Whether that's true or not, there is not one in Linux (nor FreeBSD) project. And yet, the ratio of females there is even worse, than at Microsoft.
People don't have to be enslaved for a workplace to be a very bad place.
If the free people willingly choose to work somewhere, then it can not be that bad.
there is clear and unambiguous evidence that if we allow discrimination based on those criteria that the results are bad both for society and for the individuals
Such a claim sounds rather hollow without citations. Got any?
Your "anti-discrimination" (poorly) fights symptoms, not the problem — which only gets worse because of your efforts, as we are forced to wonder, if a protected minority occupying an important post really deserved it, or got it thanks to the color of his skin. Racial relations today are worse than before — with Blacks especially alienated.
Your approach demonstrably failed. Decades ago we surrendered an essential liberty to your kind in exchange for a promise of harmony, and now we have neither the liberty nor the harmony. Look at Baltimore — despite having Black mayor and Black police commissioner, it still got racial tensions like nowhere else... It is such an egg on your face, your wisest now blame lead paint!
You are a pathetic failure. And yet, instead of pulling back to reflect on what went wrong, your kind doubles and triples down with new charges. Today even the belly-dancing or yoga are off-limits to the Whitey.
The market demonstrably cannot fairly deal with this problem.
Because it is not a market problem. In fact, I am not convinced, it is a problem at all. But, if it is, you and yours are the least qualified to address it.
Excuse me, but what I expect from corporations (where I am not myself a shareholder) is quality products. I don't give a damn, who they hire and why — as long as they don't enslave workers — and neither should anybody else. Mind your own business, people.
FreeBSD project, to the best of my knowledge, has no females at all — though, at some point, one member chose to identify as one. (He had to announce it because of the name-change.) I doubt, Linux is very different. Compared to that, Microsoft's female participation is amazing, but, once again, it is no one's business — they ought to be judged solely on the quality and prices of their offerings.
private key used to sign Bluetooth drivers has been found on a Dell Inspiron laptop
So, the happy owners of the affected laptops can now issue certificates and/or sign drivers, which will be accepted as genuine by other owners of Dell hardware?
Seriously? If so, that's just too dumb to be malicious...
Indeed, thank you. And now ask yourself, why was Enron in a position to do all that... And the answer is: monopoly. California bungled the privatisation allowing Enron to hold all (or most) of the cards...
Disabling an important functionality for fear, that it will some day be abused, seems wrong. What was it about essential liberty vs. temporary security?
They probably want to practice Sharia in the Crimea and the Russians are preventing them.
Tatars in general — and Crimean Tatars in particular — are, probably, the most secular of Muslims in the world. They are certainly not seeking Sharia and this attack has nothing religious about it — the Tatars' movement is primarily nationalistic, rather than religious in nature. These people hate USSR/Russia with passion over the ethnic cleansing they suffered in 1944. They are quite loyal to Kyiv, because Ukrainian government allowed them to return after gaining its own independence.
The attack was not solely by Tatars either. In fact, it is possible, it was tacitly sanctioned by the government — payback in kind for a "hybrid war", that Russia waged against Ukraine. The government now half-heartedly goes through the motions of trying to "restore order", but the occupiers in Crimea suffer and that's a good thing — the very earth should be on fire under their feet, as we both remember from the WW2-slogans.
I want to be able to login to my phone. And toaster. And dishwasher. ssh would be best, but even the silly old unencrypted telnet is fine. With the standard assortment of Unix command-line tools, of course, plus the phone-specific utilities.
The devices currently make certain things very easy, but other things remain impossible (MS Windows approach). Opening up would allow proficient users to do things, Apple/Google could not think of...
No it isn't protected by the First Amendment. "Commercial Speech" is commercial activity,* and not speech per se. [...] I, I'm too lazy too look them up right now.
"I think the blood of a lot of these French young people is on his hands"
I may be the sole/.-tter, who is not an admirer of Snowden, but even I do not see, how he can be blamed (however partially) for this particular attack... What could he have told Putin which, when relayed to ISIS, helped them organize the massacre?
To paraphrase Jefferson: "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is a government big enough to listen to your every word and track your every move."
Full authority autopilot code is held to much stricter standards than driving aids, even though they are essentially the same thing on trains.
And yet, the job of a car's "driving aid" is much harder than that of a train's autopilot. So it is reasonable to expect self-driving trains before self-driving cars.
Should the police be called ? Is there a medical emergency ? For how long will the traffic be interrupted ?
None of these require the driver to be physically present on a train — camera feeds can tell a remote dispatcher ("driving" 20 trains at the same time) all he needs to know about obstacles and interruptions. As for medical, fire, or police emergencies — those are reported by passengers pushing a button (or by talking to a conductor). The push may as well (and probably already does) connect them to the emergency dispatchers wherever they are — and with the speed the train is going, it will get to the next village or town before the caller finishes explaining, what's going on.
However you can't expect automated systems to test themselves.
Huh? Of course, I can... I used to write unit-tests for a living...
But I was not referring to this particular incident — this was a test run (although having so many people aboard during a test seems strange). My point is, the replacing of human operators with computers should've happened all over the railroads long before the much more complicated automatic car-driving hit the streets.
And my guess as to the reasons remains valid despite all of the hatred by Anonymous Cowards with too many mod-points: cars are owned and driven by individuals, whereas trains are run by institutions — often government-owned — and with unionised work-forces to boot.
for the sort of speeds the TGV gets up to I imagine most people would still prefer someone to be up front
That speed is exactly why the job is for a computer, not human — there is nothing a human, with our pathetic reaction times, can do even if some unexpected situation arises. Those, who don't understand this, are silly — but I have more faith in humanity and don't think, "most people" are like that.
During test runs, a number of security features are disabled, in particular parts of the TVM system, which would have prevented any overspeed during normal service. This leaves the train speed under the sole responsibility of the driver.
Why are we still using humans to drive the trains? We already have computer-driven cars on the roads — and driving a car is a lot harder for a computer both because of the complex terrain and human-only signalling.
Trains operate in a one-dimensional universe (most of the time) — they don't need cameras and radars on the sides. The signalling they use is entirely under control of the rail-road too and in most cases is already interconnected and centralized. Moreover, driving a train is usually a very tedious process, which puts the human drivers to sleep — quite often — a problem severe enough to warrant special systems to try to prevent it.
once the Arab Spring rebellion started, just like others in Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Bahrein and Yemen, his hands were forced
He assumed office in 2000. Obama's "Arab Springs" started way after 2009. Maybe, he tried to be better than daddy, but, as I said, I can't think of a regime over there, that needs military so badly to survive.
I'm no fan of Putin, but [...]
Congratulations. Putin's public relations efforts have worked their magic on you.
Assad's regime is nowhere near those in Pyongyang or Havana in terms of brutality.
Probably. Yet, I can think of nothing in between. Myanmar, maybe...
we're perfectly happy to deal with other monarchies, dictatorships, and sham-democracies
I doubt, the term "perfectly happy" applies. It is more like a "hold your nose and do it" situation.
it's not strictly the non-democracy aspect of Assad's reign that we have a problem with
True. But I was not claiming, he is exceptionally evil for that neighbourhood. I was simply refuting ihtoit's claim of Assad's legitimacy as a ruler.
But now that you mentioned it, it is hard to identify a regime there, that governs with a lesser consent of the governed, than his. Cuba and North Korea, perhaps — but not the rest of the Arab world, for example (now that Saddam Hussein is gone). They may be monarchies and/or sham-democracies, but they don't need to rely on armed forces (as much) to stay in power.
Easy: a vote, that takes place after multiple challengers are allowed to campaign — unmolested — before the poll and where the vote-count raises no questions of large-scale manipulation (small-scale abuses are inevitable).
Except ISIS made a credible claim to be responsible for the downed airliner
Even if my accusations of ISIS having been created with the help of, and being controlled in part by Russia are true — and I have no proof, just speculations — few people inside ISIS would be aware of it. Wouldn't be the first time Russia financed a foreign organization without its members knowledge
ISIS claim of responsibility seems sincere and they, very likely, really did plant the actual bomb. That does not mean, Putin's FSB had nothing to do with it..
Encryption was NOT designed to kill people, only facilitate communication.
False. You don't need encryption to communicate. You need encryption to hide your communications — and/or their contents — from others. Yeah, one of us is "fucking stupid", but it ain't me.
Unlike assault rifles whose sole purpose is to kill, maim, or cause fear.
I can think of a number of situations, where killing, maiming, or frightening can be done by most upstanding people and for very good reasons. Even you, for all you shocking and awesome stupidity, ought to be able to imagine one or two such scenarios...
because violence only begets more violence.
And cursing (a.k.a. verbal violence) only begets more cursing, right, you moronic asshole? Please, don't hate...
Slashdot Mirror
Easy with the name-calling. Please, don't hate.
Whether that's true or not, there is not one in Linux (nor FreeBSD) project. And yet, the ratio of females there is even worse, than at Microsoft.
If the free people willingly choose to work somewhere, then it can not be that bad.
Such a claim sounds rather hollow without citations. Got any?
Your "anti-discrimination" (poorly) fights symptoms, not the problem — which only gets worse because of your efforts, as we are forced to wonder, if a protected minority occupying an important post really deserved it, or got it thanks to the color of his skin. Racial relations today are worse than before — with Blacks especially alienated.
Your approach demonstrably failed. Decades ago we surrendered an essential liberty to your kind in exchange for a promise of harmony, and now we have neither the liberty nor the harmony. Look at Baltimore — despite having Black mayor and Black police commissioner, it still got racial tensions like nowhere else... It is such an egg on your face, your wisest now blame lead paint!
You are a pathetic failure. And yet, instead of pulling back to reflect on what went wrong, your kind doubles and triples down with new charges. Today even the belly-dancing or yoga are off-limits to the Whitey.
Constitution is junk to you — you may preach "tolerance", but wish to ban "hate speech". And that includes everything that makes you uncomfortable.
Because it is not a market problem. In fact, I am not convinced, it is a problem at all. But, if it is, you and yours are the least qualified to address it.
Excuse me, but what I expect from corporations (where I am not myself a shareholder) is quality products. I don't give a damn, who they hire and why — as long as they don't enslave workers — and neither should anybody else. Mind your own business, people.
FreeBSD project, to the best of my knowledge, has no females at all — though, at some point, one member chose to identify as one. (He had to announce it because of the name-change.) I doubt, Linux is very different. Compared to that, Microsoft's female participation is amazing, but, once again, it is no one's business — they ought to be judged solely on the quality and prices of their offerings.
There, somebody had to say it...
So, the happy owners of the affected laptops can now issue certificates and/or sign drivers, which will be accepted as genuine by other owners of Dell hardware?
Seriously? If so, that's just too dumb to be malicious...
Indeed, thank you. And now ask yourself, why was Enron in a position to do all that... And the answer is: monopoly. California bungled the privatisation allowing Enron to hold all (or most) of the cards...
Disabling an important functionality for fear, that it will some day be abused, seems wrong. What was it about essential liberty vs. temporary security?
Whether that's true or not, I do not have the shell-access to the device, and I want one.
Tatars in general — and Crimean Tatars in particular — are, probably, the most secular of Muslims in the world. They are certainly not seeking Sharia and this attack has nothing religious about it — the Tatars' movement is primarily nationalistic, rather than religious in nature. These people hate USSR/Russia with passion over the ethnic cleansing they suffered in 1944. They are quite loyal to Kyiv, because Ukrainian government allowed them to return after gaining its own independence.
The attack was not solely by Tatars either. In fact, it is possible, it was tacitly sanctioned by the government — payback in kind for a "hybrid war", that Russia waged against Ukraine. The government now half-heartedly goes through the motions of trying to "restore order", but the occupiers in Crimea suffer and that's a good thing — the very earth should be on fire under their feet, as we both remember from the WW2-slogans.
Citations?
I want to be able to login to my phone. And toaster. And dishwasher. ssh would be best, but even the silly old unencrypted telnet is fine. With the standard assortment of Unix command-line tools, of course, plus the phone-specific utilities.
The devices currently make certain things very easy, but other things remain impossible (MS Windows approach). Opening up would allow proficient users to do things, Apple/Google could not think of...
No it isn't protected by the First Amendment. "Commercial Speech" is commercial activity,* and not speech per se. [...] I, I'm too lazy too look them up right now.
I was not: http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/p...
Why not ban telemarketers altogether?
The First Amendment. A sales pitch is speech...
I did not say, he did. But even if he did, I can't think of what it could have been, that would've helped them with this particular attack. See?
I may be the sole /.-tter, who is not an admirer of Snowden, but even I do not see, how he can be blamed (however partially) for this particular attack... What could he have told Putin which, when relayed to ISIS, helped them organize the massacre?
Asked by who? If I report you as a Communist or ISIS sympathizer, will you cheerfully accept the monitoring and eavesdropping, that's sure to follow?
You have no idea, what my tests were testing, and what the tested software was driving, asshole.
To paraphrase Jefferson: "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is a government big enough to listen to your every word and track your every move."
And yet, the job of a car's "driving aid" is much harder than that of a train's autopilot. So it is reasonable to expect self-driving trains before self-driving cars.
None of these require the driver to be physically present on a train — camera feeds can tell a remote dispatcher ("driving" 20 trains at the same time) all he needs to know about obstacles and interruptions. As for medical, fire, or police emergencies — those are reported by passengers pushing a button (or by talking to a conductor). The push may as well (and probably already does) connect them to the emergency dispatchers wherever they are — and with the speed the train is going, it will get to the next village or town before the caller finishes explaining, what's going on.
Huh? Of course, I can... I used to write unit-tests for a living... But I was not referring to this particular incident — this was a test run (although having so many people aboard during a test seems strange). My point is, the replacing of human operators with computers should've happened all over the railroads long before the much more complicated automatic car-driving hit the streets.
And my guess as to the reasons remains valid despite all of the hatred by Anonymous Cowards with too many mod-points: cars are owned and driven by individuals, whereas trains are run by institutions — often government-owned — and with unionised work-forces to boot.
That speed is exactly why the job is for a computer, not human — there is nothing a human, with our pathetic reaction times, can do even if some unexpected situation arises. Those, who don't understand this, are silly — but I have more faith in humanity and don't think, "most people" are like that.
I don't need your modsplaining, asshole. Please, don't hate.
Why are we still using humans to drive the trains? We already have computer-driven cars on the roads — and driving a car is a lot harder for a computer both because of the complex terrain and human-only signalling.
Trains operate in a one-dimensional universe (most of the time) — they don't need cameras and radars on the sides. The signalling they use is entirely under control of the rail-road too and in most cases is already interconnected and centralized. Moreover, driving a train is usually a very tedious process, which puts the human drivers to sleep — quite often — a problem severe enough to warrant special systems to try to prevent it.
I wonder, what is it? Is it a fear of protests by union-thugs? Engineers' own inertia?
He assumed office in 2000. Obama's "Arab Springs" started way after 2009. Maybe, he tried to be better than daddy, but, as I said, I can't think of a regime over there, that needs military so badly to survive.
Congratulations. Putin's public relations efforts have worked their magic on you.
Probably. Yet, I can think of nothing in between. Myanmar, maybe...
I doubt, the term "perfectly happy" applies. It is more like a "hold your nose and do it" situation.
True. But I was not claiming, he is exceptionally evil for that neighbourhood. I was simply refuting ihtoit's claim of Assad's legitimacy as a ruler.
But now that you mentioned it, it is hard to identify a regime there, that governs with a lesser consent of the governed, than his. Cuba and North Korea, perhaps — but not the rest of the Arab world, for example (now that Saddam Hussein is gone). They may be monarchies and/or sham-democracies, but they don't need to rely on armed forces (as much) to stay in power.
It is not a vote, if the winner is known with 146% certainty ahead of time. (Time for Russians to recognize that too, by the way.) Syrian elections last year were a sham.
Easy: a vote, that takes place after multiple challengers are allowed to campaign — unmolested — before the poll and where the vote-count raises no questions of large-scale manipulation (small-scale abuses are inevitable).
Even if my accusations of ISIS having been created with the help of, and being controlled in part by Russia are true — and I have no proof, just speculations — few people inside ISIS would be aware of it. Wouldn't be the first time Russia financed a foreign organization without its members knowledge
ISIS claim of responsibility seems sincere and they, very likely, really did plant the actual bomb. That does not mean, Putin's FSB had nothing to do with it..
Uhm, hello? I'd like to report a Bias Incident...
False. You don't need encryption to communicate. You need encryption to hide your communications — and/or their contents — from others. Yeah, one of us is "fucking stupid", but it ain't me.
I can think of a number of situations, where killing, maiming, or frightening can be done by most upstanding people and for very good reasons. Even you, for all you shocking and awesome stupidity, ought to be able to imagine one or two such scenarios...
And cursing (a.k.a. verbal violence) only begets more cursing, right, you moronic asshole? Please, don't hate...