Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Re:Going overboard while falling short (Score 1) 231

by BigZee (#49163475) Attached to: Samsung Officially Unpacks Galaxy S6 and Galaxy S6 Edge At MWC
Whilst I do accept the majority of your points, there is some sense in the display being such a high resolution - VR. The Galaxy Gear VR will also use the new S6 and it will make sense for that feature to have sufficiently high resolution.

Completely agree with the rest of your points. The things that differentiated Samsung from phones such as the M8 was the ability to change your battery and to add storage.

Comment: Re:No. (Score 1) 228

by BigZee (#48930685) Attached to: Facebook Censoring Images of the Prophet Muhammad In Turkey
I pretty much agree with every point you made. The problem though is that we see Facebook as a social network. The reality is that it is also a business and is wanting to make money. This is no different to a TV network canceling your favorite show. We see entertainment but they see the need to make money. I will applaud businesses that take a moral high ground but I can't say I'm surprised that this has happened. Maybe before the floatation they could have stuck to this but Facebook is expected to priorities investors and that means compromises in other areas. I really wish this wasn't the case. The potential of Facebook (and other similarly large and popular services) being in a position to take the moral high ground and stick with it could be part of a mechanism for change.

Comment: Re:Action movies are boring. (Score 1) 332

All your points are valid. The main issue in doing that sort of thing is that it's much more difficult to do in a movie. The ideal situation is for Star Trek to move back to TV. I don't think it makes sense for a new series about the Enterprise (Kirk, Spock, etc). It should either be a new era beyond the next generation or it should be along the lines of DS9, in an existing era but with a new ship and cast. Whilst I have enjoyed most of the movies (not 5 or 10), Star Trek has always been at its best on TV.

Comment: Re:Does Samsung or Google have any influence? (Score 1) 201

by BigZee (#48633227) Attached to: Investigation: Apple Failing To Protect Chinese Factory Workers
As pointed out several times already, this is being highlighted because Apple is on record for stating that they would not do business with companies using such abusive practices. I don't know if the other companies have made such statements or not. Even if they haven't it would not be unreasonable to highlight the abuses if they occur. However, to imply that the abuses reported by Panorama are in some way reduced because they do not also highlight the abuse of the other companies seems wrong to me.

Comment: Re:WTF (Score 1) 65

by BigZee (#47369047) Attached to: Seven ISPs Take Legal Action Against GCHQ
some good guesses and a few very funny answers. GCHQ is in fact the Government Communications Headquarters. Although it's in a completely different location, GCHQ can trace its roots back to Bletchly Park.

In the spirit of the above suggestions, I presume the FBI is the Farming Board of Investigation and the CIA is the Central Idiots Agency.

Comment: Re:War of government against people? (Score 1) 875

by BigZee (#47201469) Attached to: America 'Has Become a War Zone'
Even if what you (and others above) say is true, the US still seems to be particularly violent. Whilst violent crime may be coming down, it still seems logical to remove the tools of violence. I can see a use for rifles and shotguns for hunting but handguns in particular have no use or purpose in a civilized country.

Comment: Re:Why are they in the EU again? (Score 1) 341

by BigZee (#47037571) Attached to: UK May Kill the EU's Net Neutrality Law
Most Prime Ministers realise this as well. Sometimes it takes until they get into power before they understand it but the reality is that since entering the EU (the Common Market), no PM (including David Cameron) have been skeptical enough to decide we should leave. It's worth mentioning as well that most of the major milestones to increased membership has been during Tory governments.

Comment: Re:Fuck Android (Score 1) 249

by BigZee (#46184761) Attached to: Wozniak To Apple: Consider Building an Android Phone
This sounds an awful lot like the arguments I heard in the early 90s on open systems vs proprietary. Your points are all valid but do they make the iOS platform sufficiently better for it to carry on? Given that Android is actively developed, just how long are the advantages you describe going to be an issue?

For now I see Android competing with iOS but I do think it's just a matter of time before there will be no advantage for Apple to continue developing their own OS. Woz is right, Apple could easily find themselves in the same situation as Blackberry and they need to be ready to deal with it.

Comment: Re:Perhaps they can pull this off... (Score 1) 153

by BigZee (#46100539) Attached to: Samsung's First Tizen Smartphone Gets Leaked
This isn't really that surprising. Whilst I realise that Samsung runs a half-arsed app store, it doesn't seem particularly serious to me. In practice therefore, Samsung only make money from selling you the phone. Once that's done, all they have are obligations from a support perspective and those cost money. When Apple sell an iPhone, they will make money from every app you buy. Consequently, they have an incentive to provide updates etc. I don't think Apple actually show any more loyalty than Samsung, it's only about money.

Comment: Re:KISS (Score 1) 267

by BigZee (#46099917) Attached to: The Human Body May Not Be Cut Out For Space
Whilst I appreciate the point you make, at some point we're going to want to send people to the planets. Exploration has been done quite well by robots so far. However, if it's for more sophisticated exploration, or colonization, we will want to send people. The problems have to be solved. In principle, many of them are, the problems are generally cost and a bit of time to develop, Nothing I've read says that these problems are insurmountable.

Each honest calling, each walk of life, has its own elite, its own aristocracy based on excellence of performance. -- James Bryant Conant