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


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Sad (Score 0) 434 434

It was a user driven site. The users provided much of the value. The users were pissed off. The users struck back. Now the business is scared. What's the problem?

How is there value if the owners of the site aren't making any money? If I had someone who came into my store every day and did nothing but talk with his buddies without buying anything, then I sure as hell would kick him out to the curb. That's what's happening, and everyone is surprised? Web site lets people run amok for years, then decides to rebuild into something that makes money for the VC's. Big deal. Go find another playground to loiter around in.

Comment: Re:Your biggest screw up (Score 0) 434 434

Everyone has a right to speak and think whatever they want. You don't like what someone has to say... then use your right to speak to say so and use your right to think to judge them. But you don't censor them.

No one can censor your thoughts, but free to say whatever you want? I don't think I have to use the "fire in a crowded theater" analogy. You already know that it's not true, or possible, or even reasonable. You can say what you like, I guess, on the "internet," but that doesn't mean you can say whatever you want on someone else's site. The owner of the site can put whatever restrictions they want, by our definition of ownership in this case. The concept that you can say whatever you want, whenever you want, wherever you want speaks of simple ignorance of the norms of society.

Comment: Not Really (Score 1) 434 434

Of course they can ignore it. Google is a vendor providing a part to the phone manufacturers, just like the company that makes the plastic case. Consumers buy their phone from the manufacturer or the service provider, so they are responsible for the customer's experience, not Google.

This is not an expensive computer. Phones are relatively inexpensive, and people just end up buying a new one every year or two anyway if they want the latest doodads. If people are still using the old phone with old versions of Android software, then they must be happy with it. Believe it or not a lot of people really do use their phone just for making phone calls.

Comment: Re:Grinding slowly but exceedingly fine? (Score 1) 71 71

I suppose there is some justice in the Prenda principals* living this trainwreck for years, as a sort of additional punishment before their inevitable jail sentences even start.

Who's going to jail? The lawyers? They are just hired help. The executives of Prenda? They are exempt since they hide behind the "corporation." The venture capitalists who are funding the whole thing? No, they are so above the law that it's not even funny. Maybe a few people will be disbarred. That's about it.

Comment: Re:this is science, so you have to ask... (Score 1) 301 301

is he wrong in saying that only having researching gender issues and only having researchers of only one gender may skew the research? what if this were two male researchers and a female rejected it for "ideologically biased assumptions"?

just sayin.

I don't know. We should go back to and recheck the majority of all research published, since it fits that description.

Comment: Re:Flip it around and... (Score 1, Troll) 301 301

I'm sure if a paper with the opposite conclusion authored only by men was submitted for review, women (both reviewers and others) would be decrying that fact,

Please cite the article about this happening? Or is this just your prosecution fantasy as a middle classed white male?

Comment: Re:Amazon has really been a stealth company (Score 1) 83 83

They started as a bookseller, then moved slowly into other merchandise

They started as a method to sell and distribute goods on the internet. Books were only their choice for a physical manifestation of the method. I guess you are too young to remember what people were speculating on back in the "boom."

Comment: Re:We need a law against overzealous prosecutors (Score -1) 206 206


Hacking is relatively benign compared to the damage a prosecutor with an agenda can do. The latest round of these travesties is now going on in Wisconsin , It seems we get these popping up about once a year lately and it's been accelerating.

Nice way to use a real issue to push you political agenda. Wall Street Journal, the new Fox News for the criminally insane.

Comment: Re: Waiting for the killer app ... (Score 1) 390 390

IPv6 would help both enormously. Lower latency on routing means faster responses.

Responses? Most of the internet traffic is streaming video, which gains speed by being cached, not having a direct connection to the server. Fess up. Most people here screaming that they need IPv6 are only interested in game ping times. Or else they really don't understand the difference between latency and "ping time."

Comment: Re:IPv6 and Rust: overhyped and unwanted! (Score 0) 390 390

And 99.9% of people don't care.

There are a lot of things 99.9% of people don't care about. If that's your justification...

Me personally, I'd love my end-to-end connectivity back.

People who think they need end-to-end connectivity for everything don't understand networking. It's not only not required, it is undesirable in most cases.

Comment: Re:Complexity is a feature, not a bug (Score 2) 626 626

Part of the problem is, these two things are working at cross purposes. Contrary to your instinct, making a language easy to learn will also probably harm the cause of fostering interest.

The problem is, from a sort of detached, scientific, logical point of view, it sounds like a great idea to have a language that is simple, easy to learn, containing definite rules, with no irregularity, and leaving little room for ambiguity. The problem is, people don't want language to work that way. It's not specifically that they want it to be hard to learn, but they want a language with nuance and ambiguity. We like puns and plays on words. People often enjoy and appreciate slang, or unusual word choice.

I am an American English speaker who has taken the first step to learning Japanese. One of the first things that confuses westerners about Japanese is the four alphabets, two phonetic (hiragana and katakana), one symbols borrowed from Chinese (kanji), as well as the English alphabet. Why not standardize the whole thing on English, and get rid of the rest? Well, then I discovered Kanji puns. There are different pronunciations and meanings for each Kanji, and they can be used in various ways to create double and triple meanings. The Japanese love to use Kanji puns. So, yeah, no one is looking for the optimally simple language. People want a language that the average people can communicate in, and the clever people can be funny and interesting in.

The price one pays for pursuing any profession, or calling, is an intimate knowledge of its ugly side. -- James Baldwin