Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Seriously... what info? (Score 1) 132

This is exactly what I thought too and wondered if I missed something. It'd be like picking your fantasy team solely based on average draft position. Yeah you get to see who's hot, but there little guarantee that it will matter much.

Maybe FanDuel and DraftKings needs to ban contestants from using fantasy game stat prediction sites too???

Comment Re:Cable company propaganda (Score 3, Insightful) 123

now many people are going with tablets and phone only internet connections and are cutting their local wi-fi/cable internet connection.

Do you have anything to support this claim? I know numerous people that have cut the cord regarding cable tv but kept internet, but no one that has dropped their traditional broadband for only wireless. The only two people I know that have cellular-only internet live out in the sticks where traditional broadband doesn't extend to and there is no other practical alternatives.

Comment Re:And we STILL can't read it (Score 1) 269

It's not as if they have to print it all out; I'm sure there's many a web-designer who could whip up a site with the content of the treaty in less than a day.

They don't HAVE to, but they opted to. It's not their fault you didn't find the one unlinked web page on some random government server to request your hard copy with 30-day lead time requirement. But it was available to be requested.

Comment Re:the lard of hosts for fat ads (Score 1) 338

You're right, it doesn't HAVE to. But what I wrote is likely the reason why there is a delay. On my Windows 7 laptop using Chrome, requesting a non-existent file on a port not open on localhost takes 1 second ± a few milliseconds before timing out.

I run a development server on localhost so I can't just reject any connection to port 80, and whatever delay I do encounter due to a 404 is minimal enough that I don't bother "fixing" the problem any better than what I've already have.

Comment Re:what's the problem? (Score 1) 143

So because Amazon was originally a "general store" they must always be that first and foremost at the expense of developing their own brand's products?

Amazon made a business decision. They entered one market and made the ultimate decision not to continue to support direct competing products in that limited area. They aren't blocking all Google or Apple products and accessories. And both of those products are available at an abundant number of other online and brick & mortar retail outlets so it's not like it's crippling Google and Apple's retailing opportunities.

I am a Prime subscriber and own a Fire TV stick. But I also own multiple other Google and Apple products. I have zero problem with what Amazon did because it's their store and they are hardly a monopoly in the particular area of streaming devices. And while they are a behemoth in ecommerce, Amazon is still third fiddle next to Apple and Google.

Comment Re:the lard of hosts for fat ads (Score 1) 338

It also seems to dramatically slow down a small handful of sites - I'm not sure why.

When you redirect an ad server to the connection has to timeout trying to connect to a non-existent server. Depending on what's trying to be loaded, it may block subsequent requests until the timeout happens, or result in an error that breaks the page if it's trying to load a javascript resource. If you redirect it to a IP address that responds with a 404 or a dummy transparent image or javascript file, then any blocking is minimize and the page can load faster.