The hands on the clock as I'm waiting for Monday to end...

Ugh. Slashdot fail. I am so smart. S-M-R-T.

Anyway, to illustrate the above, image a Venn diagram with two circles, the left one being "Deliberate attempt to elicit angry response (trolling)", and the one on the right is "Likely to cause a flamewar (flamebait)". There is some overlap, which on Slashdot could be modded either way, but flamebait that's not trolling is either naivety or sincerity, and trolling that's not flamebait isn't necessarily intended to start a heated argument between other parties.

Sometimes the difference between Troll and Flamebait is impossible to determine, as it depends on the intent of the author. If someone posts on Slashdot saying "Mac sucks", it would be trolling if the primary reason they posted it was to get a rise out of people. If, however, they have used Mac computers and genuinely hate them, then it may not be disingenuous, and therefore is not trolling, but it is still flamebait since it's inciting yet another Mac vs. PC vs. Linux holy war.

So the GP is correct in that deliberate flamebait is a form of trolling, but there are instances of flamebait where someone didn't specifically intend to get a reaction, but nevertheless posted something controversial in a confrontational way that is likely to elicit hostile responses (usually out of naiveté).

(AC to preserve mods)

Oblig YouTube link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSy5mEcmgwU

Fun idea for a Linux distro: include multiple desktop environments and randomly pick one at startup. I used to have KDE, GNOME, and XFCE all installed together on an old dinosaur of a laptop, and you could select one at login time. It mostly worked.

Correction, QHD is 2560x1440.

I'm with you on the term "4K". I can't believe Slashdotters are complicit in this marketing nonsense. There's nothing "4,000" about it. We've been using lines as shorthand for display resolution for quite some time now, and it makes zero sense to switch to columns now, and it isn't even 4K columns.

Resolution: 3840x2160
Pixels: 8.3M

1280x720 is 720p/HD
1920x1080 is 1080p/FHD (Full HD)
2160x1440 is QHD (Quad HD)

Therefore 3840x2160 should be 2160p, QFHD, UHD, or 2K. 4K is utter nonsense. Calling it "Mega 8.3" would even be better.

It's like if Chevrolet said the new Corvette Z06 made over 1200 HP, because they started measuring torque in half-foot-pounds.

Yeah, I guess we currently have the tech to freeze eggs & sperm indefinitely, so that would solve that. I don't think you'd need the nanobots, regular macro-scale robots could handle it with prefab components and equipment.

*sigh*
I should really start reading all the links in the comments I'm responding to.

That story's basically about what I described in my 2nd and 3rd paragraphs. Looks good, I'll have to check it out.

Heck, you could describe a fetus developing in the womb as 3D printing - you're feeding raw materials into a biological device that essentially prints itself.

The author of the article isn't about transferring consciousness, so "all you need" is a way to to encode the genome (doable), a way to transmit this encoding (also doable), a way to construct artificially a zygote using this genetic information (uh...), and then an artificial womb a la The Matrix to gestate the embryo. Also robots to raise the child and teach him why he's there and what his mission is.

You could build a robotic interstellar exploration craft containing all the information and supplies needed to jumpstart a human population on any given planet, essentially creating an initial group of standard clones. This could be a good basis for a sci-fi story if it isn't already. I may even use it as the premise for that video game I'll never get around to writing.

The studios seem happy enough to offer streaming rental options via Amazon, digital cable, Vudu, and similar services. There are also free ad-supported options (Hulu, Crackle, Popcornflix). What these have in common is constant per-view (or per-rental-period) revenue. So they're not opposed to streaming per se; my guess is that Netflix wants to keep the same low flat rate subscription system they have now, and either studios aren't willing to work with that model, or they're demanding licensing fees that would force Netflix to raise its subscriptions rates unacceptably.

Look at the pay options: digital rentals are at least $2 USD each, often $5 or more for HD content. How would a movie studio ever agree to let Netflix stream the same content, when they're getting a cut of several dollars per rental per film via other providers? Even if Netflix offered a "premium" $10/mo streaming add-on option, once you watched 2-3 films the studios would be losing money compared to the other services.

As much as we all hate the MPAA and draconian copyright legislation, the future of easy & legal digital delivery of content is in the process of arriving. There are still caveats: DRM and excessive copyright terms are still problems, IMHO the price is too high (I'd buy at $1/rental, $5 is too much, but ultimately the market will decide).

Netflix is the 800-lb gorilla in the room of streaming, and they're trying to throw their weight around, but the studios have discovered other options to deliver their content on their terms, and won't play Netflix's game.

At least, that's how I see it - I don't have any inside info so it's all speculation.

To the best of my knowledge, this is only true of the embedded & mobile Netflix streaming software - the sole purpose of which is streaming, so it makes sense. These apps aren't the full Netflix queue management system, they're just about streaming, so when you're searching for something to stream, why bother you with search results that don't do you any good? If you search on the Netflix website while viewing the "Watch Instantly" page, non-streaming titles do appear in the results (as you'd expect).

Your talk of "Virtual DVDs" and limited rentals is just overcomplicating the question, "Why don't the studios allow Netflix to stream everything?". And the answer is the same to every question of the form "Why doesn't Hollywood...": money. The studios think licensing Netflix to stream recent AAA releases (at the rate Netflix wants to pay) will undercut their physical disc sales and reduce profits. In Hollywood, money is everything, and right or wrong, studios won't make a business deal if they think it will lose money. It may very well be the case that the studios don't understand the streaming business and underestimate its revenue potential, but there it is.

Remember, Netflix streaming was originally limited to a certain number of hours per month, and this cap was lifted (although I assume that had more to do with Netflix infrastructure bandwidth capabilities than licensing). You should check out Amazon Prime - for a similar price to Netflix streaming, they offer some items for free, but also allow you to pay to rent or buy digital copies of more recent or popular films not available for streaming on Netflix. This is the model preferred by the studios - where they make money off of each individual digital rental. It's a "safer" revenue stream - guaranteed per-view income - than a riskier "all-you-can-eat" package deal, although obviously favorable terms could theoretically be negotiated for that.

So your question should actually be, "why doesn't Netflix negotiate with the studios to offer a premium add-on to their streaming service, so that users can stream recent releases and a wider selection of AAA titles?" which IMHO is a better and more interesting question, and the answer probably lies in Netflix's confidential market research and business plans.

I deny that Computer Science is "the most important 21st Century skill" on the basis that it's not a skill, it's a field of study. The most important skill of the 21st Century is the same one as all the previous centuries: the ability to use your well-formed intellect to make rational decisions. This is what education is for. Learning a trade is generally necessary to earn a living, and maybe college is a good place to do this, but your options and potential will be more limited if you're not educated.

I studied Math and Computer Science in college (my degree is math). Ultimately, the mathematics courses were a better formation for the type of thinking I needed in my career as a software developer (not a dig on the quality of the CS courses I took - they were quite good).

Okay, stupid me, this is why you RTFA first: it specifically discusses this and explains how to submit prior art evidence to the USPTO. /doh