Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Trolls serve a purpose. (Score 1) 37

by techno-vampire (#49780465) Attached to: Supreme Court Rules In Favor of Patent Troll
First off I think all Intellectual monopoly will go away in the next few decades because it will prove to be unworkable.

Just a few seconds of research told me that patents have been in use for 565 years. I find it hard to believe that they would have lasted that long if they were as unworkable as you say. Maybe, just maybe, there's a good reason that they've worked for so long especially when you consider that they only grant a temporary, non-renewable monopoly.

Comment: I'd be interested in seeing the starting list (Score 1) 4

by damn_registrars (#49780057) Attached to: Survey - George W. Bush more evil than Stalin, Mao, Lenin
The article mentions:

Students from 37 countries gave their thoughts on 40 figures and significant events in world history.

But it doesn't seem to mention who was on the list, or who compiled it, or anything else meaningful about it. It would really help with figuring out how these results came to be. In particular I can think of two more Vlads who i would expect to see in the top 10 list of villains, amongst others.

Another glaring omission is Dick Cheney. This suggests that we are still a ways away from correcting the history books to show that indeed most of the terrible decisions attributed to the incompetent Bush were just the result of executing directives handed down from the man who was - in name only - his subordinate. Plenty of people in this country are aware of the disproportionate amount of power that Cheney wielded from 2001 through 2009, however it seems that abroad still very few are.

Comment: Re:Go for it (Score 1) 4

by damn_registrars (#49780011) Attached to: Survey - George W. Bush more evil than Stalin, Mao, Lenin
While you are generally quick to defend Bush - and probably steaming over the fact that Obama is not on the top 10 - it would be interesting to see the list (article mentions a list of 40).

However, there is one distinction that Bush has that none of the others on the top 10 have. Only he launched a war against a sovereign nation thousands of miles away while in the position of head of state. Granted, several of the others did not have the technology to do so in their time (Genghis Khan, especially), but he is the only one on the list who did it either way. Others were also not formal heads of state (Khan again, or Bin Laden for a more recent example).

I expect you might want to counter with something along the lines of how Bush believed he was doing the right thing by invading a sovereign nation thousands of miles away who posed absolutely no credible threat to his own country. To that I will also point to the fact that the others on the list mostly also convinced themselves they were doing the right thing.

Comment: How do you identify when it is fixed? (Score 1) 352

by damn_registrars (#49774501) Attached to: Can Bad Scientific Practice Be Fixed?
Without an agreeable metric for how to declare it to be "fixed", that is an unachievable goal. It is worth noting though that the percentage of bad players in science is no worse than in any other vocation, and indeed lower than many. The difference is just that more media attention goes to unethical science than to drywall installers who cut corners.

Comment: Re:No they outsold Samsung and Apple (Score 0) 126

by hairyfeet (#49767093) Attached to: Microsoft Reportedly May Acquire BlackBerry

Sigh....MSFT didn't have to do a damned thing, neither did Elop as Nokia was already fucked as they pulled the same shit that Palm did, wasting their time at #1 pocketing cash and going in a dozen directions at once instead of actually innovating and staying ahead of the curve!

Break down their sales when they were last #1....what was that? It was nearly 100% Symbian "feature phones" with an OS so damned old it felt like running Windows 2 in 2005? Bingo, we have a winnar! Symbian was waaaaaaay too fucking old to compete, hell I saw that all the way back and Android Donut (1.6 IIRC) which made Symbian look like the fossil that it was. What about Maemo you say? What about it? If you go look at the actual reports coming from the devs working on the thing you'll see that Maemo would take at least another year and a half because they were having serious memory leaking and file corruption issues. Remember this was when Android 1.5/1.6 and iOS 2 was out, no way in hell would the consumer have taken a phone you had to reboot 4 times a day, could crash when you took a call, and turn your files into data salad, not when they had choices that worked!

Look I get why Nokia fanboys wanted to think some "bad guy" just killed poor wittle Nokia, I had a Nokia for ages and AAMOF I just picked up a Lumia for the wife as she didn't care for Android and while I hate Metro with a fiery passion I'll give credit where credit is due for those not "tech heads" its pretty damned intuitive and the hardware as always seems solid but....the one that killed Nokia...was fucking Nokia. It really was Palm all over again, when Elop came on board they had not ONE OS, not TWO OSes, but fucking THREE OPERATING SYSTEMS splitting up the talent and sucking down resources. They had 1.-Symbian, 2.- Maemo, 3.- the dumbphone OS, and wasn't there even a fourth one for awhile? I seem to remember they were also working on a Java based one there for like a year and a half.

When your only selling product, top of the heap at that moment it may be, is the equivalent of VHS when the entire industry and an ever growing segment of the populace was buying DVD? Well that is when your ass better be laser focused on beating the other guy to the punch, instead they split their resources all over the place and by the time Elop showed up? It really was a "burning platform" as Symbian was too fucking old to compete, dumbphones were going the way of the 8-track, and Maemo probably wouldn't have gone gold until after Apple 3 and Android Gingerbread had been out a good 6 months and by then they were royally fucked.

In a perfect world they would have bought WebOS but they couldn't compete with HP throwing stupid money and Android was in a race to the bottom so Elop bought the only other OS available,and it didn't work out, it was a Hail Mary but at that point a Hail Mary was all that was left, the other guys simply were too far ahead in the game.

Comment: Innocent is a relative term here (Score 1) 148

by damn_registrars (#49764175) Attached to: Al-Qaeda's Job Application Form Revealed
Jihadists believe that the people they are killing are in some way interfering with their goals. They generally believe that the land they are fighting in is rightfully theirs, so they see the killing of "infidels" as a righteous cause. It just so happens that the people they are killing are better skilled at selling their own cause to the media that reports the killings.

Comment: Re:32MB? (Score 1) 225

by hairyfeet (#49763313) Attached to: Google Developing 'Brillo' OS For Internet of Things

If you don't learn from your history? Then you sir are a dumbass, because datamining is what Google does and if its one thing they love its gathering more and more intel on you.

I mean have you really already forgotten the stink over google trying to ram G+ and real names down on YouTube? From Google Drive to even spying on kids emails the simple fact is Google is all about connecting the dots, its what they do, where their income is coming from, and the more they can gather on you the more money it can make from its REAL customers, the advertisers.

Comment: Re:So, that's how it works? (Score 1) 10

by damn_registrars (#49758343) Attached to: The Kevlar Kandidate Prepares to Surprise Nobody
As I've said before, when I get to vote, I have to choose between a candidate who doesn't really fit my beliefs and one who wants to destroy my ability to make a living. Voting for a nonviable candidate in a close race is effectively giving a vote to the candidate who wants me unemployed.

But I've told you that before. So go ahead, tell me how it means something completely different from what I have told you it to mean.

Comment: Re:For me it's Windows NT 3.1 (Score 1) 386

by techno-vampire (#49756809) Attached to: 25 Years Today - Windows 3.0
For that, NT 3.1 is the most significant Windows release ever imo.

The big change for me was with Win95. All earlier versions of Windows were bolted on top of MS-DOS, although many people had it started by AUTOEXEC.BAT so they never needed to notice that DOS was still there. Starting with Win95, however, the default was for the computer to boot directly into Windows unless you went out of your way to make it come up in CLI mode. And, as most users were more comfortable with the GUI, that just made their computers work the way they wanted without having to jump through any hoops to set it up. And of course, the ability to have it autorun CDs when they were inserted was another great convenience.

Comment: Re:So, that's how it works? (Score 1) 10

by damn_registrars (#49756621) Attached to: The Kevlar Kandidate Prepares to Surprise Nobody

Unfortunately Bernie can't raise enough money to be taken seriously by those who have the power to select a candidate...

It's the voters who select their candidates, or allow them to be selected by someone else. It's all very simple.

And when was the last time that there was a president who wasn't from one of the two parties we have today? When was the last time that either house of congress had a significant number of members who were not from either of the two parties?

And the game is rigged within the two parties, as well. We have seen before that most of the candidates - specifically any that vary from the party platform - are systematically eliminated from contention well before most voters have a chance to make their interests known in the primaries and caucuses.

We've also already seen that Bernie has committed to only running as a Democrat. Once he is eliminated - which will probably happen at most two weeks after Iowa - we won't see him again as a presidential candidate.

So no, the voters do not select their candidates. At least, not for president. We've seen that some people are interested in re-separating the voters from the senators as well, which is a related matter.

There are three kinds of people: men, women, and unix.