Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:MenuChoice and HAM (1992) (Score 1) 268 268

One of two shareware programs I ever purchased for was the far-too-generically-named "Plug-In For Windows" by Plannet Crafters.
First introduced in September 1992, it was a Start Menu-like interface for Windows 3.x, only without the Start button itself. A right-click on the desktop would bring up the menu, optionally with nested folders. If Apple had any patents on the functionality, they should have nipped the menu-style interface in the butt long before Win95. By the time Microsoft got a hold of it, it was pretty generic.

Comment Re:I dunno? (Score 1) 61 61

"the Tor browser, which is supposed to guarantee anonymity."
Dangerously incorrect. In fact, the start page makes this quite clear: "Tor is NOT all you need to browse anonymously! You may need to change some of your browsing habits to ensure your identity stays safe." The Tor Browser allows you to be anonymous, IF you follow some basic principles. Nothing is guaranteed.

Comment Re:What bothers me (Score 1) 434 434

Agreed. I just meant that "oops" would be enough to weather the political storm (in fact, it already mostly has), and would probably be enough to keep a friendly Justice Department off her back for another 18 months. Strictly legally speaking, it's not an excuse, but the letter of the law rarely applies to high-profile politicians..

Comment Re:What bothers me (Score 2) 434 434

It's actually worse than that. She could (plausibly) claim that some were mistakenly deleted. Mistakes happen. The real trouble is that some were *partially* deleted/redacted by her team, which requires positive action. How does one *accidentally* delete one paragraph from an email chain?

Comment Re: ... and the hype for Windows 10 begins.... (Score 4, Insightful) 405 405

And is that so wrong? I liken it to your favorite grocery store changing up where all the products are located every few months. They may have all the studies in the world that say it's a better flow of people to have Product A and Product C right next to each other, but if nobody is looking there, because that's never where it's been before, it's a poor design.
"But you can change all the options..." if you can find them. Changing the finer points of the visuals such as Icon Spacing and Title Bar font used to be behind Desktop / Properties / Appearance. Now it's Desktop / Personalize / Window Color. That's...less intuitive.
Every new version of Windows since 2000->XP has suffered from the unnecessary moving of options and screens. They've all been focused on the dwindling number of people who have never used a computer at the expense of the other 99%. Maybe the new layout makes more logical sense if you have no muscle memory or expectations. Then as soon as everybody gets used to the new layout, they go and fuck it all up again.

Comment Re:Glad somebody is taking columns seriously (Score 1, Interesting) 67 67

This.
Adding multi-column support will only encourage poorly designed websites to USE it. It may work in a few select scenarios, but most of the time, it will encourage one of two bad designs:
A. Two columns that both extend down the page "below the fold," such that you have to scroll down to finish the first column, then back to the top to read the second. Ugh.
B. Cutting off page content "at the fold" and forcing a slideshow on any content that extends beyond what's visible on one screen.
Multi-columns might be useful for short content that's visible on a single screen, or two columns of independent content, but for the vast majority of what's out there, a single scrolling column with plenty of whitespace on both sides is the best layout.

Comment Re:Compromise (Score 2) 191 191

"in fact, it's the only tool legislators have after they've rooted out real corruption"
Phew, I thought for a minute that they have to be hypocritical, but if it's only a last resort AFTER they've rooted out corruption, they must still have plenty of other tools available.

Comment Re:Cry More (Score 1) 139 139

This smacks of "the most transparent administration in history" offering a solution that can be trumped up as transparency, but is actually intended to reduce the number of FOIA requests to begin with.
If they are truly committed to transparency in this area, the real solution is fairly clear: Offer the requester a choice. For no filing fee, the requested documents will be released online in a central repository for everybody to see. Or for a fee, the response will be completed as it is now. Reporters get their story (the whole intent of which is to release the information anyway), and the public gets to see all the information made by other parties immediately.
Costs go up slightly as requests are filled with no payments coming in to offset, but this seems like something that a government should be doing anyway.

Comment Re:Never ascribe to malice... (Score 5, Informative) 213 213

Bingo
Wasn't it just yesterday TWC was fined over $200k for not taking a person off their call list when they said they were (mistaken identity)? Including over 70 calls AFTER the lawsuit was filed.
Cable companies are the scum of the earth. Just because they say they've changed the wife's details in the system doesn't mean jack shit.

Comment Re:How do we know we've only discovered 1% of NEAs (Score 4, Insightful) 54 54

If it's just a count of objects, "1%" doesn't mean much anyway. We should be much more interested in mapping Mass. A 1kg asteroid is mostly harmless (to Earth, though it could be catastrophic for man-made satellites). This may be a faulty assumption, but I would think the larger, more dangerous objects would be detected first. If so, 1% of the total number may represent something like 50% of the total mass of all NEAs. If that's true, it's far less ominous than saying "99% of potential Earth-impacting asteroids are currently hidden!!!1!"

egrep -n '^[a-z].*\(' $ | sort -t':' +2.0

Working...