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


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Cyber Monday Sale! Courses ranging from coding to project management - all eLearning deals 25% off with coupon code "CYBERMONDAY25". ×

Comment Re:You can't win that war, take my money instead. (Score 1) 296

You have full control over the information you send to Google. You can choose not to allow JS, you can choose not to allow cookies, you can spoof your metadata. The information you send to google is 100% voluntary, down to the settings and software you use,

Even still, the "my computer is using resources so this gives me a right to the site" argument is poor. It's like saying you have a right for someone to bend to your demands because you had to use your mouth to ask them and then used your ears and brain to receive their response

Comment what? (Score 1) 296

It's the site owners who are entitled? Slashdot is a parody of itself sometimes.

They can deliver the content in whatever means they want. Don't like it? Don't visit. Google are under no obligation to deliver content in a way that meets you personal preferences. You don't have a right to ad free content. You can try to bypass or not receive this content but Google are perfectly free to come up with ways to ensure they won't serve you one thing without the other.

You have no automatic right to access their servers and content and it's perfectly within their rights to control access, just like you as a user can turn off JS and disable cookies.

Comment Re:Copyright Law (Score 4, Insightful) 190

That's a myth spread by litigious idiots whop prefer not to be seen as the scum that they are.

A simple legal agreement taking up less than one page where the domain name holder agrees not to use that domain name for the same line of business would do just fine if their intentions were at all honorable.

Like the legal agreement Apple Computer made with Apple Corp never to enter the music business in return for keeping the Apple Computer name?

Apple decided to enter the music business, Apple Corp. sued, lost and had to pay £2m to the company that had infringed on their trademark, thanks to that agreement. In the face of an army of lawyers, not only do these agreements offer minimal protection, they can actually make your position weaker.

Comment This is driver error (Score 4, Insightful) 392

I believe almost all of the self parking cars currently available to the public more accurately described as hands free more than completely automated. From what I gather, the driver is still required to operate the pedals (for liability purposes rather than technical reasons).

It was the driver's responsibility to operate it safely (ie not stamp on the accelerator and actually look at what's ahead), the fact that a premium feature could have compensated for the idiot behind the wheel is moot. It's akin to driving straight at a brick wall then complaining that the accident was caused by a car company not giving you "brick wall avoidance" as a feature in your model rather than you doing something stupid.

Comment RTFA (Score 1) 282

You certainly didn't listen to his words that's for sure.

If you had read what he said in the article, he's talking about when installing CCTV aimed at eye level so it captures facial features rather than having them in positions where you couldn't identify a burglar. He's not telling everyone to get CCTV, he's telling people who are going to use CCTV to make sure you're not wasting your money by capturing just the top of someone's head as they rob you.

Comment Re:Clickbait title (Score 1) 282

If you had CCTV footage of a crime, you have long been required to hand it over if the police ask for it. This has been the law for as long as CCTV has existed and I imagine this is the case in most countries. It's evidence of a crime.

You can't refuse to give it to the police any more than you can refuse to let the police look at a suspicious bloodstain in your house when you're being investigated for murder.

Comment Re:pretty sad.. (Score 1) 80

Theme parks are vanity investments. You largely invest in them so you can say "our portfolio includes theme parks...". Nobody does vanity investments like the oil rich counties.

They're massive risks and the UK is home to the world's second largest theme park Operator, Merlin Entertainment (probably most famous internationally for running the legoland parks). This theme park will be under an hours drive from 3 different Merlin owned Theme Parks (in addition to the London Dungeons and Madam Tussaud's) .

Comment Re:Field Sobriety Tests Anyone? (Score 1) 342

The field sobriety tests is designed for catching alcohol. 2 out of the 3 tests in the link you provided specifically say that failing them is associated with having consumed too much alcohol. The only one that doesn't specifically state as being about alcohol still only tests for a very specific impairment common to being drunk .

Comment Re:Completely outrageous (Score 3, Informative) 834

It's not a straw man, it's a perfectly valid comparison.

There have been hundreds of articles primarily about death threats towards people involved in this saga over the last couple of months.

When Penny Arcade or Jack Thompson received death threats, they were halfway down the article, generally a single paragraph, usually in articles condemning them. There were very few articles primarily about the death threats. There was a tone of "well serves them write for not apologising for that comic" among a lot of the gaming media. There certainly wasn't anything approaching a universal blanket condemnation. As far as I know, Giant Bomb were the only major site that did make it the focus of an article.

Comment Completely outrageous (Score 5, Interesting) 834

Death Threats are unacceptable. I'm glad we're seeing journalists express their outrage exactly the same way they did when Jack Thompson received death threats and when Death Threats were made against the family of the Penny Arcade writers...

Oh wait, there was no outrage over these, if anything there was an atmosphere of "well, they deserved it". Of course, to condemn these would require news websites to accept some culpability for the drumming up the anger that lead to the abuse they received.

The hypocrisy and self serving nature of the journalists is probably best summed up by the "gamers are dead" articles. The basic argument presented by a disturbingly large number of them is basically "How dare you be sexist and comment on someone's sexual history you virgin man-children!" and the writers are completely unable to see the irony in doing that.

Lastly, a call for diversity is fine but you've need to accept that diversity is more than just LGBT and women. It's the rich and poor, old and young, the conservative and liberal, the religious and the atheist, The North American and the European (or any combination of continents). Gaming sites have readers from all these backgrounds. Maybe, just maybe there are lots of people don't like being lectured to by relatively well off 20-30 year old ultra liberal Americans? Maybe, when people disagree with political opinions presented on the website, the best response isn't name calling, shaming and banning. You belittle, censor, insult and claim superiority then wonder why there's a build up of hatred on the other side.

Comment Re:Saw the debate (Score 1) 451

Ah someone who has seen Religulous and considers themselves an expert. Shame that documentary was full of crap. Most of the parallels/plagiarism he pointed out were reaching to an extreme or were a result of the stories that were stolen from actually being altered after the formation of Christianity and some stuff he flat out made up.

Comment So... A glorified personal contract purchase? (Score 1) 126

Plenty of car manufacturers will offer deals that you a guaranteed buyback value of a car 'bought' on PCP over here. It's usually a hook to get you to use that money as a deposit on buying another car from that dealer. Pay £3000 to 'buy' the 4 year old car you've been driving or get £3000, put that down as a deposit on a slightly better car and keep on paying what you were for your old car and have a bit of spare change to splash out on a holiday. I know Fiat offered this last time I went into a dealer.

As always with PCPs, sounds a great deal until you hand back the car and there's a 5p per mile over-usage penalty, that mark that looks like a fingerprint is totally a scratch that costs £100 to fix, you'll need to buy 4 new tyres despite the old ones only having 5000 miles on them...

All Finagle Laws may be bypassed by learning the simple art of doing without thinking.