Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Check your arithmatic (Score 1) 214

by aardvarkjoe (#47687289) Attached to: Figuring Out Where To Live Using Math

Anyone and everyone that has walked in much hotter temperatures, surely would.

It's making blanket statements like this that is making you sound like an idiot. I know very few people that consider 85F to be a comfortable temperature, let along "nice and cool."

The average person finds their comfort range for room temperature to be in the low- to mid-70s; and when exerting oneself (even to a small extent), the comfortable temperature will generally be lower than that. While I'm sure there are some people that prefer temperatures as high as 85 F, they are certainly outside the norm.

Comment: Re:+1 for this Post (Score 2) 427

by aardvarkjoe (#47633585) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Life Beyond the WRT54G Series?

It's funny; I was actually looking into a replacement for my WRT54G (using DD-WRT) last night. It's been great for a long time, but during the past couple months it periodically craps out and stops responding. Unfortunately, it seems like the only router that everyone can agree on being good is the WRT54G series itself.

But there's some good leads from this post. Brings me back to the days when Ask Slashdot was actually frequently useful or interesting.

Comment: Re:I wonder who is doing the actual posting. (Score 2) 165

by aardvarkjoe (#47532285) Attached to: Wikipedia Blocks 'Disruptive' Edits From US Congress

I hope this is coming from some over zealot unpaid interns, working for the congress. Not from the actual congressmen themselves.

I hope this is coming from the congressmen themselves. They're much less likely to cause damage trolling Wikipedia rather than if they're attempting to pass legislation.

Comment: Idiot Slashdot editors again... (Score 4, Informative) 115

by aardvarkjoe (#47509499) Attached to: UK Users Overwhelmingly Spurn Broadband Filters

The article linked in the summary requires you to answer survey questions or post it to your google+ / facebook before you can read it.

Don't put up with that crap. It's even worse than forcing you to watch advertisements before reading something. Filter out pcpro.co.uk with your hosts file or whatever other method instead.

Comment: Re:Really? (Score 2) 125

by aardvarkjoe (#47487555) Attached to: FTC To Trap Robocallers With Open Source Software

Same here. I always press "1", which transfers to a live operator, and then I play along for a few minutes. Then I ask her what color underwear she is wearing. Most hang up at that point. but a few continue the conversation. If we all waste a little of their time, then these business will no longer be viable.

Or if you don't want to be stuck talking to them, just play along until they ask you for your credit card number, tell them, "oh, I have to find my wallet" -- and then set the phone down and do something else.

I once got one of them to waste fifteen minutes on me by picking up the phone every few minutes and making some new excuse.

Comment: Re:Once the user cancels, you have lost (Score 1) 401

by aardvarkjoe (#47461831) Attached to: Comcast Customer Service Rep Just Won't Take No For an Answer

The alternative is to not have broadband at all -- which isn't an option for me.

In other words, you value having broadband very highly.

I don't blame you for wishing prices were lower, but there's nothing unethical about a company charging what you're willing to pay.

Comment: Re:Once the user cancels, you have lost (Score 1) 401

by aardvarkjoe (#47460743) Attached to: Comcast Customer Service Rep Just Won't Take No For an Answer

(though if you did that with me, my reaction would be to cancel on principle because you ripped me off all the time, if you can lower your rate now, why couldn't you before? And I certainly have zero reason to continue business with a company that very obviously has no problem with ripping me off)

Presumably, if you're paying a particular rate in exchange for service, that's because you believe that the service has at least that much value to you. As long as that's the case, then the company providing the service isn't "ripping you off."

As a customer, there's going to be some upper limit to how much you're willing to pay for a service. For the company, there's some lower limit to the price that they can afford to offer. Obviously every customer would like the price to be set at that lower limit -- so skewed as much in the customer's favor as possible -- but it's not unethical for the company to set their pricing elsewhere.

Comment: Re:Hard to get excited. (Score 1) 129

by aardvarkjoe (#47460129) Attached to: Mozilla Doubles Down on JPEG Encoding with mozjpeg 2.0

Most videos (at least those linked to from meme-based image sites) are stored in GIF format...

While I don't disagree that the storing videos in GIF format is incredibly inefficient (and annoying), I somehow don't think that "meme-based image sites" are actually a significant fraction of internet bandwidth use compared to websites that use more standard video formats.

Prototype designs always work. -- Don Vonada

Working...