Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Calm down - it's not a real prohibition (Score 4, Insightful) 164

But it's soooo much easier to just not fund it currently. It shows that they demand accountability and to stop spying on Americans...this week. It holds open the possibility to fund it later by slipping it in as part of some larger budget bill. You know, when it's politically more advantageous to "stop terrorism", "save American lives", or "think of the children".

If they make it illegal now, they'd have to go through the hassle of making it legal later, then still have to fund it through another bill.

Comment Re:Big fuss over nothing (Score 1) 646

but it's been turned into a better word, a word to be proud of

Really? Have you seen the Washington Redskins play anytime in the past 2 decades? Aside from a brief glimmer in 2012 with RGIII, not a whole lot to be proud of.

If we have to change the name of the Washington Redskins, I say we change all the names of things in this country that have native origins. Just think of how many states, cities, counties, rivers, mountains and such have native-derived names

You'd have a point if all those things that would be changed were derogatory in nature, either once or currently. If Redskin, SD was a real town, then I'd expect it to be changed. Or Redskin River. But that's not the case.

Comment Re:Massive conspiracy (Score 1) 465

You have evidence of this? A group with Tea Party in their name must by definition make explicit political endorsements?

Explicit political endorsements? No. Attempting to influence legislation? Definitely.

From the IRS's page on lobbying:

An organization will be regarded as attempting to influence legislation if it contacts, or urges the public to contact, members or employees of a legislative body for the purpose of proposing, supporting, or opposing legislation, or if the organization advocates the adoption or rejection of legislation.

I've yet to see a group with "tea party" in their name that didn't try to do that. And to be fair, I would expect any organization that has other current keywords on either side of the political spectrum to receive additional scrutiny.

Comment Re:FYI: remove from Youtube not from 'Google' (Score 3, Insightful) 364

The agreement protects google against legal action arising from hosting copywriter content

They already have that protection in the form of the DMCA and this form. They don't need to force content owners to license the video for their streaming service in order to have protection for YouTube videos, and even if they had a streaming license it likely wouldn't cover a YouTube video anyways.

Comment Re:Risking irrelevance (Score 1) 364

This seems like a familiar story from Microsoft and IBM: think your company is so indispensable that you start demanding more of your users and/or partners. And in doing so, make people start looking for alternatives.

Yet despite that, both companies stock continue to do well. I can't really even tell you what IBM does anymore since they've shed their PC, laptop, and server business to Lenovo. Yet their stock continues to be higher now then what it was during any of the previous bubbles in the 90s and 2000s. Microsoft, despite the disasters of the Windows 8 interface, Windows 8 Mobile, and Surface has a higher stock now then any previous time except the bubble leading up to the 2000 pop.

Comment Re:Kingston selling shit USB3 flash keys (Score 2) 289

If your device is only capable of USB 2 class speeds then why the %$#@! are you marketing it as a USB 3 speed device?

The same reason why you can buy a "HD antenna" to pick up OTA television signals. People have a high def TV and if they see two antennas, one that says HD and another that doesn't, they are likely to pick the one that matches their TV. Similarly, if their computer says that they have a USB3 port, they'll pick the flash drive that says it's USB3 even if it performs the same as USB2.

Comment Re: Brand identity (Score 1) 209

Beats is a marginal product sold at an inflated price...

Sounds like a perfect fit for Apple then...

As for as streaming, Beats is about 5 years late to the game.

And Beats streaming service is far older than Apple's non-existent streaming service. Apple acquiring them instantly gives them a functioning subscription service infrastructure, a paying subscriber base (albeit small), and existing streaming contracts that don't need to be negotiated with dozens of different labels before they can launch the service.

Comment Re:Oh...they have access to better imagery... (Score 2) 82

Reminds me of a scene from Enemy Of the State:

[the NSA team is watching satellite footage of a conversation between Dean and Brill on a rooftop]
Hicks: Can you get a feature scan and pattern matching on him?
Van: No, he's smart, he never looks up.
Jones: Why does he have to look up?
Fiedler: The satellite is 155 miles above the Earth. It can only look straight down.
Jones: That's a bit limited, isn't it?
Van: [Sarcastically] Well, maybe you should design a better one.
Jones: Maybe I will idiot.

Comment Re:Here's yer free market, telco's (Score 1) 106

The free market has generally been fiber vs Comcast. The Comcast salescreature stops by my house about once a month trying to get me to change to them. Something to do with how many channels I'd get for a low low introductory price. I point out we haven't had cable TV, haven't for years, all we have is internet and phone, and we're thinking of dumping the land line. And he gets rude.

We too have FiOS from Frontier nee Verizon and have had several door to door salesmen from Comcast stop by. After I point out how my service is better in just about every way except for a few months for the promo package, they finally get the hint and realize they aren't making the sale. That doesn't stop Comcast and Comcast Business from sending me 2-3 mailings a week trying to get me subscribe.

Slashdot Top Deals

BASIC is the Computer Science equivalent of `Scientific Creationism'.

Working...