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


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Deal of the Day - 6 month subscription of Pandora One at 46% off. ×

Comment Re:Awwww thats so cute (Score 1) 288

Yeah, I think the tech community is mostly all in agreement with everyone else when they say "Wait...Yahoo is still around...and has email?"

I have a yahoo account. I use it for testing purposes when I want to send/receive from an "outside source" as all my other emails are with google.
I also use yahoo as a backup in pidgin for IM because for some reason the great wall of china blocks google but doesn't block yahoo.

Comment Re:Look at the bean counters for your answer (Score 1) 162

These days virtually no one from the janitor to the CEO expects to be at the same company long enough to care about the company itself.

At the company I work for, we have over 20 employees. We hire a couple new employees every year and very few have every left. Most have now been with us for 10-20 years and will most likely stay with us until they retire. Very few have worked for us for less than 5 years and the few that have left have generally left for things unrelated to the job like deciding to be a stay at home parent or moving their family out of state.

Comment consistent pricing between digital and physical (Score 1) 482

This is less tech and just the sorry state of physical and digital media.
Why does amazon charge more for the physical than the digital on some movies and the reverse for other movies?
While we're at it, how about a service that charges me $1/hour to watch movies and then gives me access to 100% of everything that was ever made.
Yes, amazon prime and netflix are cheap but their selection is terrible. Amazon's paid side is better but some of the prices are completely out of line.
Right now, the best selection would be netflix by mail but then you have the huge delay of actually mailing out the physical dvd.
A good compromise would have been the "remote dvd player" services that loaded the dvd for you but they've unfortunately been killed.

Comment Re:Camara that sticks out on an iPhone 6... (Score 1) 482

YES, it is an issue and nobody even try to convince me otherwise!

I need (a) Steve back whole will kill these "compromises" immediately!

This was a ridiculous "compromise" to a problem that didn't need to exist. They should have just made the iphone slightly thicker and used that extra space to increase the battery size which would solve an ACTUAL problem of short battery life.

Comment Re:Death to the touchpad! (Score 2) 482

Seriously, touchpads are the worst pointing devices in the history of pointing devices. Every manufacturer claims to have a "better" touchpad, but they all just end up sucking in different ways. I typed my thesis on a 10+ year old IBM keyboard with a trackpoint on it, because I couldn't stand any other option that was on the market (and I paid dearly to acquire it!).
My change would therefore be for more manufacturers to use trackpoint (or trackpoint-style) keyboards. Laptops, desktops, even foldable bluetooth keyboards for tablets. Give us something that works. We've seen other vendors (Dell, HP, Toshiba, and even Sony) use them in past years, it can be done again.

The problem with this comes down to personal preference. I can't stand trackpoints. I even prefer touchpads to mice. My current laptop actually has both a touchpad and a trackpoint and I never use the trackpoint because to me it's like trying to navigate with a joystick or controlling the mouse with arrow keys.

Comment Re:He will walk there, (Score 1) 278

The words imminent and lonely, when placed in front of the word death, don't exactly incentivise me to go to Mars. I full well realise my long term chances of survival are nil here on Earth, but I'll still take my chances with the old lass.

It's more than just your long term prospects. Let's say you can get to mars for $1M and yes, it would be one awesome trip but with that same $1M you could do dozens of equally awesome trips and still have money left over to try thousands of exotic foods, places, etc... And if it's for "science" or "humanity", there are still better ways to spend the money and get better research and better outcomes than spending it sending a person to mars.

Comment Re:Questions... (Score 1) 133

Wouldn't that be forbidden by the TPP?

It shouldn't be if we're talking a US company selling to US consumers. Plenty of European countries have put restrictions on exporting of "lethal injection" drugs to other countries, it seems reasonable that we could similarly restrict the sell of off-label use of antibiotics by fining them or limiting their patent protection. Even though I wonder how many antibiotics are still under patent protection. Many of them should be generic by now. Doing something like fining them would actually hurt the real problem with antibiotics which is that there is no money in it. Once people start dying by the 10s or 100s of thousands per year then there will be plenty of money to develop new antibiotics. When only a handful of people both contract an antibiotic resistant strain AND live long enough to be able to buy your drug, there is not much incentive to develop new ones.

Comment Re:Yeah, that's the problem (Score 1) 133

There is a rather simple way of unwinding this rather quickly. Currently health insurance is tax deductible if paid by the employer but many times is not tax deductible if paid by the employee. This needs to be immediately reversed. If employers had to pay taxes on health insurance and employees didn't then they would have a major incentive to switch this back around. This would help. The second thing that needs to happen is the "pool" shouldn't be tied to your employer at all. It makes no sense that switching from a job working for IBM to the equivalent job working for HP causes all your benefits, plans, deductibles, etc.. to change. It also makes no sense that my employer gets to pick my plan. The Affordable Care Act was supposed to get rid of preexisting conditions. If preexisting conditions go away then it should just be a matter of choosing a plan for your "risk class" based on age, etc... and get the employer completely out of it. The insurance companies aren't the real problem. If we can get the employer out of it then the government and insurance companies would both be much better behaved. Unfortunately, the biggest obstacle to this is perception as people are going to yell and scream that companies are just trying to save money if they drop their health insurance even if the companies give them a matching raise at the same time.

Comment Re:"For the fans"? Really? (Score 1) 420

Last I checked Disney started putting light sabers into the hands and paws of their cartoon characters, bastardizing the whole crap. I sure as fuck don't want Lilo and Stitch running about spouting Jedi wisdom.

But I'm probably not the right kind of fan they're looking for. For example I'm not the kind that buys any and all merchandising rubbish they will near certainly crank out.

Exactly, you might go watch the movie and/or buy the dvd and then you are done. A family with kids will watch the movie, buy the dvd, buy a half dozen Disney Infinity characters, halloween costumes, toy lightsabers, themed lego sets, themed candy, etc... not to mention travel to Disney World, etc... The fans that Disney care about are the ones that they can get several hundred plus dollars from over the course of several years.

Comment Re:GM producers are shooting themselves in the foo (Score 1) 513

I think that's actually a fantastic idea, as long as the government agency responsible for truth in labeling actually has teeth. Otherwise we'll just continue living the situation where all companies lie 100% of the time, get caught 1% of the time, and in those cases get an actual punishment 0% of the time (other than a slap on the wrist).

If it's a third party certifying agency then the government agency wouldn't have to have teeth but rather the certifying agency could actually sue a company if they used their trademark without permission.

Comment Re:WTF (Score 1) 154

How are you going to throw the engineers in jail for manslaughter? Wouldn't they all just quit working on such projects?

FFS, the DRIVER IS RESPONSIBLE. This is the law already and it must always be the law if we value a free society.

Of course the driver is responsible. But the software is the driver, not the person who just happens to be seated in the front seat or do you want people to only be allowed to sit in the back seats to not be liable? For the most part, the driver is the one responsible not the owner of the car and that should be the way it stays. Passengers shouldn't be liable whether they are sitting in the back seat or whether they happen to be sitting in the seat location that traditionally was thought of as the "driver" seat.

Comment Re:Not going to happen, sadly. (Score 1) 154

Liability is the reason autonomous cars will not happen, at least in America.

Insurance companies have no problem taking on liability. Even if a customer has to buy their own insurance for their autonomous car they will have no problem doing it once the cars are deemed safer than humans. The insurance company will look at the number of miles driven and the number of accidents and plug it into their existing formulas just like they do when a new driver who has never driven buys insurance for the first time. There might be a slight premium at first but after a few years, each car manufacturer or even car model will have their own rates based on the number of accidents per year just like they do now for drivers.

Comment Re:GM producers are shooting themselves in the foo (Score 1) 513

Won't the issue then be: The FDA doesn't really give a crap about those who incorrectly label their food "Non-GMO"? What regulatory body enforces what "Non-GMO" means and what the punishment will be for mislabeling?

Both the FDA and the FTC should be able to regulate and prosecute deceptive labelling and "Truth in Advertising"

Comment Re:Salmon's now on my "foods to avoid" list (Score 2) 513

They still can't mark them "wild caught" unless they are. I wonder- do they still get labeled as "Atlantic Salmon"?

Not only can they not market them as "wild caught" but presumably they also can't market them as "GM free" unless it is true. Also, presumably, other companies are still allowed to market their product as "GM free" so from this point on if you care about this you should just assume that anything not explicitly labelled as "GM free" is probably not "GM free" or inversely, if you want GM fish then look for companies that do label their fish as such.

Comment Re:GM producers are shooting themselves in the foo (Score 1) 513

Does the food that you purchase identify the conglomerate which entirely owns the folksy subsidiary whos name appears on the product? Does it identify the wage scale of the workers who gathered, made, and/or packaged it? Do your canned foods even say "lined with BPA?"

You never had that impression. You're merely dragging out a trope of long-disproven economic theory in an attempt to require that a food product include a politically-driven disclosure that the producer does not wish to use.

You bring up a good point and it's impossible to include every thing that every person might want labelled. The best solution might be to just require truth in advertising. If a company thinks that it is good for sales to say that it is GM or is not GM then they should be able to label it as such so that if it matters to a consumer then they can look for the label. Then consumers can go after individual companies asking for labels like "GM free" or "BPA free" or "made in the USA". Don't require it but require it to be true if it's printed on the label. Something that I've considered for a while on the wage scale would be some sort of certifying agency that can certify companies to a certain depth. Something like "We only buy from companies paying more than $X and require everyone we purchase from to also only buy from companies paying more than $X" would give you a level 2 rating. If you only buy from companies with a level 2 rating then that would give you a level 3 rating, etc... Again, this shouldn't be something done by the government but something done by the manufacturer based on consumer demand.

I've got a bad feeling about this.