Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
What's the story with these ads on Slashdot? Check out our new blog post to find out. ×

Comment Re:Someday? (Score 1) 124

loads'a bollocks

The royal family as a *whole* is worth a lowly $1 Billion USD. The monarchy itself is worth less than half of that.
Today, they mostly exist as a cultural icon that's popular with tourists & looks after a couple of old estates. Perhaps doing the occasional ambassadorial visit.
Since the enactment of parliament, they are expected to remain politically impartial. The next prince in line to the thrown has stood out recently, as he's caused a lot of controversies of late after it was discovered he had been writing to people in parts of government - the topics were quite banal, but as an unelected official, he's been strongly criticised for "meddling" in the country's affairs.

Even the annual "Queen's Speech" is written by the sitting government.
If the royals were seen to be interfering in politics, they'd meet the wrath of both the government and the populace.

Comment Re:Limits of storage / human perception (Score 1) 109

In a future of unlimited storage & compute power, we'd no longer use MP3 - or any other compressed file format for that matter. Everything would be lossless.
It's not a question of us being able to tell the difference, but unnecessarily degrading data.

Also, as mentioned above, our media will probably start including things such as depth & other environmental data. True VR will require much more than a simple 3D projection & stereo audio.

Comment Re:Sure it can work (Score 1) 418

For what it's worth, Americans actually pay *more* for their welfare than many European countries, and yet get much less for it. From what I see, your government's generally prohibited from making social care more efficient because it hurts the profits of the private companies suckling on the public teat & "ohnosocialism!".

Comment Re:Puzzling (Score 1) 46

Not so much a malfunction as a poor configuration in the face of unexpected circumstances. The comet was apparently *much* softer than planned for, so the pressure sensors didn't pass the threshold to activate.
They were expecting rock, when in fact, they landed in a big pile of dust. Depending on the design of the harpoons, even if they had been triggered in that situation, they might not have had much to hold on to.

Comment Re:I'm against ad-blocking on a network level (Score 1) 327

You must be visiting too many porn & crapware sites then, because my experience has been distinctly different from yours.
Of course, you're mostly blowing hot air, because as by your own admission you have everything blocked anyway - you don't see any of it in the first place.

I've never had anything silently installed by flash or anything else on my browser. I got bitten a by search bar once, but only because I stupidly installed some shitware off SourceForge (RIP). It was hardly a surprise.

You're also highly unlikely to see any adult ads on any reasonably frequented gaming site. If you'd worked with ANY commercial sites yourself in the past DECADE, you'd know that.
With the exception of, again, adult & crapware sites, all advertising is now targeted - it's more profitable for the client, it's more profitable for the advertiser, it's more profitable for the site & it's less annoying to the user. And the base line for targeting is aiming at that particular site's audience. So no, you're not going to be finding any adult content on kids' sites.

Comment Re:I'm against ad-blocking on a network level (Score 1) 327

It's about being selective with what you block to show site owners what is & isn't acceptable. Blocking *everything* fails to provide any sort of feedback & just encourages them to try & find workarounds to the ad-blockers.

Content providers in both online & printed media rely on the same model. Fees, subscriptions or advertising.
I don't see many people complaining about the ads in newspapers & magazines. Don't fool yourself. The only print media you get for free & *doesn't* include ad spreads are brochures & sponsored material which is *itself* the ad.

Comment Re:I'm against ad-blocking on a network level (Score 1) 327

No, I'm a pragmatist with enough experience in the area to know what it costs to run big infrastructure. When you leave high school, you might also learn what it's like to keep quality services running in the real world.

Slashdot is pretty much the only site I visit which is mostly user-generated content. They also have relatively little advertising.
Complain about the way the site is run all you like - I agree with much of it, however that Slashdot isn't itself Slashdotted, an effect caused by just a fraction of its visitors (I mean, come on, what percentage of people actually RTFA?) just shows how much goes into their own infrastructure.

I already stated above that I also hate the abusive flash-heavy ads - I block them myself. However I make sure to allow any advertising which I think is reasonable. With any luck, that will help influence what type of advertising is the most effective. Nuking *everything* just encourages advertisers to try & find workarounds.

Comment Re:I'm against ad-blocking on a network level (Score 1) 327

4) The site is run Ad-Free as a side cost of doing business.
Oh, the only business _is_ the site?

No, the business is the "content". I frequent many sites who provide quality content & support themselves with advertising & merchandising. I've got little interest in merchandise, so the only revenue these sites can earn from me to cover their costs are from advertising & donations. The latter tends to be limited to small hobby sites.
B&M is expensive & restricts you to a physical location, & in my case the majority of the content I consume (tech news & blogs, international politics, manuals, etc.) comes from countries on the other side of the world.

I find many Slashdotters to be very hypocritical on this subject. They complain about paywalls, targeted advertising AND general advertising. And to those of you, I say, "Fuck You". Quality content doesn't come free.

Comment I'm against ad-blocking on a network level (Score 1) 327

I have Adblock+ installed on my browser, but I only use it on the most obnoxious of sites.

There are 3 ways content sites can support themselves:
1) With payments & subscriptions;
2) With Ads outside of the content;
3) With sponsored content that *is* an Ad

I choose 2. I don't want to have to pay for every site & page that I click on, so the only other option a site has bar explicit ads, is with sponsored content. Content which attempts to look legitimate & impartial, but whose ultimate goal is to influence the reader for financial gain.

I reserve the adblocking only for when I'm forced to use the flashy heavy sites which drag my browser to a crawl. I've even gone so far as to never have used the /. function to disable ads. I use the site, I want to support the site, and I occasionally click through to the ads I personally find interesting.

Comment Re:Are all U.S. Laws enforced in the U.K.? (Score 1) 125

He didn't say anything about the copyright not being valid, he said the framework & procedure as outlined by the DMCA are not valid. If an American company wants to make a copyright complaint against a UK body, they have to do so according to UK law & procedures. That means filing in a UK court, not simply firing off an email quoting legislation enacted in a country on the other side of the fecking globe.

Comment Re:Yes to Brexit (Score 1) 396

Wow, you have such a lack of understanding of European (dare I say, global) politics that I don't even know where to start...

First off, the world is not the United States. Our countries weren't recently formed by homogeneous colonialists divvying up their spoils of war for easier administration.
Previous attempts to force the rest of the world to work like this have given us the lovely situation we now have in the Middle-East & across Africa.
European countries are built upon many different cultures, traditions & "tribes" that have interdependently developed over millennia. A single European government would work about as well as a single American government (consisting of Northern, Central & Southern America). In fact with the relatively young age of the "New World" countries, an "American" government could arguably be easier to set up!

There are very few countries that meet all the following criteria: EU member; uses the Euro; member of the NATO. Notably missing from the 'full' integration...

Those 3 institutions have very little to do with each other & the only crossover is that the EU & Eurozone happen to be based in the same region, & NATO & the EU were a result of WWII. A federation such as the United States has never been a goal.

No wonder Russia feels comfortable doing what it wants on the perifery, and will continue to shift map and influence boundaries as it wants.

Instead, the Russians fill the power vacuum like there's no tomorrow, and already granted a €10Bn loan for a Russian power plant constrution in Hungary.

If Eastern Europe falls to the Russians...

Perhaps it's a little rusty, so let me refresh your memory: It's still in recent human memory when all of that was Russian territory & the West was on the brink of war with them. Roll forward 2 or 3 decades & many of those territories are now under the wing of a political union that was their sworn enemy for a good part of a century (their support during the war was a mutually reluctant "Enemy of my Enemy" situation.
That the Russians might get a bit nervous with a Western European bloc on their doorstep is hardly a surprise.

...it's a pain that something offsets the demographic process that was going to cause an Islamic and Asian majority in the largest UK cities in a few decades.

It pains me that it's only after I've bothered writing this long reply that I see you're getting your world info from Fox. What a wasted few minutes :(
I think it's also worth pointing out that the most deadly attack recently experienced in Europe was committed by an extremist far-right Christian xenophobe.