the election. But the left gets hoist by their own petard whenever something like this happens, as reporters occasionally demonstrate a complete disregard for the most basic fact-checking before they breathlessly run a story that just happens to show the current administration in a bad light. We saw it happen with the Washington Post and the "Russians hacking the electrical grid" nonsense (they didn't even bother contacting Burlington Electric for a statement), and we see it now again with the non-existent fact-checking of the New York Times before publishing a completely made-up story.

Would I call that "fake news"? No, not really. Just plain bad journalism. But in the end, it really amounts to the same thing - misinformation presented as news.