Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!
Yeah. The reason you can't find 3-button mice are because scroll mice provide everything they did and more. Honestly I find it easier to position my fingers since the middle "button" is significantly different in feel than the others.
The only issue is that on SOME mice it's too easy to accidentally scroll.
If I could mod you up, I would. You hit it dead on. The only counterargument I see to this though is that you still have the
chicken/egg problem if 25/3 is available and most people aren't willing to pay extra for it because they just don't need it.
On, a bit of a side note, as you mentioned yourself, the upload speed still sucks. Why 25/3? That's actually a worse
ratio that the current 4/1. If we really want new and interesting cloud services then upload and download should be matched.
Given the choice, I would take 10/10 or even 10/5 over 25/3. 10/10 would allow much more interactive cloud services than
25/3 does.
Actually, An even better solution is make it a pipe and give them 10M, 20M, etc... and don't let them hide a crappy upload
speed in the fine print. If they say it's 4M, it should be 4M whether that's 100% upload or 100% download. My 100M
ethernet doesn't have a different speed for a different direction and neither should my internet.
This change should either make your 'net cheaper, or increase your speeds. Either way, you win.
I disagree. The cable company where I lived started offering a 256/64 package a few years back for $20 a month (basically
the same price as dialup at the time) in order to get people to switch to cable instead of dialup. They quickly ended this
because it was costing them more than it was making them as people were downgrading to it or choosing that over the other
more expensive broadband connections. Upgrading to 25/4 when most people don't currently need it is going to cost alot of
money and only a few people are going to be willing to pay the premium for it so in order to cover that cost they will need to
increase the cost on the low end. I'm on a 1M connection and can surf the web, watch movies, etc.. with no issue.
The FCC would be much better off leaving the broadband definition alone and instead try to figure out how to get at least
3-4 independent providers in every area so there is real competition.
If you want our internet to remain third world, by all means, stand against the FCC in attempting to revise their definition of broadband.
Competition and/or expanding access would go alot further to bettering the internet than increasing the broadband definition.
Dialup or using a cellular hotspot with speeds less than 1M is painful. 4M not so much for everyday use. I'm a programmer and
work remotely via vpn, ssh, plus browse the web, watch amazon prime, etc... on a 1M connection and I have no problems with it.
I do wish my upload speeds were faster. The fastest upload speed I can get is 768k so I guess by the FCC's definition I'm not
on broadband. Even this is not a huge problem. The only reason I wish I could do faster uploads is so that I can do online backups
but that's probably a niche market.
Even if 25/3 was available where I live, I probably wouldn't pay for it. I just don't need that much and can't justify the extra cost right now.
This and more. There's also a massive difference between actually abusing a child and trading pictures of nude kids on the beach. And many more details.
That's the main problem with the public court of opinion - our own and the medias tendency to simplify. To replace details with labels.
Every witch hunt in history has this problem. They all start with something arguably reasonable. You want to get rid of the witch because she poisoned your cows. You want to kick out jews because they steal money from the people. You want to drive the heathen out of the community because he erodes moral values. You want to put the paedophile behind bars because he abuses children. More or less reasonable arguments, maybe not true but there's a causality in the thinking that we can relate to. But a few steps further the cause is lost or abstracted and the individual becomes a group, and the causality is not even assumed anymore, just implicit in the group attribution. Now you want to burn all witches, kill all jews, slaughter all heathen or castrate all paedophiles. Not because they've one anything, only because they belong to a group that you've given the "evil" label.
Not the purposefully coordinated kind where everyone meets in a dark room somewhere to plot their actions, but the kind where everyone sharing fundamentally rotten values leads to effectively coordinated flock behaviour.
Which is not a conspiracy. The first rule of searching for the truth is to call things by their proper names. A conspiracy, by both legal and colloquial definition, requires agreement between the parties. Agreement requires communication (not necessarily verbal, but explicit).
If everyone on the highway drives too fast, you can argue about "everyone sharing [fundamental values] leads to effectively coordinated flock behaviour", but that still only makes it a lot of speeding tickets and not a conspiracy.
It's important to make the distinction because it changes how to approach the problem. A conspiracy you would try to shatter in a different way than you would tackle a culture problem.
the ongoing work, which has been divided into three steps.
None of which is validation of the information.
It'll be interesting to watch how much of this is going to end up being disclosure, how much a witch hunt and how much targeted disinformation. It's already far too popular to destroy peoples' lives by accusing them of kiddie porn, now you can make an anonymous account on Github and add your enemies.
We seem to forget too often that the more vile the crime, the more sure you need to be that you actually have the guilty party. Falsely accusing someone of a petty theft is bad, but it will be forgotten. Falsely accusing someone of murder, rape or kiddie porn, not so much.
Because it's easy to misinterpret the question
Do you want to label foods with DNA as
Do you want to label foods with foreign DNA added from other plants, insects and animals (or even entirely created).
Yes... I'd like to know if you added peanut genes to my tomato. It may taste fine- but it would be nice to know.
I hear the ultra-fucking-high-def (UFHD) standard will be out in 5 years. I'll wait to upgrade my TVs and players when they support that standard. That way I can watch Ultraporn
This harkens back to when the Consent Decree was put into place, then it wasn't, then it was watered down and now it's expired (as of 2011). The EU on the other hand at least forced MSFT to give users a choice when it came to browser selection. It still seems as though we still have to have IE and this new Spartan presumably. I guess I'll need to download the preview and see if I can get rid of both.
At one point they were using body paint as clothing and a local municipality said "no." damn city hall.
Yes, yes it is. http://www.redneckheaven.com/
Who puts three fingers on the surface of a mouse?
Everyone with the normal human number of digits, I would think.
I've always just used my pointer and middle finger with my middle finger operating the right button and my left finger operating both
the left button and the scroll wheel. It's feels very awkward for me to either operate the scroll with my middle finger or to operate
the right button with my ring finger.
Wait you still have Tilted Kilts? They closed near me and I have to settle for Twin Peaks or Redneck Heaven now.
if your friends run off a cliff, do you follow them?
Yes, but that's because we are all BASE Jumpers. Ditto for the bridges too.
ASHes to ASHes, DOS to DOS.
