As an experiment, I added a spurious and incorrect fact to an obscure wikipedia article, complete with a reference to a document which did not support the claim. It took years before my edit was noticed and reversed.

This only works with obscure articles. The more obscure the article, the less it's checked. If you try inserting something spurious into the page on Obama it will be reversed in about 5 minutes

No, it works with non-controversial subjects. Pick an article on a subject that's not obscure and also not particularly controversial - for example, common household substances, typical garden flowers, etc. - and read a few of the citations.

You'll be surprised how many don't support - or, in some cases, don't even relate to - the associated statement in the Wikipedia article. Most of it is stuff that is "common knowledge" that is false - but some authors/editors are so sure of its truth that they cite anything vaguely related to back up the common belief.

One where technologically capable individuals fight back against brutish peers.

^shrug^

You don't live in Midsomer, do you?

It's a ROUTER.

No, it's a BELKIN. They've been pulling stupid shit like this for the last 10 years at least , so why anyone should still be surprised is beyond me.

Remember that - whatever you buy from them, it'll always be a Belkin first and <device> second.

... five stories about Win10 in 6 days.

Slashdot turned into just another Microsoft-shilling site so gradually that I hardly noticed. Now it's too late...

I commented on one the other day to say that the real purpose of Win10 was to keep everyone talking about it, and predicted we'd be seeing a post every day for a while.

Somehow that got modded "-1, Troll" instead of "+1, Insightful".

4 days. 4 posts about Win10 - the announcement story, the "will it cure cancer?" story, the "will it still love me?" story, and this one.

Just saying...

It doesn't matter whether Win10 finally addresses "OS decay" or not.

All that matters is that there's a succession of stories so they've got you talking about it - from website to website, day after day, one story after another.

Oh, and that you attack Mac users for being "sheep"...

Get around stupid geolocation redirects like that by using Google Translate as a proxy. Simply tell it to 'translate' the original URL from Arabic* to English.

(* or almost any language that doesn't use the Roman alphabet.)

Before clicking the link I was trying to imagine how a trapezoidal shape could help and I could not. Well, that's because it is a hexagon.

Doesn't matter. You clicked on the link. Dice's job is done...

The difference there is that Socialism, its various types, & the path to Communism, were all clearly defined by Marx, Engels, et al. well before it actually happened - while the excuse of 'crony Capitalism' is a post-facto excuse for the failures of Capitalism.

Your examples - the Societ Union, Maoist China, and Cuba - while bastardised implementations of Communism (not Socialism; forget your propaganda-based US-influenced "education"), were not the natural outcome of the Socialist progression. Crony Capitalism is one of the natural outcome of Capitalism without regulation...

This seems to hold true for most broad-interest sites like newspapers and magazines where comments can be downright awful, as opposed to sites like Slashdot with a self-selected and somewhat homogeneous audience ...

... where, as this thread amply demonstrates, comments can also be downright awful.

(p.s. and no, the /. mod system doesn't improve it - unless by 'improve' you mean 'hide away by the lowest common denominator of consensus groupthink, nope, nothing to see here at all, move along, move along ...")

That is a newer generation of the same thing, but if you notice they decode DVB-T2, which is High-Definition. The cheap RTL dongles decode about 3 MHz of spectrum space which is enough for a Standard-Definition DVB signal, but not enough for HD. The newer ones that do DVB-T2 have a wider chunk of spectrum space they translate, wide enough for an HD signal. In the US, an ATSC or "digital TV" High-Definition signal is about 6 MHz wide, for reference.

These newer generation dongles must have internal improvements that allows them to grab a bigger hunk of RF spectrum. The professional SDR devices that cost upward of $1000 can grab much larger chunks of spectrum, some can do 20 MHz wide swaths of RF.

What utter bullshit.

DVB-T occupies 5/6/7/8 MHz (depending on country). The transmission is COFDM spread-spectrum, the data is interleaved across all subcarriers, and (ignoring hierarchical transmissions, which are rare) the whole ensemble needs to be retrieved to demux a single channel. So, regardless of whether the content is SD or HD, DVB-T dongles always have received the whole 5/6/7/8 MHz wide channel to work (decoding is done in software).

DVB-T2 occupies 1.7/5/6/7/8/10 MHz (depending on purpose & country - e.g. 1.7MHz is meant for mobile, while afaik 10MHz isn't in use anywhere yet). The transmission is an extended version of DVB-T's COFDM spread-spectrum, the data is likewise interleaved across all subcarriers, and (ignoring hierarchical transmissions, which are rare) similarly the whole ensemble needs to be retrieved to demux a single channel. So, regardless of whether the content is SD or HD, any DVB-T2 dongle needs to receive the whole 1.7/5/6/7/8/10 MHz wide channel to work. I don't know of any offhand, but presumably decoding is similarly done in software.

Raw mode - typically used by SDR software when using chep DVB-T dongles - is different. That has limitations, but it's got nothing to do with the channel bandwidth when using the dongles for DVB-T/DVB-T2.

... especially since Linksys is a subsidiary of Cisco who are the NSA's bitch.

No they're not. Cisco flogged Linksys off a year or more ago to Belkin - which, granted, is an even bigger reason to avoid them.

Mod parent up.

If you haven't looked at the links, you may think he's being unnecessarily harsh.

He's not.

Apart from the winning entry, there's the usual collection of poorly-composed & poorly-lit random sub-happy-snap photos. Then there's the poorly-composed & poorly-lit random sub-happy-snap photos with crappy filters applied. And then there's the poorly-composed, poorly-lit, random sub-happy snap-photos with crappy filters & fake HDR.

All taken with a cheap sub-smartphone quality camera & lens.

Use of the word "buss" to refer to electrical or mechanical power distribution predates the Bussmann company by a good 30 years or more (it's used in engineering documents and handbooks from the 1880s). It probably derives from the Germanic / northern European / Scots gaelic of the time, since they were big engineering regions.

But don't let that stop your misplaced outrage. Why not turn it to the common mispronunciation of "router" (i.e." rowt-er") instead? "Rout" (pronounced "rowt") means " to turn aside; a disorderly retreat or decisive defeat", while "route" (pronounced "root") means "a way or course taken in getting from a starting point to a destination". Which does your router do?

Hence, the device used in networking should be pronounced "root-er"...

(Notwithstanding the fact that most of them should be pronounced "gateway", since that's the correct networking term for a device that interfaces between different physical transports or protocols...)