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


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Cyber Monday Sale! Courses ranging from coding to project management - all eLearning deals 25% off with coupon code "CYBERMONDAY25". ×

Comment Re:What if I want to know what's out there? (Score 2) 305

The problem with the ads (at least the ones I've seen) boils down to this.

"Hey, ask your doctor if {X} is right for you. We're not actually going to tell you was {X} is used for, because that might actually be informative. We're just going to show people leading an active lifestyle after apparently taking {X}, with the idea that without {X}, they're out-of-shape slugs.

And now, here's 30 seconds of side-effects. Remember, ask your doctor about {X}."

Comment Re:Eh. (Score 1) 287

They don't want to ban sugar water in it's entirety.

They want to ban "sugar water as a cure for {X}", where X comprises the set of medical conditions that does not include dehydration and low blood sugar.

Comment Re:D&D Board Games? (Score 1) 321

There's actually a number of board games that use the setting and thematic elements of existing pen-and-paper RPGs.

And board games like this don't require as much investment in terms of time and game knowledge compared to creating a new character. For instance, the last few D&D games (pen-and-paper) that I've ran have pretty much had the first gaming session devoted to character creation.

Comment Re:Online text does what now? (Score 2) 478

No, but you apparently need this explained to you.

You are attempting to argue that because everyone who has ever read Mein Kampf hasn't gone out killing Jewish people, then it follows that no one is ever affected by words/speech to do something.

That's a logical fallacy.

Some people are more easily swayed by propaganda. Others aren't. Just because some people aren't swayed by a particular piece of propaganda doesn't invalidate the effectiveness of propaganda or nullify the psychology behind it

Comment Re:About time they manned up (Score 1) 478

You know, thirty-mumble years ago, when I started playing console games and later on computer games, the only harassment I had to worry about were my brothers shit-talking about how terrible I was at Super Mario, or Kid Icarus. (Showing my age here.) And they had to be in the same room as me to really do that.

There's a lot of different kinds of gaming now that isn't just "two people playing on the same console". (Still showing my age here.)

But there still seems to be this odd belief, this persistence, that there's only certain kinds of gamers, and if you're not one of them, you have no business talking about games or game culture at all.

That belief, is, of course, so much fertilizer.

Comment Re:The metaphors around this are hilarious. (Score 2) 478

There's a difference between a boycott and threats of violence.

One, a boycott is not inherently a crime. I could choose to boycott, oh, say, Wal-mart, and if I announce I am boycotting Wal-mart, it doesn't necessarily follow that this boycott is illegal (because it isn't), or that if I follow through on boycotting, that I have committed an illegal act.

Whereas, if someone threatens violence, depending on jurisdiction, it IS a crime. (In some states, threatening others with the intent to cause harm is considered assault. Actually harming them is a separate crime.)

Now, consider the following:

1) A statement by a group that if Wal-Mart is open on Thanksgiving Day, the group will boycott Wal-Mart for the duration of the Christmas season.

2) A statement by a group that if Wal-Mart is open on Thanksgiving Day, the group has threatened to attack Wal-Mart employees.

The first is a boycott. The second is a crime.

Class is dismissed.

Comment Re:What happened to SXSW (Score 3, Insightful) 478

But being able to harass someone while not even in the same city/county/state/country is relatively new.

Back in Victorian England, if you wanted to harass someone, you pretty much had to be where they were. I really don't see there having been a whole lot of harassment by telegraph. Maybe newspaper, sure. But that was about the limit.

Now? You don't even have to be in the same state to dox someone or SWAT them. So, the nature of harassment may not have changed a lot, the method of delivering it has.

Comment Re:I don't get it (Score 3, Informative) 168

He got the U.S. marketing rights to that formulation. To the best of my knowledge, before Imprimis started making their DIFFERENT formulation, there wasn't a generic.

The plan (or part of it) was that anyone who needed the drug in the U.S. would only be able to get it through specific vendors who got it from Shkreli's company. There were significant barriers in place to keep companies who might make generics of the same formulation from getting enough of that formulation to reverse engineer it.

However, the particular active ingredient can be used in other formulations which aren't covered by the rights that Shkreli's company has. Specifically, there is a loophole that allows Imprimis to do what it just did - make a different formulation.

Now, they (Imprimis) can still only make this stuff on request. They can't mass produce the drug, supply it to pharmacies and thereby fully extend the giant middle finger to Shkreli. However, they are able to produce it on a "per request" basis for individual customers.

Leveraging always beats prototyping.