Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:That's only an excuse. (Score 1) 65

Sorry, but you are wrong. The AC mentioned Experian, so I guess this is a quick example: http://www.experian.com/screening-services/tenant-credit-check.html Only name and address needed (and annual income if you want them to make a decision for you, but not for the credit check). But you could also ask the hordes of people who are surprised when they find out their car dealer ran their credit with only their name and address (hint: if they never gave permission they can pursue the FCRA violation).

Comment Re:Detect this sarcasm (Score 3, Interesting) 364

Ok, so there are no rules in place that would make Comcast enforce net neutrality. But I don't understand, why wouldn't their customers have a good class-action case against them? I mean, I am paying a (decent in the case of Comcast customers) monthly service fee and I have a reasonable expectation of being able to access whatever I want at a reasonable speed. Why aren't Comcast/Verizon customers recruited for a good ol' class action, since they are essentially paying a monthly fee just to be added to the pool of Comcast/Verizon customers that those companies can "dangle" in front of the likes of Netflix in order to extract more fees. I am not in the US right now, but when I had a TWC (=another crap ISP) contract, it didn't say that TWC could decide what I could download at slow or fast speeds - is that no longer the case?

Comment Re:Is it even worth the time to RTFA? Seems flawed (Score 1) 231

The MOST important person in the history of humanity is the one who made the species naming system we use, even if few people actually know him? Just because there are more species on Wikipedia than, say, elements whose pages link to Mendeleev (an example of a person I would consider more influential)? It is a good thing then that Jimmy Wales didn't put a link to his page on the "about" link of every Wikipedia, otherwise you know who would be #1 "according to research"!

Comment Is it even worth the time to RTFA? Seems flawed. (Score 3, Insightful) 231

Correct me if I am wrong, but even from the summary I get a strong suspicion this "research" is heavily flawed. I mean, the only way for "Carl Linnaeus" would be on the top spot would be if you blindly applied a sort of page-rank algorithm forgetting to only include non-standardized parts of pages. A significant percentage of Wikipedia pages on all languages are about the various species of plant or animal life, all of which have a stub which contains the link to "Scientific classification" perhaps also to "Binomial name", both of which feature Linnaeus prominently.
It reminds me a spider my boss had built to get a few thousands of pages to construct a word frequency list, and I had to point out that it needed some work, since words like "print", "home" etc were not in the top-5 most common words of the English language.

Slashdot Top Deals

The optimum committee has no members. -- Norman Augustine

Working...