How We Know North Korea Didn't Detonate a Hydrogen Bomb

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

How We Know North Korea Didn't Detonate a Hydrogen Bomb

Posted by timothy on Saturday January 9, 2016 @11:02AM from the still-weaponizing-fan-death dept.

StartsWithABang writes: The news has been aflame with reports that North Korea detonated a hydrogen bomb on January 6th, greatly expanding its nuclear capabilities with their fourth nuclear test and the potential to carry out a devastating strike against either South Korea or, if they're more ambitious, the United States. The physics of what a nuclear explosion actually does and how that signal propagates through the air, oceans and ground, however, can tell us whether this was truly a nuclear detonation at all, and if so, whether it was fusion or fission. From all the data we've collected, this appears to be nothing new: just a run-of-the-mill fission bomb, with the rest being a sensationalized claim. (Related: Yesterday's post about how seismic data also points to a conventional nuke, rather than an H-bomb.)

176 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Forbes Warning by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 11:05 · Score: 5, Informative

WARNING: The link goes to Forbes.com. Do no click on it.
1. Re:Forbes Warning by Teun · 2016-01-09 11:27 · Score: 1
  
  Who cares?
  Just click on the Continue to site button and the first thing you see is the gleaming face of the only well fed North Korean.
  I've got uBlock Origin and Ghostery to take care of most of the tracking.
  
  Though disabling Javascript delivers a white page.
  
  --
  "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
2. Re:Forbes Warning by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 11:29 · Score: 0
  
  Right there you know this whole thing was propaganda. Living in a closer vicinity to North Korea than say the US or Europe. I can say the last time this happened we felt a bit of a shake. Of course there was an earthquake registered again this time but nobody here noticed it. Apparently it was even the same magnitude.
3. Re:Forbes Warning by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 11:30 · Score: 0
  
  That used to be reserved for goatse around here. Wow, StartsWithABang has a shitty reputation these days.
4. Re:Forbes Warning by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 11:47 · Score: 0
  
  I agree. Also, ignore the New York Times, the Washington Post, and a plethora of other Internet monetizers.
5. Re:Forbes Warning by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 12:09 · Score: 0
  
  That's the first link, to qz.com. Although it's no more than another discontent misaggregator, what we really hate is forbes.com, pointed to by the 2nd link.
6. Re:Forbes Warning by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 12:44 · Score: 0
  
  I'm no JavaScript guy and I don't need to write JS for my job. But I just added "learning enough JS to write a decent Greasemonkey userscript that blocks all stories linking to forbes.com" to my to-do list.
7. Re:Forbes Warning by Zontar+The+Mindless · 2016-01-09 20:54 · Score: 1
  
  I've started tagging all submissions from this person as bangspam. You are free to do likewise, or not.
  
  --
  Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
8. Re:Forbes Warning by Hognoxious · 2016-01-10 00:14 · Score: 1
  
  I use something like bluehipsterfixieridingupsidedownheadfucktard
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
9. Re:Forbes Warning by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-10 06:46 · Score: 0
  
  Some of you should be interested in Forbes Magazine and even the Wall Street Journal as opposed to the mainstream liberal/socialist/communist rags that print garbage lies! Freedom is not free! There is no free lunch!
Whew by fph+il+quozientatore · 2016-01-09 11:07 · Score: 5, Funny

Just a normal fission nuke? Oh, ok, we're safe then.

--
My first program:
Hell Segmentation fault
1. Re: Whew by TheReaperD · 2016-01-09 11:22 · Score: 2
  
  Well, they can only destroy one city per bomb instead of one country (or US western state) per bomb. Sound like a small difference except that they have so few of them to work with.
  
  --
  "Be particularly skeptical when presented with evidence confirming what you already believe." -
2. Re:Whew by DoktorMidnight · 2016-01-09 11:23 · Score: 2
  
  This is a bit of a nomenclature/semantics problem. Culturally, all non-conventional weapons are regarded as "nukes" due to the fact that the entirety of the non-conventional arsenal is composed of thermonuclear devices (i.e. hydrogen bombs aka fission-fusion trigger devices). What the North Koreans detonated was an atomic bomb (possibly with a hydrogen component, but not truly a fission-fusion trigger device and therefore not a thermonuclear weapon). And from what the seismic data indicate, it was smaller than the device used on Hiroshima (and/or Nagasaki).
  Executive Summary: Yes, it's a largish bomb, but don't go building a fallout shelter.
3. Re: Whew by angel'o'sphere · 2016-01-09 11:28 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  a fusion bomb may have much more power in terms of megatons TNT, but it won't destroy more than a medium sized city.
  
  --
  Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
4. Re:Whew by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 11:40 · Score: 0
  
  Yup, just an ordinary nuke bomb. Again used by a rather nutty world leader.
  Nothing to see here, move along, citizens.
5. Re: Whew by TheReaperD · 2016-01-09 11:43 · Score: 2
  
  I was thinking of the super powerful ones we tested in the pacific. Now that you mention it, they can come in smaller sizes though.
  
  --
  "Be particularly skeptical when presented with evidence confirming what you already believe." -
6. Re:Whew by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 11:45 · Score: 0
  
  You've got it all wrong: With fission bombs, people built fallout shelters. When fusion bombs arrived, the need for fallout shelters instantly became obsolete due to the fact that the consequences of these weapons made them completely moot. Don't expect much life on this planet after an all-out thermonuclear war beyond simple microbes.
7. Re: Whew by NormalVisual · 2016-01-09 11:56 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Fusion bombs aren't that strong. An average 1.2 Mt device set off in the air at the Magic Kingdom in Walt Disney World would likely leave most of Orlando unscathed beyond broken windows and a bad sunburn, and wouldn't even have any effects at KSC beyond hearing it. Running the plot for a much larger 5 Mt explosion shows that while there's significantly more damage, even the nearby cities of Sanford and Lakeland wouldn't be significantly affected.
  
  --
  Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
8. Re: Whew by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 12:03 · Score: 0
  
  Wow, since we detonated more than 2000 nuclear bombs since WWII, and it's raining in January in Canada.... I don't know about your claim.
9. Re:Whew by trout007 · 2016-01-09 12:06 · Score: 1
  
  Well at least there are no unfriendly countries that could afford one of those. It must cause a couple billion dollars.
  
  --
  I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
10. Re:Whew by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 12:33 · Score: 1
  
  Doesn't a fusion bomb use a fission bomb to ignite it? Isn't a more likely explanation that the fusion part failed to detonate but the fission part worked? So technically it was a fusion bomb, but it didn't work right so we only got the fission part?
  Anyway, lets just stop with the bombs, but keep on with the Korean girl bands.
11. Re: Whew by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 12:37 · Score: 1
  
  Teller pretty much said that fusion bombs are limited to 100 megatons, which wipes out ~30x30 mile area. Due to curvature of the earth, a bigger bomb wouldn't do more damage, it would just push the fireball faster into space. So it's still 1 bomb per city...
12. Re:Whew by ChunderDownunder · 2016-01-09 12:39 · Score: 1
  
  I was thinking South America, high in the Andes away from the tsunamis. Far away enough from the crazies with nukes and in altitude away from toxic particles. Just don't try the seafood from the lowlands.
13. Re: Whew by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 12:46 · Score: 0
  
  And as we soon figured out, it's simply more economical to use multiple smaller bombs rather than a single big one.
14. Re: Whew by sumdumass · 2016-01-09 13:01 · Score: 1
  
  Hmm.. global warming - nuclear winter. .. are you thinking what I am thinking?
  Well if you are, I'm sure discussing whether kids would want them if they call them unhappy meals is sure to be off topic.
15. Re: Whew by delt0r · 2016-01-09 14:17 · Score: 1
  
  Err no. That is FUD. See the movie Threads to see what they thought it would be like. humans survive just fine as far as a species is concerned.
  
  --
  If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
16. Re: Whew by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 14:51 · Score: 0
  
  That's ignoring fallout. Also, the economic and political aftermath.
  Although I'd pay to see a post-apocolyptic Disney World. Outline of Mickey Mouse burned into a wall. A charcoal Donald Duck. Radioactive Epcot golf ball lying in a lagoon.
17. Re: Whew by Gojira+Shipi-Taro · 2016-01-09 16:26 · Score: 2
  
  It would also cleanly eliminate The Great Rat's dark hold on Orlando.
  
  --
  "Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my Presidency. I'm fucked."; ~ Donald J. Trump
18. Re: Whew by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 16:58 · Score: 0
  
  Yup... that makes me feel safer... Thanks!
  - Resident of a mid size city.
19. Re: Whew by seven+of+five · 2016-01-09 16:58 · Score: 1
  
  In the Fifties I believe there were discussions about the usefulness of fusion bomb and reasonable targets. The gist was, a megaton H-bomb would be wasted on a mid-sized city, but back then the really big targets were pretty much all inside the US. Other than Moscow, maybe Leningrad/St Petersburg, the Russian town size was much smaller then. So the Russians stood to gain much with H-bombs, not so much the US. But we made them anyway.
20. Re: Whew by NormalVisual · 2016-01-09 17:06 · Score: 1
  
  It was run as an air burst (to maximize blast damage), and if you look, fallout was considered in the simulation run. Fallout would be minimal, and the political/financial aftermath isn't going to "destroy one country per bomb".
  
  --
  Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
21. Re: Whew by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 17:50 · Score: 1
  
  You're confusing maximum yield with extent of damage. Teller's claims were effective military use, where making one 10 times as large simply does not cause 10 times as much effect anymore. So larger devices are conceivable, and even technically possible. They're just not worth the extra difficulty.
  Teller also wasn't looking at fallout and climate change. Hitting a coastal city or an ocean or island strike with enough power will vaporize square miles of shallow ocean and cause a global climate event matched only by large volcanoes or meteor strikes. Tunguska has been estimated at roughly 20 Megaton equivalent, and had no noticeable radiation. The dinosaur killer asteroid is estimated at roughly 100 Megaton equivalent, and Teller didn't know about the dinosaur killer asteroid theory.
22. Re:Whew by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 17:53 · Score: 0
  
  What will you eat? Convenient jets full of soccer players are rare, though they do keep well above the snow line.
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1972_Andes_flight_disaster
23. Re:Whew by ChunderDownunder · 2016-01-09 18:01 · Score: 1
  
  llamas and vicunas are plentiful in the antiplano. Potatoes originate from that part of the world too...
24. Re:Whew by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 18:37 · Score: 0
  
  Yes it does take a regular nuclear bomb to start the fusion reaction. So, maybe they attempted to get one to work and it didn't go as planned, or maybe the western media just says it didn't work...
25. Re: Whew by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 18:51 · Score: 0
  
  I understood that the ratio of the radius of effects of an explosion, such as say between a one megaton and a 50 megaton would the cube root of ratio of power of the explosion, of in this case 50, about 3.68. This does not sound much but if were to detonate such a device in Trafalgar Square in London, the deadly effects would reach Reading and Southend.
26. Re:Whew by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 20:15 · Score: 0
  
  Nukes are obsolete. A precision guided bomb to take out O'l Kimmy will only weigh a few pounds and cost much less than a nuke.
  It is therefore good news that Kimmy is still wasting money on nukes. You need to start worrying when he clues up and stops wasting money on nukes.
27. Re: Whew by bkmoore · 2016-01-09 20:56 · Score: 1
  
  I think there must be an upper limit to where the explosion is kinetically destructive. Eventually the curvature of the earth would direct the explosive energy into space.
28. Re:Whew by hairyfeet · 2016-01-09 21:33 · Score: 0
  
  Uhhh this is just the US government talking out its ass because without boots on the ground we have no clue what they really did and will most likely turn out to be about as "accurate" as trying to guess what happened at Chernobyl simply by detecting the cloud.
  We don't know if they purposely built a small bomb (they would most likely have limited bomb quality fission material so that would make sense) or if the bomb was a partial fizzle, with it being underground all the US government can say with any real accuracy is something nuclear was set off and everything else is pulled straight from their behind.
  
  --
  ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
29. Re: Whew by serviscope_minor · 2016-01-09 21:47 · Score: 1
  
  Fusion weapons scale well. The Tsar Bomba would destroy any size city and then some. It was also run without the uranium jacket, roughly halving the yield, but making it much cleaner.
  The big superpowers were interested in huge bombs when they couldn't guarantee an accurate, direct hit. Interest waned completely when accurate ICMBs arrived.
  
  --
  SJW n. One who posts facts.
30. Re:Whew by the_other_chewey · 2016-01-09 22:19 · Score: 1
  
  You can't test a full H-bomb under ground. It wouldn't stay under ground.
  Phew - I'm glad all those full H-bombs tested underground didn't know that at the time.
31. Re: Whew by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 22:29 · Score: 1
  
  The dinosaur killer asteroid is estimated at roughly 100 Megaton equivalent, and Teller didn't know about the dinosaur killer asteroid theory.
  If by "100 Megaton" you mean "240 Gigatons", sure.
32. Re:Whew by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 22:52 · Score: 0
  
  A h-bomb with a yield this small would be a massive achievement. I don't think it was ever done.
33. Re: Whew by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 23:08 · Score: 1
  
  How the fuck is that "5, informative"?
  "Oh, a Hydrogen Bomb only makes a fireball with a diameter of 2 fucking km, rips the lungs of every living being in a diameter of 14 km and topples most stuff that can be toppled, kills everything and burns everything in a diameter of 25 km with third degree burns and gives second degree burns and sets stuff on fire even beyond that. And oh, there is also fallout. Massive fallout. That is not bad at all".
  How the fuck is this informative in any way on a website that should have a scientific audience.
  The post above does not understand what those numbers from that website "mean".
34. Re: Whew by dcw3 · 2016-01-10 00:59 · Score: 2
  
  You're off just a wee bit...
  From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
  The Chicxulub impactor had an estimated diameter of 10 km (6.2 mi) or larger, and delivered an estimated energy equivalent of 240,000 gigatons of TNT (1.0×1024 J).[21] By contrast, the most powerful man-made explosive device ever detonated, the Tsar Bomba, had a yield of only 50 megatons of TNT (2.1×1017 J),[22] making the Chicxulub impact almost 5 million times more powerful. Even the most energetic known volcanic eruption, which released an estimated energy equivalent of approximately 240 gigatons of TNT (1.0×1021 J) and created the La Garita Caldera,[23] delivered only 0.1% of the energy of the Chicxulub impact.
  
  --
  Just another day in Paradise
35. Re:Whew by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-10 02:15 · Score: 0
  
  Or maybe they built a proper fission-fusion-fission thing - but it didn't work beyond the first stage. It'd be a "hydrogen bomb", albeit not a working one. There are many ways these designs can fail - surely NK won't succeed on the first try.
36. Re: Whew by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-10 04:29 · Score: 0
  
  Thankfully, a scientific audience isn't predominantly composed of hysterical and overly emotion consumed people such as yourself. Geez, get a grip.
37. Re:Whew by Blaskowicz · 2016-01-10 04:36 · Score: 1
  
  (2^31)-1 dollars ought to be enough for anybody.
38. Re:Whew by lazarus · 2016-01-10 09:37 · Score: 1
  
  North Korea Destroys all of Asia
  
  --
  I am not interested in articles about life extension advancements.
39. Re: Whew by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-10 14:51 · Score: 0
  
  Err... 2x kiloton yield bombs (fat man was 21 kT, little boy was 15 kT) were supposedly enough to get the Japanese to surrender in WW2. Nukes of any kind are a big deal.
  Perhaps you should ask the people of Hiroshima or Nagasaki what they think of fission bombs about 50 times the power of those used to end WW2.
40. Re: Whew by Agent0013 · 2016-01-11 03:59 · Score: 1
  
  Curvature of the earth would not matter so much when the burst takes place above the surface. Then you get a bigger range of land destruction.
  
  --
  
  -- ssoorrrryy,, dduupplleexx sswwiittcchh oonn.. -Quote found on actual fortune cookie.
41. Re: Whew by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-12 01:51 · Score: 0
  
  If you're talking pure destruction, as in leveling buildings, then yes.
  However, there is a bigger concern from a single weapon. Detonation at high altiude can flood a continent with an EMP. Considering lots of things aren't EM shielded for that (cell systems, medical equipment, etc...) it could get pretty scary. It all depends on the size of the weapon and the altitude it pops.
Smells fishy. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 11:10 · Score: 2, Interesting

I'm no Korean speaker, but did they actually announce a hydrogen bomb explosion, or certain technologies involved hydrogen bomb production? It's not like they wouldn't be aware that foreign organisations would know what's going down, of course, so this might just be an internal propaganda exercise that the RoW decided to pick up on. Maybe they wanted to see sensationalised headlines from the West to prove to their people that they were under threat again.
1. Re: Smells fishy. by TheReaperD · 2016-01-09 11:24 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  There's no doubt that this is all about propaganda, it's just a question of who the story is aimed at.
  
  --
  "Be particularly skeptical when presented with evidence confirming what you already believe." -
2. Re:Smells fishy. by Teun · 2016-01-09 11:31 · Score: 1
  
  Have you been living under a stone the over past few days?
  Just follow the first link or use DuckDuckGo.
  
  --
  "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
3. Re: Smells fishy. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 12:16 · Score: 1
  
  It's aimed squarely at US presidential candidates, so they can say a bunch of bullshit about NK to keep it in the news
4. Re: Smells fishy. by sumdumass · 2016-01-09 13:22 · Score: 1
  
  They probably saw the sweet deal Iran got and are posturing for something similar. Ever since the 94 deal which they pretty much ignored, they sort of have a habit of rattling sabers a bit to threaten world peace and then wait for offers to settle down.
5. Re: Smells fishy. by phantomfive · 2016-01-09 14:09 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  A lot of people think it was aimed at China.
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
6. Re: Smells fishy. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 14:27 · Score: 0
  
  There's no doubt that this is all about propaganda
  Yes, capitalist pig propaganda attempting to discredit Benevolent Dear Leader, who circled the test site atop his pegasus, spreading joy and preventing the vile West from detecting the awesome powers of Best Korea.
For the love of Christ, enough StartsWithABang by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 11:13 · Score: 0

WARNING: The link goes to something that Ethan wrote. Do not click on it because it only encourages him.
more slashdot clickbait from Forbes by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 11:14 · Score: 0

cripes, are they the new sponsor of Slashdot or something?
slashdot is owned by a trillionaire by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 11:24 · Score: 0

I keep offering to pay $1024 per impression for a simple ad. they just ignore me. stupid. your site is worth less than $128 billion. Slashdot is not what it used to be (at least a $16 trillion company).
Re: Oh that's nice by TheReaperD · 2016-01-09 11:26 · Score: 1

*rolls eyes*

--
"Be particularly skeptical when presented with evidence confirming what you already believe." -
What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 11:27 · Score: 0, Offtopic

Holy fuck! My expectations for Slashdot have never been particularly high, but they've also never been as low as they have been lately.
The stories on the front page have been particularly atrocious lately. So many of them have to do with social "justice", or they're linking to Forbes articles which don't even load in my browser, or they're just irrelevant political articles, or they're just sensationalist tripe.
While we're getting all of these shitty submissions ending up on the front page, there are all sorts of real issues we should be discussing. I'm talking about stuff like:
* The destruction of the GNOME project thanks to the horribly failed GNOME 3 debacle.
* The destruction of the Firefox web browser thanks to numerous fucking idiotic changes being forced on its users by Mozilla.
* The destruction of Linux as a viable OS, especially when used on servers, all thanks to systemd being forced by all of the major distros.
* The fall of the GPL thanks to people wanting to use truly free licenses like the BSD and MIT licenses.
* The fall of Ruby and Ruby on Rails.
* The Rust and Perl 6 programming language disasters.
* The Go and Swift programming language success stories.
* The rise of FreeBSD and OpenBSD, thanks to systemd ruining Linux.
* Microsoft porting .NET to OS X and Linux.
* Firefox OS failing worse than nearly any software project has failed in a very long time.
I wish that we could go back to discussing important matters like we used to. I just gave a big list of important topics. I'm sure there are others, though.
I'd be willing to submit articles about important topics like those, but I know that doing so would just be a complete waste of my time, so I don't. After all, none of these important matters have to do with social "justice" and they aren't particularly full of sensationalism.
Don't even bother suggesting Soylent News. Somehow they manage to actually be worse than Slashdot, if you can imagine that!
1. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by TheReaperD · 2016-01-09 11:37 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  OK, over half of the topics you suggest are your personal pet peeves, rather than current news stories. The others have already had their run here. What do you suggest, that they keep rerunning your issues with software development until your satisfied with the end result? Now, that being said, some of the articles here have been pretty bad.
  
  --
  "Be particularly skeptical when presented with evidence confirming what you already believe." -
2. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 12:08 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  His list was also what I'd call my list. Perhaps you just don't fit in with us.... I'm with him.
3. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Ultra64 · 2016-01-09 12:24 · Score: 2
  
  You mean you *are* him.
4. Re:What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 12:35 · Score: 0
  
  Don't forget the destruction of Python due to the Python 3 fiasco.
  Swift only looks like a success because Apple told everyone to switch to it from ObjC.
  I've never seen a program in Go or Rust.
  There are a list of things I'd like to see in a new programming language, but I'm not going to say what, I'm going to cobble together an interpreter in obfuscated Javascript, then put a BSD + you must include ads and give me half licence on it for monetization.
5. Re:What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by BarbaraHudson · 2016-01-09 12:41 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  The destruction of the GNOME project thanks to the horribly failed GNOME 3 debacle. * The destruction of the Firefox web browser thanks to numerous fucking idiotic changes being forced on its users by Mozilla.
  Nobody cares any more because realize that Mozilla is so f'ed up that it has to get worse before it gets better.
  
  * The destruction of Linux as a viable OS, especially when used on servers, all thanks to systemd being forced by all of the major distros.
  FreeBSD FTW. If it's good enough for Sony and Apple, ...
  
  * The fall of the GPL thanks to people wanting to use truly free licenses like the BSD and MIT licenses.
  You say that like it's a bad thing to replace a restrictive license like the GPL with a freer license.
  
  * The fall of Ruby and Ruby on Rails.
  That was an easy one to figure out pretty much right from the get-go. Only the n00b language-of-the-month people got sucked into that.
  
  * The Rust and Perl 6 programming language disasters.
  And? There weren't that many people using Rust, and Perl 5x still works fine.
  
  * The Go and Swift programming language success stories.
  Nobody who's not using it cares. Replacing a set of tools with another because "NEW" has been done too many times.
  
  * The rise of FreeBSD and OpenBSD, thanks to systemd ruining Linux.
  Again, what's so bad about a system with no licensing restrictions, as opposed to the GPL?
  
  * Microsoft porting .NET to OS X and Linux.
  They're free to do whatever they want. That's not suddenly going to make someone who didn't use it before suddenly want to use it.
  
  * Firefox OS failing worse than nearly any software project has failed in a very long time.
  How is this not a GOOD thing? Maybe it will force them to concentrate more effort on core products, like fixing the memory leaks and other bugs in Firefox.
  See, there's always a silver lining around every cloud.
  
  --
  "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
6. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 13:32 · Score: 1
  
  Well I don't know about these other assholes... But I'm not him. I'm not me either. Maybe I'm you.
7. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by 0100010001010011 · 2016-01-09 13:36 · Score: 0
  
  Damn it, undoing a mod so that I can comment I'm with them.
  I've been here since ~2001. I rode out 9/11 on Slashdot, read about Bittorrent and the iPod being released. (Where's that Nomad now?)
  I'd read and comment on any number of those articles he proposed. Especially over stuff that they've been posting.
  The comments on Slashdot are still better on some topics than Reddit or anywhere else.
8. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 13:54 · Score: 0
  
  Another AC here, cant be arsed to log in from this machine - I used to read slashdot all the time, but not for a while, and just happened to pop in - and holy shit this place has gone to hell.
  That above list also appeals to me, and I think would appeal to most IT types. If a story about one of those comes up somewhere and you don't like it, then just don't read it. Just like I'm not reading most of the stories here any more.
  I'd love to have a real tech news site that isn't adverse to non-mainstream opinions or afraid to take a stand on an issue. But that is not here any more.
9. Re:What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 13:55 · Score: 0
  
  I'm pretty sure Dice is shopping Slashdot for a sale to Forbes. Roland Piquepaille didn't have enough money.
10. Re:What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 14:17 · Score: 0
  
  Don't forget the destruction of Python due to the Python 3 fiasco.
  That's not on the list because it didn't happen and there's nothing to discuss about it.
  The Python devs did it absolutely right. They didn't impact Python 2 users, while still allowing the language to improve and progress. People could transition to Python 3 whenever they saw fit. Now that is has been several years, Python 3 is seeing very wide use. It has been an excellent transition.
  The only people who criticize the Python 3 approach are the Perl weenies. Well, just look how their approach turned out! It's 15 years later and Perl 6 is still a total unusable joke, with Perl users still using Perl 5 because it's the only option they have!
11. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 14:25 · Score: 0
  
  Tell us more about why you don't submit the stories that you think are important instead of actually submitting them.
12. Re:What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by mcrbids · 2016-01-09 14:43 · Score: 0
  
  * The destruction of the Firefox web browser thanks to numerous fucking idiotic changes being forced on its users by Mozilla.
  ... Moves designed to protect users from MalWare. Of course that's "destruction"...
  
  * The destruction of Linux as a viable OS, especially when used on servers, all thanks to systemd being forced by all of the major distros.
  I use Linux extensively. SystemD has been a very minor speed bump. All the people screaming and crying about systemD haven't been able to down out the simple fact that SystemD works just fine and carries numerous benefits.
  I personally don't care enough about the other issues to comment.
  
  --
  I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
13. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 15:33 · Score: 0
  
  Diff AC here.
  Those don't sound like `pet peeves` to me.
  
  * The destruction of the GNOME project thanks to the horribly failed GNOME 3 debacle.
  This is still news. It's an ongoing issue. It's directly impacting the usability of Linux.
  
  * The destruction of the Firefox web browser thanks to numerous fucking idiotic changes being forced on its users by Mozilla.
  This is still news. It's an ongoing issue. It's directly impacting the freedom of the web.
  
  * The destruction of Linux as a viable OS, especially when used on servers, all thanks to systemd being forced by all of the major distros.
  This is still news. It's an ongoing issue. Systemd is causing more damage to Linux and its community than Microsoft, Apple, SCO, or anyone else could have ever have hoped to cause.
  
  * The fall of the GPL thanks to people wanting to use truly free licenses like the BSD and MIT licenses.
  This is still news. It's an ongoing issue. It's causing the FSF and software like GCC to become irrelevant.
  
  * The fall of Ruby and Ruby on Rails.
  This is still news. It's an ongoing issue. Ruby on Rails is a great lesson in what happens when hype and unskilled developers collide.
  
  * The Rust and Perl 6 programming language disasters.
  This is still news. It's an ongoing issue. They're other failures we can be constantly learning new lessons from.
  
  * The Go and Swift programming language success stories.
  This is still news. It's an ongoing issue. Both of these languages are evolving rapidly, unlike other failing languages mentioned above.
  
  * The rise of FreeBSD and OpenBSD, thanks to systemd ruining Linux.
  This is still news. It's an ongoing issue. The implications of this are huge, because it means that Linux and the GPL are falling by the wayside, and are being replaced by much better alternatives.
  
  * Microsoft porting .NET to OS X and Linux.
  This is still news. It's an ongoing issue. This will no doubt have a huge impact on software development for Linux and OS X.
  
  * Firefox OS failing worse than nearly any software project has failed in a very long time.
  This is still news. It's an ongoing issue. There was actually a /. story about this yesterday, showing how Mozilla still thinks that Firefox OS has a future, when it obviously doesn't.
  All of the things listed are clearly newsworthy.
  They are much more relevant than the other stories we have been getting lately.
14. Re:What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by PopeRatzo · 2016-01-09 15:42 · Score: 1, Funny
  
  While we're getting all of these shitty submissions ending up on the front page, there are all sorts of real issues we should be discussing. I'm talking about stuff like:
  * The destruction of the GNOME project thanks to the horribly failed GNOME 3 debacle.
  * The destruction of the Firefox web browser thanks to numerous fucking idiotic changes being forced on its users by Mozilla.
  * The destruction of Linux as a viable OS, especially when used on servers, all thanks to systemd being forced by all of the major distros.
  * The fall of the GPL thanks to people wanting to use truly free licenses like the BSD and MIT licenses.
  * The fall of Ruby and Ruby on Rails.
  * The Rust and Perl 6 programming language disasters.
  * The Go and Swift programming language success stories.
  * The rise of FreeBSD and OpenBSD, thanks to systemd ruining Linux.
  * Microsoft porting .NET to OS X and Linux.
  * Firefox OS failing worse than nearly any software project has failed in a very long time.
  I wish that we could go back to discussing important matters like we used to.
  Jesus wept.
  
  --
  You are welcome on my lawn.
15. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 16:10 · Score: 0
  
  To be honest, it is more like commentary since each blurb clearly takes one side of an issue
  That said, they are issues that deserve discussion in an industry leader like say, Dr Dobbs... What's that? They shuttered Dr Dobbs because it wasn't bringing in enough revenue?
  So yeah, /. has clearly gone over to the dark side and is abandoning its roots for whatever the data analytics people say brings in the most eyeballs. News that Nerds would want to read does not seem to be their target anymore
  What you see is what sells, or they get set out on a ice floe like Dr Dobbs
16. Re:What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 16:29 · Score: 0
  
  SystemD has been a very minor speed bump.
  As somebody who follows the mailing lists of several major distros that switched to systemd, I'd hardly call it a "very minor speed bump".
  It has been a huge disaster for many people. We're talking about Linux installations that no longer boot after what should be routine updates. We're talking about problems that are difficult to diagnose and fix because of systemd's idiotic approach of using binary logs. We're talking about the most talented and experienced Linux users moving to FreeBSD just so they can get a stable and reliable OS again!
  When I read the cries for help on the distro mailing lists, or read some of the devastating bug reports, I'm utterly shocked. I can't see how somebody could write it off as a "very minor speed bump". If Windows ever suffered from even 5% of the problems that systemd has caused, people would never stop talking about it, and it would never live it down. Yeah, it's that bad! Even long-time Linux users are finding that Windows is now preferable to Linux for both desktop and server use.
17. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 17:07 · Score: 1
  
  No, you are definitely him.
18. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 17:10 · Score: 0
  
  That's not really a commentary on Linux. Windows has become exceptionally good in the last 5 years.
19. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 17:11 · Score: 0
  
  So let's quit bitching about /.'s decline and make a better one. Make it p2p and have a distributed moderation system. Discuss this on twitter with #p2pnews
20. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 19:31 · Score: 0
  
  Perl 5 and Perl 6 are completely different languages, and this has been planned from the start. Perl 5 isn't deprecated, and you're a fucking idiot. Cheers. -PCP
21. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by zapadnik · 2016-01-09 20:39 · Score: 1
  
  I miss the old Slashdot. This Socialist Justice editorial selection seems to be betting in the way of interesting tech subjects. Perhaps Slashdot needs a #GamerGate to bring stuff back to "News for Nerds. Stuff that matters" again ?
22. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 20:41 · Score: 0
  
  I object most strenuously to the language "just a run-of-the-mill fission nuke". No nuclear bomb has been dropped since Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the IAEA received a Nobel Peace Prize just 10 years ago, I quote, "for their efforts to prevent nuclear energy from being used for military purposes and to ensure that nuclear energy for peaceful purposes is used in the safest possible way".
  Surely things haven't changed so much in 10 years that rogue states having nuclear arms is now a run-of-the-mill issue.
23. Re:What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Zontar+The+Mindless · 2016-01-09 21:02 · Score: 2
  
  * The fall of the GPL thanks to people wanting to use truly free licenses like the BSD and MIT licenses.
  Your phrasing clearly shows an agenda. This "fall" is occurring only in the dreams of those who want to corporatise OSS software while giving nothing back.
  
  * The Go and Swift programming language success stories.
  *What* Go and Swift programming language success stories?
  
  * The rise of FreeBSD and OpenBSD, thanks to systemd ruining Linux.
  While I'm not a huge fan of systemd (wouldn't miss it, were it to... die in a fire, for instance), this hasn't kept *me* from using Linux for the last decade-plus. I don't see it stopping many other folks, either.
  
  --
  Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
24. Re:What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Zontar+The+Mindless · 2016-01-09 21:04 · Score: 1
  
  Forgot one:
  
  * The destruction of the GNOME project thanks to the horribly failed GNOME 3 debacle.
  "And nothing of value was lost".
  
  --
  Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
25. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 21:09 · Score: 1
  
  It exists, and it's really good:
  pipedot.org
26. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 21:18 · Score: 0
  
  You're fucking joking right?
  I guess you aren't experiencing the file explorer refresh bug?
  Or the constant random update failures?
  My friend the other day had the "user profile service" puke and now she can't log into her laptop at all.
  No, Windows is not "exceptionally good".
27. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 22:19 · Score: 0
  
  Which doesn't seem to have a mobile friendly page! What a waste.
28. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 22:22 · Score: 0
  
  I wish they would.bring back jenny cam.
29. Re:What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by nightfire-unique · 2016-01-09 22:47 · Score: 1
  
  Man.. we're old. :(
  
  --
  A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
30. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by nightfire-unique · 2016-01-09 22:48 · Score: 1
  
  Like k5 all over again. :(
  
  --
  A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
31. Re:What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by nightfire-unique · 2016-01-09 22:56 · Score: 2
  
  So to a business owner, _no_ commodity is more valuable than feedback.
  People have a bad meal at a restaurant, and 90% of the time, leave without saying a word. The business owner is perplexed, and eventually goes out of business.
  "The roast beef here is terrible."
  Six words could have saved his business.
  The same is true for every business.
  AC is certainly free to stop reading, and AC knows that. You're not really adding to the conversation, but you could dissuade them from providing an extremely valuable service to businesses in the future - feedback.
  
  --
  A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
32. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Hognoxious · 2016-01-09 23:58 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not him.
  I'm Spartacus.
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
33. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-10 00:12 · Score: 0
  
  I feel ya. This is what usually happens when communities are invaded by 'normal' people outside the original special group.
  Especially the sensational and justice parts. Sad.
34. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-10 00:17 · Score: 1
  
  I think he means 'compared to older windows versions'. I think in that case he is right. It became a lot less awkward doing admin things since windows 7.
  Nothing in comparison to a well-configured unix derivative, though.
35. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by holyjoly · 2016-01-10 00:35 · Score: 1
  
  soylentnews.org is updated more frequently than pipedot.org and seems to have a bigger (though still small) community.
36. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by vel-ex-tech · 2016-01-10 01:00 · Score: 1
  
  No I'm AC!
37. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-10 02:08 · Score: 1
  
  I've found that SN has a serious problem with abusive moderation. Like you stated, it has a small community. This means that a small number of people have mod points. And to put it nicely, pretty much all of the mods over there are crazies. If you post a comment that doesn't fit into their rather fucked up world view, then they will very often gang up on you and downmod you. At least Slashdot has a big enough mod community that it isn't monopolized by a small number of whackos. If somebody mods abusively here, it's often undone by somebody else.
  Many of the stories at SN are the same ones as here, like the exact same shitty Hugh Pickens submissions submitted to both sites. The rest of the submissions are typically poorly written and very poorly edited, too. There are some frequent contributors there with a very heavy leftist slant, and the articles they submit are total rubbish (and I say this as somebody who is quite liberal). Even Slashdot manages to have better articles than SN, that's how bad SN is!
  And Pipedot is a fucking joke. It's basically a dead site. One or two new submissions each week combined with maybe two or three comments each is not sufficient.
38. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by 0100010001010011 · 2016-01-10 02:46 · Score: 2
  
  I think we need a technical solution in FOSS.
  I think the climate of the internet is ready for it. Everyone is sick of Slashdot's turn for the worse. Redditors are crying about reddit going down. Everyone is complaining about the twitter sinking ship. Facebook is... facebook.
  We haven't seen a new, good, decentralized site in years. Personally I think all of the software is already written, it just needs a bit of tweaking.
  - Usenet for discussion.
  - IRC for chat.
  - nginx front end.
  The only thing that needs to be written is a decent moderation on top of it all.
39. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Wrath0fb0b · 2016-01-10 05:50 · Score: 1
  
  * The fall of the GPL thanks to people wanting to use truly free licenses like the BSD and MIT licenses.
  This is still news. It's an ongoing issue. It's causing the FSF and software like GCC to become irrelevant.
  This is silly, GCC is just a technologically inferior option to LLVM/clang -- ask anyone working in the compiler space about it. Even the folks working on GCC admit that's not aging gracefully.
  If GCC becomes irrelevant, they will have no one to blame but themselves.
40. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by doccus · 2016-01-10 06:06 · Score: 2
  
  His list selections are all SLASHDOT material. That's kinda what this site used to be about. If you want "current news stories" go to ..er.. FOX ;-)
41. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-10 07:27 · Score: 0
  
  Sorry, #p2pnews is already taken for some other purpose.
42. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by jafac · 2016-01-10 08:06 · Score: 1
  
  I've been here quite a while too, if that counts. I am in violent agreement with the others in this thread. I like my 4 digit uid, but I long ago realized that Slashdot can't be saved. When cmdrtaco left and it was sold to dice, that was the end.
  Slashdot has always been about its user community, so I am sure that a technical solution can easily be made, and that community will find it when that happens.
  
  --
  
  These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
43. Re:What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by SivDotnet · 2016-01-10 08:08 · Score: 1
  
  I wholeheartedly agree with this post. When I was first on Slashdot there weren't many items in the daily email with the links in it that I wouldn't read, nowadays I am struggling to find 2 or 3 each day out of the 15 stories that are sent.
  Let's get back to Linux, programming, web and general IT Industry news like it used to be!
  Siv
  
  --
  Martley, Near Worcester UK.
44. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Contract+Gypsy · 2016-01-10 08:14 · Score: 0
  
  I went green a long time ago, soylent green. It's called beating our Govt to the punch line!
  
  --
  Life is in a state of dynamic equilibrium, it both blows and sucks
45. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by ubrgeek · 2016-01-10 08:24 · Score: 1
  
  Trapper: Count off!
  Radar: [to Hawkeye ]Are you one?
  Hawkeye: Yes, are you one too?
  
  --
  Bark less. Wag more.
46. Re:What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by rrohbeck · 2016-01-10 08:42 · Score: 1
  
  It's called monetization. Looks like Slashdot tries to become MSM, not news for nerds.
  
  --
  thegodmovie.com - watch it
47. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Hognoxious · 2016-01-10 10:51 · Score: 1
  
  Me too, certainly more than half.
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
48. Re:What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-10 11:07 · Score: 0
  
  Wow. A lot of butthurt in this one.
49. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-10 12:34 · Score: 0
  
  I'm Brian!
  And so is my wife!
50. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by EricTheO · 2016-01-10 13:26 · Score: 0
  
  Well I don't know about these other assholes... But I'm not him. I'm not me either. Maybe I'm you.
  "We are Groot!"
  
  --
  -Eric
51. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Hylandr · 2016-01-10 13:54 · Score: 1
  
  +1 Funny !
  
  --
  ~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
52. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Hylandr · 2016-01-10 13:59 · Score: 1
  
  Mobile friendly pages can die in a fire.
  
  --
  ~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
53. Re:What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by Hylandr · 2016-01-10 14:22 · Score: 1
  
  Grouping these up in a way that makes a touch more sense.
  
  The destruction of the GNOME project thanks to the horribly failed GNOME 3 debacle.
  * The destruction of the Firefox web browser thanks to numerous fucking idiotic changes being forced on its users by Mozilla.
  Nobody cares any more because realize that Mozilla is so f'ed up that it has to get worse before it gets better.
  
  * Firefox OS failing worse than nearly any software project has failed in a very long time.
  How is this not a GOOD thing? Maybe it will force them to concentrate more effort on core products, like fixing the memory leaks and other bugs in Firefox.
  See, there's always a silver lining around every cloud.
  Firefox lost me with the insatiable pace of updates knocking my extensions out of compatibility. The fact that Google offered a hugely more streamlined experience sealed it's fate. Now, I only use it when I am testing something that requires cross-browser support. It can die and I could not care less, neither would I care to read an article about it.
  
  * The rise of FreeBSD and OpenBSD, thanks to systemd ruining Linux.
  
  * The destruction of Linux as a viable OS, especially when used on servers, all thanks to systemd being forced by all of the major distros.
  This has to be some of the most cleverly disguised FUD campaigns I have ever seen. Linux is still quite relevant, and is still overtaking MS products which have recently begun charging licenses *by the core* for it's 2016+ Server products. Then there's the Windows 10 thing which I am witnessing people begin their migration to Linux. I work at a very large global corporation with thousands of AWS servers and I have seen at MAX one or two OSX servers.
  As for Systemd I was angry that they were changing things that didn't really seem to have a purpose but it makes a lot of sense with the bottom statement.:
  "One of systemd's main goals is to unify basic Linux configurations and service behaviors across all distributions."
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
  
  FreeBSD FTW. If it's good enough for Sony and Apple, ...
  Again, what's so bad about a system with no licensing restrictions, as opposed to the GPL?
  You say that like it's a bad thing to replace a restrictive license like the GPL with a freer license.
  
  * The fall of the GPL thanks to people wanting to use truly free licenses like the BSD and MIT licenses.
  You mean Profitable. Under the BSD License I can take any open source you develop and change it a bit and be completely free to return that code to a proprietary format and NOT share *any* code in my product or offering.
  
  * The fall of Ruby and Ruby on Rails.
  That was an easy one to figure out pretty much right from the get-go. Only the n00b language-of-the-month people got sucked into that.
  ^^ This right here. Thank god that support / upgrade Nightmare is going to be over soon.
  
  * The Rust and Perl 6 programming language disasters.
  And? There weren't that many people using Rust, and Perl 5x still works fine.
  
  * The Go and Swift programming language success stories.
  Nobody who's not using it cares. Replacing a set of tools with another because "NEW" has been done too many times.
  
  * Microsoft porting .NET to OS X and Linux.
  They're free to do whatever they want. That's not suddenly going to make someone who didn't use it before suddenly want to use it.
  No matter the language there will always be sloppy programmers available to make it look bad. Some languages just seem to invite a disproportionate number than others. I can't wait to see the looks on the .net goofs!
  
  --
  ~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
54. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by thechemic · 2016-01-10 15:46 · Score: 2
  
  My workstation at home has never had a BSOD, never any data corruption, and never any issues at all for over 2 years. But I also make it a rule to not buy my computers from Walmart. I also implement configurations to mitigate code execution from the user profile. Windows is an exceptionally stable and powerful platform assuming you didn't install it on top of complete garbage for hardware and assuming you don't run it using an administrator account - just like on Linux.
  
  --
  Let's make like a bird... and get the flock outta here.
55. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by zapadnik · 2016-01-10 17:12 · Score: 1
  
  Thanks. That;s interesting. But I would argue that it is the immoderate and SJW-biased 'moderation' that is killing Slashdot. I think we need more Free Speech and not more censorship ("moderation") - that way all points of view come across and Darwinian evolution hammers out the best ideas. I believe that my points of view can stand up to scrutiny, and I'm sure many others do to - but it is the censorship and stealthy pushing of Collectivist memes over Individualist ones that is strangling Slashdot and other places. The gamers fought this off with their #GamerGate exposure of the censorious control freaks. I record Slashdotters can do this too - no matter what you believe, this is should be News for Nerds - not propaganda for the Borg Collective.
56. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by BDF · 2016-01-11 11:36 · Score: 1
  
  Your forgot...Freshmeat.net is renamed and static content. Much like Slashdot, but without being renamed.
57. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by TheReaperD · 2016-01-11 12:45 · Score: 1
  
  I mod, therefore I am part of the collective. I don't care about SJW issues and I don't care for censorship in most forms. That being said, if your being an ignorant troll, I will mod you as such without hesitation and if you want to create a flamewar, your post will be modded into -1 purgatory. If someone does abuse their mod points to silence criticism and legitimate debate, I both use my points to counter them and report them to the admins. If you're a moderator and you don't do these things, you're not doing your job.
  
  --
  "Be particularly skeptical when presented with evidence confirming what you already believe." -
58. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by zapadnik · 2016-01-11 14:49 · Score: 1
  
  Thanks. I agree with much of what you say. The problem is the editors select articles that interest THEM and new editors seem to be selecting SJW issues. If one wants to do SJW then Huffpost is a good place to do it - but it is inappropriate on Slashdot. With regard to modding - I try to never, ever mod down. Ever. The solution to bad speech is more speech, pointing out the errors - censorship is one of the greatest evils on the planet.
  For example, despite your best of intentions what if someone is telling you something unpopular and you consider it trolling, but it is true and is "speaking truth to power"? you might be against the idea, but perhaps you could be persuaded of the facts, if only people can freely say how they understand the situation. This is the only way we can learn the truth (as in reality) despite a sea of disinformation out there. A great example is recently when there was clearly orchestrated molestation of rapes of young women in German, Austria, Norway, Finland, and Sweden by Muslim immigrants (following the depraved example of Mohammed, but we won't get into that). The mainstream media squashed the story, the German government used police against protesters trying to get the truth out, and then the media was forced to release articles but they distorted everything (in short, the media lied). It was only social media where people got to tell the truth about what happened, and the Orwellian way the German government trying to squash and distort all information - calling anyone against the rape "racist". Now on Slashdot a moderator may not know the truth, and thus mods the posts down as "flamebait" or "troll" - yet what is coming out is the truth that is not yet well known. Hence, modding down is extremely problematic.
  
  If someone does abuse their mod points to silence criticism and legitimate debate, I both use my points to counter them and report them to the admins. If you're a moderator and you don't do these things, you're not doing your job.
  Yes, you are an excellent example of a moderator. However, the SJWs among us don't believe in Free Speech at all - where Free Speech includes true facts that offend their extremist worldview. They mod down ruthlessly - they can't win debates on facts, so their main weapon is censorship. Thus, when I try and present facts, including uncomfortable truths, I have been modded down ruthlessly and systematically. These people then watch for other posts you make - no matter how innocuous, and continue to mod you down until you have negative karma and are no longer granted mod points, which means you cannot challenge the SJW cultural Marxist Narrative by modding up people pointing out informative and interesting posts that refute their propaganda. I know these SJW types do this because I've had to ask Slashdot admins to examine vicious modding against me and they looked at the pattern and saw the censorship - fortunately they they stripped the crazed SJW censors of the ability to mod ever again. But it is out there.
  Free Speech is not about things we agree on. It's not about ponies and rainbows and unicorns and things that make you feel good. Free speech is all about the things we find uncomfortable to talk about. Free Speech is about truths that people don't yet understand. This is why I say that modding down is bad, we should strive to mod up informative and factual posts not matter how we emotionally feel about them. What may be a "troll" to someone who doesn't yet know the truth is a "truth teller" to other people that do. Just as you do, we need to fight censorship - but we also need to fight censorship in *ourselves* if the post contains facts and no personal attacks, no matter what we feel about a subject. Only then can we use Diversity of Opinion (the only diversity that actually matters) to filter many ideas through an evolutionary process and arrive at the best picture of reality despite the massive amounts of disinformation we are subjected to daily.
59. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by 0100010001010011 · 2016-01-11 15:16 · Score: 1
  
  His UID has an entire extra digit than ours. Not just an extra digit, nearing 3x. I don't think he remembers old mods or moderation.
  I got 5 mod points once every other month. I certainly didn't squander them on bad posts. It's not like Reddit where it takes a fake account (or bot net) and you can easily push conversation however you want it.
60. Re: What the fuck has happened to Slashdot?! by zapadnik · 2016-01-13 08:49 · Score: 1
  
  Nah man. This is a second account since my first one was targetted by the SJW trolls I talked about. I speak in truth !
TWICE IN ONE DAY! by thegarbz · 2016-01-09 11:39 · Score: 3, Informative

WTF Slashdot.
Two fucking Forbes articles in one day.
Two fucking StartsWithASlashvertisement posts in one day.
How many more readers do you want to leave? I'm getting to my breaking point!
1. Re:TWICE IN ONE DAY! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 14:13 · Score: 1
  
  And they even fucking admit in the fucking summary:
  
  (Related: Yesterday's post about how seismic data also points to a conventional nuke, rather than an H-bomb.)
  
  They actually fucking admit right then and there that the post is a dupe, and they link to his spam blog anyways.
  We all need to start hitting the http://slashdot.org/firehose.plFirehose more frequently and downmodding Ethan Siegel's blogspam on sight.
Why they detonated it by phantomfive · 2016-01-09 11:57 · Score: 3, Interesting

This is my favorite theory of why N Korea detonated a bomb, because China snubbed the dear-leader's hand-picked girl band. Things are strange over there.

--
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
1. Re:Why they detonated it by PopeRatzo · 2016-01-09 15:57 · Score: 1
  
  It's got to be lonely being the Supreme Leader of a shithole country after you've killed almost everyone you know to gain power.
  So lonely.
  
  --
  You are welcome on my lawn.
2. Re:Why they detonated it by phantomfive · 2016-01-09 16:11 · Score: 2
  
  Yeah, he's probably arone.
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
3. Re:Why they detonated it by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 23:46 · Score: 0
  
  So ronery.
4. Re:Why they detonated it by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-10 05:47 · Score: 0
  
  For what it's worth they still quite haven't run out of people as you can see there :
  https://www.youtube.com/v/eGGHSYSuhm0?start=1182&end=1410&autoplay=1
Forbes ad-block.. LIGHT ad reward?? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 12:00 · Score: 0

I'd RTFA, but the Forbes site erroneously states I need to disable my ad-blocker; repeatedly.
I say erroneously because, if I did disable it, I'd have to unplug my router, barring me from the internet.
Wow, yes, that would indeed be ad-light.
(I use a dns blackhole on my router's DNSmasq from MVPS. http://winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.txt )
Doesn't block every known site, but gets a good majority.
This is the first site I've come across that didn't work.
I've been using this on my router for almost a year now.
1. Re:Forbes ad-block.. LIGHT ad reward?? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 12:21 · Score: 0
  
  There's no TFA to R in the first place.
  Everything written by this Ethan Siegel can be found by searching for publicly available information from other sources. You don't actually need anything written by this marketing droid.
  There's no article. There's no fucking spoon. This is hyperarticle -- a simulacrum resembling an article, which serves no other purpose than hiding the fact that there is no fucking article to begin with.
2. Re: Forbes ad-block.. LIGHT ad reward?? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 12:28 · Score: 0
  
  I've been using something similar for quite some time, and until recently could continue to the site; however, they have become desperate to block the blockers and closed that hole. Oh well, no great loss for most.
Fuck Forbes, and in particular Ethan Siegel by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 12:01 · Score: 5, Informative

I've posted this, today, on slashdot and I'm posting it again.
In particular, Fuck Ethan Siegel, the handle resembling a human name used by the StartsWithABang guy, well-known Internet troll and manipulator of disinformation ("digital strategist" in today's Internet dysphemism), who is claimed to be "professor" perhaps of nothing but the art of aggressive marketeering.
dieethandie.

Forbes is a well known scam site.
The website "offers" 17 trackers on a single page serving what they claim to be "content", by the count of Ghostery. In comparison, Slashdot serves 6.
The site claims to promise "light ad" and nags you to turn off the ad blocker. In reality, it's 4% content and 96% ads.
What's worse, the blogs hosted there offers no information that is so unique that is worthy of whitelisting the site in your content blocker. The "Starts with a bang" blog, for example, "publishes" stories that are actually regurgitated, thinly-wrapped, dumbed-down, borderline plagiarism from science journals, websites and blogs. The link to the actual news is usually buried with a wall of distracting text and images copied or re-phrased from the original source. The whole blog serves no other purpose than baiting the reader for the purpose of tracking.
In addition, it appears that the purpose of hosting ads includes malware delivery.
The behavior of Forbes.com is at best sociopathic and outright criminal at worst. They look really desperate.
It's only a matter of time before this hub of mal-adverts gets its page ranks bitchslapped by Google, and pulling down the rank of all prolific referrers, including Slashdot.
Which is completely deserved.
1. Re:Fuck Forbes, and in particular Ethan Siegel by whh3 · 2016-01-09 16:20 · Score: 1
  
  I get the animosity toward Forbes and these type of articles, but why the animosity toward Ethan? That's a serious question.
  When I googled I found information that certainly seems to suggest he has a legitimate PhD in a field in something more complicated than I'll ever understand. He also seems to hold (or have held) real teaching positions. Please help me see what I am missing.
  References:
  http://www.phys.ufl.edu/siegel/
  http://startswithabang.com/?page_id=4
  
  --
  remove nospam. to email!
2. Re:Fuck Forbes, and in particular Ethan Siegel by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 17:09 · Score: 1
  
  I get the animosity toward Forbes and these type of articles, but why the animosity toward Ethan? That's a serious question.
  
  Because he does this on every content aggregator, from Slashdot to Fark to HackerNews. It's clickbait and self-promotion. He is not interested in participating in these communities; he's merely dropping his name and his cut-and-paste-crap-from-Wikipedia-and-Google-image-search blogspam to any site that will garner him clicks.
  
  When I googled I found information that certainly seems to suggest he has a legitimate PhD in a field in something more complicated than I'll ever understand. He also seems to hold (or have held) real teaching positions. Please help me see what I am missing.
  So does Ben Carson. That doesn't mean he's worth reading.
  (I don't mean to accuse Siegel of pseudoscience; I accuse him only of being a grifter.)
3. Re:Fuck Forbes, and in particular Ethan Siegel by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-10 00:45 · Score: 0
  
  He hasn't written a research paper in 4 years from the link given. Also, please don't think that these fields are more complicated than you'll ever understand - cosmology and theory can be intimidating to look at from the outside, but it's a lot easier when you spend some time looking at it.
4. Re:Fuck Forbes, and in particular Ethan Siegel by rjh · 2016-01-10 05:20 · Score: 1
  
  It's clickbait and self-promotion.
  
  Clickbait, no: there's actual, real, high-quality content to what he writes.
  Self-promotion: so what? If someone writes something interesting and informative, I want it to be brought to my attention -- even if they're the ones to bring it to my attention.
5. Re:Fuck Forbes, and in particular Ethan Siegel by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-10 08:57 · Score: 0
  
  Clickbait, no: there's actual, real, high-quality content to what he writes.
  No, it isn't.
  Cosmology is complicated. The Black_Hole at the center of our galaxy is an awesome thing, but it's just a little bitty baby compared to the clickbaiting monster at the center of M87, which is 3.5 BILLION solar masses!
  These links are also well-written and also have pretty pictures. If I write a few dozen paragraphs of drivel like that and loosely tie it in to a one-sentence summary of whatever Hubble or Chandra discovered this week, do I get two front-page articles on Slashdot every day?
So Duck and Cover Still Good Advice? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 12:30 · Score: 1

I don't want to look silly, after all.
1. Re:So Duck and Cover Still Good Advice? by Joe_Dragon · 2016-01-09 12:37 · Score: 2
  
  We can try to shoot down the missile inbound and it they get off they will be wiped out.
2. Re:So Duck and Cover Still Good Advice? by BarbaraHudson · 2016-01-09 12:50 · Score: 1
  
  Duck and cover still works. For those who don't know it:
  1. Duck under a table, a desk, or something else to help protect against falling debris.
  2. Cover yourself with a blanket to shield you from dust and flying glass
  3. Tuck your head between your legs and kiss your ass goodbye/
  
  --
  "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Effective immunization against US aggression... by bogaboga · 2016-01-09 12:43 · Score: 4, Insightful

According to the Norh Koreans:

"...The Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq and the Gaddafi regime in Libya could not escape the fate of destruction after being deprived of their foundations for nuclear development and giving up nuclear programs of their own accord, yielding to the pressure of the US and the West keen on their regime changes... a bitter lesson should be drawn from those events..."
I wonder why I am inclined to believe them. Am I alone?
1. Re:Effective immunization against US aggression... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 16:58 · Score: 0
  
  Don't forget that Ukraine handed over all their nuclear weapons and look what happened to them. So if every country with despotic leadership and a well documented history of killing or imprisoning anyone who dares voicing a complaint gets a nuclear weapon they can do anything they want. I am surprised that China has not put an end to the NK belligerence. NK actions has resulted in all the surrounding countries upgrading their militaries and caused the US to step up it's military vigilance in the region. When the funny looking little NK leader started threatening to launch missiles at the US the US refunded anti-missile weapons programs and beefed up it's various anti-missile capabilities which in the not to distant future could weaken China's nuclear deterrence. The day that missile defense technology is able to neutralize both conventional and nuclear missiles is the day WW3 starts.
2. Re:Effective immunization against US aggression... by Gojira+Shipi-Taro · 2016-01-09 17:12 · Score: 1
  
  Pretty much, you are. Their alliance with China is more than enough to repel any "US Aggression". It's the reason that the Korean War/Conflict ended in a 50+ year long cease fire.
  
  --
  "Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my Presidency. I'm fucked."; ~ Donald J. Trump
3. Re:Effective immunization against US aggression... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 17:59 · Score: 0
  
  > So if every country with despotic leadership and a well documented history of killing or imprisoning anyone who dares voicing a complaint gets a nuclear weapon they can do anything they want.
  As opposed to countries with a genuine fear of invasion? Iraq, Afghanistan, and N. Korea certainly count. So do Isreal, Pakistan, and Cuba. Notice how the US didn't invade Cuba in the 1960's, beyond the abortive Bay of Pigs fiasco? Notice how India has never gotten tired of Pakistan's irritating Muslim fundamentalists and just overwhelmed PAkistan? Or everyone in the Middle East hasn't gotten tired of Isrel and overwhelmed them? Or how the US hasn't set foot in N. Korean territory since the end of the Korean war over 60 years ago? Or how the Soviet Union and East Germany never tried to annex West Germany, which had US nuclear weapons shortly after World War 2?
  Nukes are an effective deterrent.
4. Re:Effective immunization against US aggression... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 19:30 · Score: 0
  
  China has not put an end to the NK belligerence. NK actions has resulted in all the surrounding countries upgrading their militaries and caused the US to step up it's military vigilance in the region
  China can roll over any ten other Asiatic countries. As for the US, North Korea really isn't causing any concern from a China perspective - we're anything from pals to hardcore mess-with-them-and-you-gonna-get-rekt buddies with the bigger Asiatic countries regardless.
  I'd be surprised that China hasn't smacked NK over the refugee issue - that is a problem for China. But of course, NK does keep SK in check. It also lets China pretend to be a benevolent peace maker when they can come in and have a sit down chat with Lil' Kim. China does love looking like a superpower.
5. Re:Effective immunization against US aggression... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-10 02:24 · Score: 0
  
  Saddam having 'a few' nukes and no rockets beyond SCUD would not prevented the U.S. invasion. Nukes are not so scary when they cannot be delivered to the faraway home country.
  It'd be bombers obliterating possible launch sites until it seems safe to send in some soldiers. Nukes are no good for defending against bombers - it is one nuke per plane until they run out of nukes - and then it is conventional war easily won.
6. Re:Effective immunization against US aggression... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-10 02:58 · Score: 0
  
  Alliances can shift. quickly. China's alliance with North Korea is not because they like them so much, it is because China did not want an economic powerhouse, as a unified Korea would have been, under US influence on its eastern border.
  However, China has become powerful on its own right, North Korea is dirt poor, and a unification of the Korea's is no longer such a big threat to China as it was 50 years ago. On the contrary, a unification would pose huge difficulties for the South Korean economy. Think of the Germany reunification, but then squared in difficulty and costs.
  Therefor it is not unthinkable that North Korea will soon become more of a burden than an advantage to China. When that happens North Korea's dictatorships days are numbered. North Korea knows this and that is why they need nuke's. They need to stand on their own or fall.
I know because... by AchilleTalon · 2016-01-09 13:25 · Score: 1

...my daughter is a seismologist you insensitive clod!

--
Achille Talon
Hop!
Timothy ties the knot by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 13:26 · Score: 0

with StartsWithABang in totally unrelated news.
Duck and Cover works for asteroid strike by Latent+Heat · 2016-01-09 13:34 · Score: 2

Ha, ha, and ha, very funny but completely unoriginal.
In the Chelmyabinsk asteroid air burst, there was a video of people who saw the flash and then stood there for multiples of seconds until the blast wave bloodied their faces with glass shards.
Duck and Cover is for real for all wide-are effect events in the kiloton to megaton range, whatever their source. If you are close enough, yes, you will be vaporized. If you are far enough away that you can be conscious after seeing the flash, it will take some time for the blast to arrive. Instead of just standing there with your mouth open, get your face under cover so people don't have to pick the glass splinters out of your hide.
Dear Anonymous Collective by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 13:49 · Score: 0

Please, DDoS /. and Forbes for ... forever! There's no longer anything of value here and making their lives as miserable as their once rich and diverse community's lives are being made now by their ignorant, greedy, fuckwad Dice masters!
Please, twice?
Signed,
A Former Member of the /. Community
Thermonuclear devices have fission primers by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 14:34 · Score: 0

Of course you'll detect a fission reaction for a thermo device because the fission primer is required to reach the temps and pressures that will allow fusion to happen.
This is just more US propaganda to make USAsians believe, rather falsely, that they are safe.
Kimmel had people congratulating them on it by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 16:35 · Score: 0

Funny bit. People on the street congratulating NK on finally achieving their dream of building an H bomb.
I would like to also congratulate them. Good for them. They worked very very hard and and accomplished the goal. Good work guys! Thumbs up! Let the Kpop blast all night for a month
comes to terms with mediocrity by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 19:54 · Score: 0

Face it, the revenue base for a skilled technology web site is insufficient to support a truly good website. Instead we are stuck with the now mediocre slashdot. Just like Black Lives Matters complains about mediocre cops (a really good police force can be very expensive), Conservatives complain about Fox News (yes, this does happen), and Americans complain about mediocre Public Schools. If you want a good system, that gives good results, you've got to pay for it, like the American Health Care System, where the biggest complaint is about money.
1. Re:comes to terms with mediocrity by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-09 21:20 · Score: 0
  
  "Face it, the revenue base for a skilled technology web site is insufficient to support a truly good website."
  Bullshit.
  Servers, hosting, and bandwidth are now cheaper than ever.
  A truly good website should be able to cover its operating costs plus some targeted development support for its open source codebase.
  Fire all the managers, marketing, and UX idiots, and focus on core values.
  You're right, such a site won' t be pulling in millions a year, but it will be self sustaining, high quality, and refreshing in today's world of layered Web3.0 crap.
Bill Clinton got a treaty ! by zapadnik · 2016-01-09 20:42 · Score: 1

I'm pretty sure Bill Clinton got a treaty out of the North Koreans that they wouldn't make nukes. In return the US gave lots of aid to prop up the regime. With that 'success' Obama has just done the same with the Iranian theocracy, even using the same negotiators to make sure the best deal was hammered out. Totalitarian dictators don't tell fibs, right? (I was talking about Iran, not about the US regime).
North Korea wouldn't be the first country to prete by tandavanadesan · 2016-01-09 22:03 · Score: 1

The UK did the same thing in 1957.
Turn of your ad blocker by drolli · 2016-01-09 22:16 · Score: 1

to lazy to do that.
Re:North Korea wouldn't be the first country to pr by Richard_at_work · 2016-01-10 00:40 · Score: 1

Anything to back that up? We didnt pretend anything in 1957.
Re:North Korea wouldn't be the first country to pr by Rising+Ape · 2016-01-10 02:48 · Score: 1

I assume he's referring to Orange Herald, which was a big fission bomb that was meant as a "backup" in case the actual H-bomb didn't work, so they could pretend that they'd developed the technology.
However, since the real H-bomb (Grapple X) was tested successfully less than 6 months later, it was all a bit moot.
Lie? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-10 03:30 · Score: 0

If they lied about this one, why does anyone believe they have a nuke at all? I think its all bullshit.
1. Re:Lie? by Megol · 2016-01-10 06:49 · Score: 1
  
  We have equipment that distinguish a large conventional explosion from a nuclear one - called seismometers. Using them one can detect the power and the impulse of an explosion meaning that either the NK have a nuclear weapon or an unknown type of conventional explosive with similar characteristics of that of a nuclear weapon. And if they have a conventional explosive of that type it would be even more dangerous than the nuclear alternative.
  But don't worry - it is impossible to make conventional explosives with similar impulse of a nuclear one.
Conventional? by tmjva · 2016-01-10 06:15 · Score: 1

Remember when all nukes were "unconventional"? I guessed we missed the invite to the first annual nuke convention.
It probably didn't have a catchy name like "Nuke Expo" or "Nukecon".

--
Tracy Johnson
Old fashioned text games hosted below:
http://empire.openmpe.com/
BT
Re:North Korea wouldn't be the first country to pr by tandavanadesan · 2016-01-10 09:30 · Score: 1

http://www.independent.co.uk/n...
hilarious by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-10 10:00 · Score: 0

How stupid is the media? Hmm they have a Uranium enrichment program that they can't even really afford to operate in the first place. I know! Let's switch everything to Tritium instead for no logical reasons. Seems legit.
Re:North Korea wouldn't be the first country to pr by quenda · 2016-01-10 14:42 · Score: 1

Even the first "failed" British test in 1957 has a 300kt yield. The recent NK test was about 10kt.
I don't think we can say that NK is claiming to have an H-bomb in the usual sense of the word.
They've probably attempted to boost it with tritium, which I've learned from Tom Clancy is a lot easier than a Teller-Ulam design.
Is there any evidence that NK has progressed beyond a gun-type u235 weapon like the South Africans had?
A 10kt weapon is peanuts compared to their conventional capability. Unless/until they can make it small enough to deliver by long-range missile, it is of little military value.