Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:how many products? (Score 1) 298

Yeah, right now at $79 I just keep letting my Prime membership auto-renew because a) I'm lazy, and b) it does save me a little at Christmastime. But their video catalog is pretty limited - much of what I've tried to watch is TV shows where, it turns out, they've only included a few episodes you can access without paying more. And their Kindle Lending Library is likewise pretty limited - it's "all the Harry Potter books plus hundreds of authors you'll never want to read".

Really, even at $79 it's hard to justify. There's not a whole lot I *must* get in two days...

I'll probably just not renew this time around - free ground shipping is good enough. And, if they further limit that, I'll probably start frequenting other online stores. Pretty much everyone is on the web now; I just currently default to Amazon because of the "free" shipping.

Either you don't buy much in the way of electronics, or you live in a place with lots of options. I do buy a fair bit and live in a place where the best computer store is Best Buy. Sure, I could wait days and days for something to show up (and still pay for even that likely) or with Prime I can order as late as Thursday and have it no later than Saturday.

Given the alternative for someone in my position is to wait up to a week for something to show up, or buy it locally at highly inflated prices and just take whatever the local stores feel like carrying it's a pretty simple thing.

Newegg wants to charge 23 bucks to ship anything over night. Prime will do it for 3.99 and you only have to do that a handful of times for Prime to pay for itself.

Of course, YMMV.

Comment Re:even a broken clock... (Score 2) 523

Both factors make feedback cycles more rapid & precise. I wouldn't be surprised at all, if evidence existed that those poor backward horse-riding founders could conceive of this.

But again, this was very much a function of the state of technology and the limitations of travel and communications at the time. The feedback cycle today can be instantaneous, across the country. And while state representatives live closer to those they represent, that's not a function of state power. Members of Congress live near those they represent. We could have no recognition of states or any state governments and still have federal government representatives distributed across the US, representing people.

State and local government does lend itself to backwardness, which is probably why conservatives gravitate to it. The founders should be admired for the country they created, however if you brought them back today they wouldn't know what a computer is, what a semi automatic weapon was and why somebody shot up a movie theater with one, why all the homosexuals aren't in prison, and why there are so many free slaves walking around.

The giant difference is the amount of influence you have against your city or State government is far far greater than you do against anyone in Fed.gov. Depending on the size of the city you're in your Mayor may care what you personally think and say. The President of the US cares not one little bit what you personally think and your Senator's likely care little more. You're a number among millions and they are going to be far more influenced by someone down on K Street than you.

That's the point in the end. Your direct power over someone in the Fed.gov is very limited simply as a function of numbers. Your direct power over your State rep is far greater and in the end if your State sucks in your mind, you can relatively easily move to one that matches your view points. Don't like the conservatism of the Mid-west for instance, move to California or vice versa. The Founders reasonably foresaw this and they may have no idea what a computer was but that doesn't make the Federal system they crafted antiquated and we are poorer for having moved from it. They might wonder why there were so many "free slaves walking around" (or not, as many of them were abolitionists or proto-abolutionists) but they definitely would wonder why in the world we had let Fed.gov become the out of control leviathan it is and how in the world it has been allowed to reach into the life of every last man, woman and child.

Comment Re:even a broken clock... (Score 1, Insightful) 523

A budget that can't be passed by the Senate and won't be signed by the President is not a real budget. It's a hope that they can still get reelected in their gerrymandered districts and still remain relevant.

Sorry, no. That logic would only apply if the budget were insane and passed by the House specifically to fail. In any case, if the Senate thought the budget was crazy they should have taken it up and voted it down. Instead they simply said "meh" to their Constitutional duties and ignored the budget for years and years.

Their bloody job is to take it up, vote it up or down and/or amend and return it. Not to bloody ignore it so they can avoid going on the record.

Comment Re:Google plus (Score 3, Informative) 244

"Not only is G+ not forced upon you, at all, but it's one of the easiest social services to delete your account from, removing ALL your history (every post, every reply, every picture, every single trace of your existence). And to top it off, it allows you, before you delete your account, to download a .zip file of all your posts, if you want."

Says the AC with no link.

IT certainly has been forced on me and if there is an option to delete it short of deleting my accounts on gmail and youtube (which seem to have been merged without my consent) in the process it's far from obvious.

Odd, I was able to search and find a delete your google plus link easily. I do agree that it is slightly annoying they don't have a check box to not create the G+ profile but it isn't like they automatically fill it out and push everything into it. You have to manually go to G+ and finish the process if you want it, delete it if you don't.

The poster's stalker premise is also pretty silly. If I'm being stalked am I really going to be dumb enough to create accounts with my actual name on them? The whole thing still strikes me as a tempest in a teapot.

Comment Re:price (Score 1) 110

Agree with everything... Though, who actually checks system requirements these days unless you know your machine is so marginal that it isn't even funny. I'll grant maybe I'm not the average, maybe I'm blinded by my own experiences and resources, but unless you're wanting to play Crysis at won't most people's normal machines handle the vast vast majority of games without even blinking?

Am I wrong here?

Comment Re:Overreach (Score 1) 366

Because clearly the solution to this problem, like all problems, is ever more government intrusion. Big Brother must be allowed to protect us morons from ourselves. Someone has to do it, no?

Even the strongest libertarians believe that preventing fraud is a legitimate roll for government. Of course if you aren't a libertarian then I guess that won't mean all that much to you.

I'm not totally sure that's the case though. I'm sure many would see the necessary powers to do that as a gross intrusion. One may not like it but the freedom to succeed includes the freedom to fail. The freedom to spend your money as you see fit includes the freedom to possibly be defrauded out of it. That sucks, but the alternative is that government monitor and approve directly or otherwise every single transaction or at least the conditions under which those transactions take place. I have a hard time imagining a libertarian granting government the power to do that, no?

Comment Re:Overreach (Score 1) 366

The point of the Interstate Commerce Clause in the U.S. Constitution was to cut through regulations and to prevent states from prohibiting commercial activity between states. It was there to stop things like the tariff wars that happened between New York & New Jersey that nearly started the U.S. Civil War a few decades earlier with the fighting across the Hudson River instead of the Mason & Dixon line. How something designed to prevent a shooting war ends up regulating somebody trying to make a YouTube movie is utterly stupid.

Agreed. It is an excellent example of the true nature of government. It grows and gobbles up power unless something comes along to stop it. Once SCOTUS ruled that the ICC was pretty much the blank check you mentioned there was nothing left to limit Congress from doing whatever the hell it wanted as long as it could some how or another tie it to either commerce or the market in general.

Comment Re:Overreach (Score 3) 366

This is all about small time investors and the attitude that somebody with a spare hundred dollars is incapable of being able to make an informed decision about a potential investment opportunity.

This is about making sure that somebody with a spare hundred dollars has the bare minimum information available to make an informed decision. It is analogous to standardized labeling requirements on groceries.

Because clearly the solution to this problem, like all problems, is ever more government intrusion. Big Brother must be allowed to protect us morons from ourselves. Someone has to do it, no?

Comment Re:FSF does free; they do step one, others step tw (Score 3, Interesting) 340

> no understanding of the importances of "just works"

That's not their part of the job.

Various entities can label something as user-friendly. FSF is pretty much the only entity that can label stuff as free.

This is one laptop. Hopefully next year there'll be twenty, and then someone can take on the job of announcing which is the most user-friendly of the twenty free laptops.

I'd take issue with them nominating themselves as the one true source, but that's neither here nor there. The real question is whether people will be willing to pay exorbant prices for relatively ancient hardware on the grounds that it very slightly increases the amount of "freedom" they have. Given that 99.95% of people will have no idea what this is about and further wouldn't care if they did (as we're talking about an increase that is difficult if not impossible to measure and arguably doesn't exist) I wouldn't hold your breath on this becoming anything more than an isolated instance.

In short, unless one can prove that even a tiny percentage of computer BIOSes and the like are phoning home or contacting the NSA with daily activity reports exactly no one, on the grand scale, will care. It reminds me of all the efforts to create a "free" CPUs or graphics cards in the past. Sure, you could do it and have them as long as you're okay with 10 or 15 year old technology that is incapable of doing anything that is currently useful. But it's Free! :D

Comment Re:Already There (Score -1, Flamebait) 414

"You already live in that world. The only question left is if every sane and law abiding citizen should also be able to get a gun to protect themselves."

Maybe you do.

If you live in so much fear you feel the need to protect yourself with a gun you may want to consider moving to a more civilized part of the world.

To many people guns are things you see on television, or occasionally carried by specially trained armed response police.

Sorry, you live in that world. The fact that violence hasn't entered your life as yet does not change the nature of the world or alter reality in the slightest. Some people see the world for what it is and reasonably take precautions. Others deny the nature of the world and hide behind "specially trained armed response police". I would never want to deny people their right to self delusion but I draw the line at when they wish to push their delusions on others.

Just because the wolf hasn't come to pound on your door yet doesn't mean he doesn't exist. Count your blessings and be thankful for that, but do not think that simply because it hasn't happened yet that it cannot happen to you.

Comment Re:How hard can that possibly be? (Score 1) 663

The entire thing is an overly complicated way to say something which is fairly simple: 6 - 5 = ??. The number of ways to present that are numerous but the simplest would likely have been: You have 6 Apples, you eat 5. How many are left?

Assuming you just don't want to go with: 6 - 5 = ??. Odd that we could teach it the simple equation way for the last.. oh.. forever?

Comment Re:You don't know what you are talking about. (Score 1) 569

That's ridiculous. I used to install pipelines and wells beneath roads in southern California. That's a much slower and messier process than laying underground cables (I know because we did that too). Believe me, the residents did stand for it. To them it's just more road work. It would be easy for a company to lay new subterranean cable, and it would be even easier to place it above ground.

Not only that but they'd likely say something along the lines of: "This will cut your Internet bill in half and double your speeds" to which the people in the area would reply "Right, do that then."

Prices are high because government causes un-natural monopolies and shields their pet companies from competition via exclusive contracts for areas. End this practice and watch prices fall and quality rise.

Comment Re:The Romans found out about lead (Score 2) 780

Well, considering the ATF - in its infinite malice - has banned solid copper and brass hunting projectiles as "armor piercing" even though they work EXTREMELY well as hunting bullets

Except they didn't do that. They banned brass pistol ammo, which is very rarely used in hunting.

The attack on lead ammo is about gun control, not lead abatement. Period.

Except the bill in question (AB711) places no restrictions on the sale, use or possession of lead ammo, as long as you don't hunt with it.

Given the history of such proponents and of such laws there is exactly zero reason to believe that if this law isn't fought and defeated that these same people won't be back next year wanting to ban lead, also known as 'affordable', ammo entirely.

The history of gun control is one of dishonesty, misdirection and incrementalism. It is also unlikely, though possible, that this is really about serious concerns about the relatively tiny amounts of lead and more likely just a way to try and ban ammo in a politically acceptable manner.

They want bans, they should provide incontrovertible evidence that this is not only a serious problem with direct and provable harm but that the only reasonable solution is this ban. Otherwise, it should be voted down immediately.

Comment Re:Hey US... (Score 1) 650

When you say "both" you appear to be suffering under the misaprehension that you have two political parties and a functioning democracy. Do don't. You have one party with two brands, and they all are given their marching orders by their funders. There is no more freedom in the United States than in China. The only difference is the mechanism by which the people are controlled. Tomorrow I protest against the corrupting influence of the United States in my own country.

The US has problems to be sure but if you think this is an accurate statement then you clearly have no idea at all what you're talking about and likely have never been to either place.

If you have then you're wearing such heavily colored glasses that you cannot see the reality of the situation.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Experience has proved that some people indeed know everything." -- Russell Baker

Working...