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


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:dont try tmobile (Score 1) 142

I love all these T-Mobile bashing threads because everything boils down to what happens when you're out of a city. I travel for work and T-Mobile works fine. Why? I'm either in a major metropolitan area or I'm in the air. I never drive out into the country, and if i do, I don't mind the disruption of LTE service because it will always be there when I get back to a metro.

The only place this gets annoying is if you are trying to use Google Maps, but price it out. T-Mobile w/ Unlimited Data + a Tom Tom or Verizon with a cap.

Personally, I'll take T-Mobile because you can abuse your unlimited data (I download movies over LTE all the time and can set up a hot spot that beats whatever hotel wifi will have). Yes, YMMV. You need to really look at where you're going to be. Flying into NYC or Boston for the week for work? T-Mobile. Driving around in the middle of nowhere and using GPS? Don't T-Mobile

(p.s. If you buy a T-mobile iphone they'll lock the mobile hotspot to only 5GB / month. You may be best off with a 'droid device if that's going to be your primary use because that won't be locked -- although you can download unlimited data to your phone and transfer it over e.g. with Airplay)

Comment Re:Search engines search. It's what they do. (Score 1) 179

I think the key is only certain things should be allowed to be forgotten.

The police blotter comes to mind. People who have not been convicted of any crime (but who have been accused) end up in the paper (with something you can find with google) irregardless of whether they'll be convicted.

What once was a pressure of public shaming has multiplied a thousand times: someone can be framed for a crime, be arrested, and released (because it comes out the charges are bogus) but they still essentially have a felony on their record (even though they were never convicted), because an employer can google their name before ever getting a background check.

This strikes me as wrong, and can see why someone might (rightfully) want to have something forgotten by google.

On the other hand, if BP wants to "forget" the oil spill it caused, or Shell wants to "forget" that it's drilling in the Arctic, that seems to me much less reasonable.

The solution therefore, is to redefine the right to be forgotten to a specific set of issues (where it is reasonable to be forgotten).

Alternatively, it may be that in the future there is a distinct rise in the name of "John Smiths," effectively limiting how much google can pick up on you.

Comment Re:Wonderful DRM misfeatures (Score 1) 134

I have a job with 100% travel, and this never happened to me. In fact I bought the kindle because I can be in Ho Chi Minh and still easily find the latest English language releases. In fact, I've been all over the world with my Kindle (North America + Europe + Asia + a bit of Africa) and was AMAZED that I've literally always had access to the free 3G

Comment Re: "Is this what we wanted?" (Score 1) 260

Music is now disposable. Do you really think people will still listen to their Taylor Swift or Ellie Goulding albums three years from now?

I'd really disagree with this. Spotify to me is revolutionary. People use spotify because music lasts so long, and to filter out the junk, because the cost of a really diverse music collection (buying CDs) is much much greater than my $10 / month spotify fee.

As an amatuer guitarist, it is not uncommon to want to listen to several CDs to hear specific styles or understand the history of music. Before spotify, I might spend $100 on CDs trying to research the roots of blues (e.g. just buy one CD of each of the greats: Son House, Muddy Waters, Wolf, etc.). Or decide to listen to several CDs by a single artist to see their growth. That was very costly buying CDs, but on spotify? Still $10 a month.

It allows me to surround myself with music. Literally, I listen to music all day at work, and never the same CD in a row (and usually not the same CD in a week). Just to keep up such a diverse set of music was incredibly costly before. And whereas buying CDs I used to waste money on the occasional dud I'd never listen to more than once, that never happens anymore.

And it's not just me. Take guys like my coworker for example. He downloaded the Rolling Stone Top 500 Album of all time list, and started listening from bottom to top. Great idea that you couldn't afford to do buying CDs ($5k to listen)

Another great example was at a family gathering a few weeks ago. I could just put on music that was appropriate to the crowd without having to buy a lot of CDs (and then not buy the one someone requests)

Really streaming music is revolutionary. It's night and day from 20 years ago where I used to go to The Wall, drop $20+ on a CD, and be stuck only getting what they might have in stock. Suddenly, no more special ordering necessary. Any style, anywhere, anytime.

Comment Re:So what's news about this? (Score 1) 356

A (very) eye opening thing was when a friend who is a teacher advised me to google salaries for my local state / local school district.

Teachers salaries are public record (although usually you'll find the public record is updated after a few years, so you might just now see salaries for 2012 online).

And the interesting thing, while junior teachers might make $10 an hour (which is barely livable), senior teachers will be salaried at $150k+ per year.

And, on top of that: they only work 9 months out of the year, and get nice pensions.

So while the bottom rung is not so well paid, the survivors are. And while I do understand a teacher in his or her 50s should be paid well, $150k seems excessive.

Comment Re:Bad use case (Score 1) 128

Except of course if there ever really was nuclear war, they'd be much safer.

You could use the same line of argument for a lot of things: seat belts, guard rails, non-slip shoes

Silly people spending money to prevent something that most likely won't happen.

However as a society we accept sometimes that preventing a marginal risk is the best scenario

Comment Re:Bad use case (Score 4, Interesting) 128

What the Indonesians needed was a warning, not an escape pod. With no warning, the pods are useless. With warning, just get out of the path.

The key here is how much warning. Having been to indonesia, I can tell you that if you're on a beach you'll see signs everywhere pointing out the most efficient tsunami escape path. The problem is, even if you see it coming, and you start running, you might not be able to cover the kilometer or so to safety in the time you have warning. (Contrary to popular opinion tsunamis are not a giant wave, but more like a tide rolling in)

This provides a solution that allows you to survive with less reaction time. Which may be a good thing.

Comment Re:So how long before (Score 4, Insightful) 181

And when was somebody's "authorization to use mass transit" was ever revoked? You're paraonoid.

For starters, how about the No Fly list?

But let's face it, the government can revoke your transportation privileges anytime it pleases. If you don't believe me go drink and drive in a zero tolerance jurisdiction and see how long you keep your license.

Comment Re:Makes sense (Score 1) 239

The proper remedy here, is to make youtube and other video sites not be able to collect income from uploaded videos of drone flight.

Not to penalize the drone operators, who simply want to share videos of drone flight with other enthusiasts, without a profit motive.

Where do you think the money comes from to run the youtube servers, hire their sysadmins, and their programmers?

People get confused because the internet is full of "free" stuff, they think they have a right to free stuff. But actually, nothing is free. You pay for all your free content online (with a few exceptions like wikipedia) by being the product. Google is selling information about you to advertisers (and Adwords make more money for Google then any of their other ventures, like Android).

If drone enthusiasts want to share their videos with others in a non commercial way they should fork out the cash for their own host (which is dirt cheap these days anyways). Maybe the community can get together and create a not for profit website for sharing of such videos.

Comment Re:The law makes no allowances for irony. (Score 1) 122

Check the first link. It's that monkey picture the court ruled wasn't copyright to the photog.

There are other examples too. Try posting a picture of a famous landmark and you might get a DMCA takedown notice.

Or just go watch an NFL game and listen to the ridiculous warning about how even thinking about the game is copyright the NFL.

Copyright is very hard to explain these days. In some places there's broad over reach, and it's quite hard to determine what you can and can't take pictures of, and what you can legally do with those pictures.

"We shall reach greater and greater platitudes of achievement." -- Richard J. Daley