Bill Clinton, aka: Harcourt Fenton Mudd
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
Cars from the 60's-70's suck big time.
That is just not so! A car you can fix with a hammer and screwdriver is perfect, and if you know which end of the screwdriver to hit, your car would always be in tip-top condition. And I bet you can still find a 30 dollar alternator out there, and regular sealed beam headlamps for around 5 or 10, maybe?
6rd is for when you want v6 but your uplink doesn't support it, so not an issue here. The DNS lookup doesn't cause much delay.
Some operations did indeed screw up initially but others got it right first time.
While at the first glance, you argument is compelling, that is not what is going to happen. There is a feedback-loop here: "Management" will hire even worse coders, as the language clearly does most of the work now. As a result, not readily obvious properties like security and reliability will get even more abysmally bad and code quality will drop through the floor.
On the plus side, we are missing a few really impressive IT catastrophes that cannot anymore be swept under the rug to drive home the point that creating software is hard. Swift will surely contribute to reaching that goal.
When net neutrality splits the Comcast network from the Comcast/NBC/Universal content, and Netflix has to compete for bandwidth on a level playing field, the money to create original content is going to dry up quickly.
Don't you have that exactly backwards? "Net Neutrality" has been the default. The new neutrality laws don't create a level playing field, they preserve it. Why would Net Neutrality and having Comcast separated from the content creators make it harder for Netflix? They're already paying for bandwidth. And Netflix users are already paying for bandwidth. And with the incestuous relationship severed, what would Comcast's incentive to screw with Netflix be?
Or do you believe we've reached peak bandwidth?
And there is a reason not to name all these 'offenders'? You know, just for informational purposes...
Security tech is not what creates security. The competent use of security tech can help to create security, and as such not all of it (but unfortunately a lot) is fraud. The basic problem is that most enterprises still try to do IT security on the cheap or by locking everything down tightly. The first approach fails for obvious reasons, and the second one fails because it prevents people from getting work done. In both approaches, "magic" boxes, techniques, policies, etc. play a key role, as the IT security people in most enterprises are incompetent and incapable of actually understanding the threats and risks. This is an invitation to a lot of more or less unscrupulous vendors to sell these "magic" things.
Oh shit. I just realized I made a grievous error, in attributing the "Trouble Man" soundtrack to Curtis Mayfield instead of its true creator, Marvin Gaye. Curtis Mayfield did the soundtrack for "Superfly" (which by the way, is also unavailable to stream from Netflix, those bastards). If you are unfamiliar with the Trouble Man soundtrack, go check it out on Youtube right now. You will come away understanding why Pharrell Williams is a punk ripoff.
I just stuck myself in the leg with a pen knife to atone for this terrible mis-attribution.
Ain't gonna happen. The average user will prefer it that way. It will be more convenient for them. What might happen is that people will demand that all costs, repair, insurance, registration, etc be included in the monthly payments. We don't own anything anymore, not even our bodies. Civil forfeiture and common medical practice saw to that. The government/repo man can come and take what they want, and resistance will be most feeble at best.
It's probably a good thing that companies like Netflix are making good original programming, but I've noticed that their catalog of classic films has shrunk significantly.
What I really want is a service like Netflix that is more Spotify-like, with an enormous catalog of old films, classic foreign films, art films, shorts, animation, etc.
I guess the fact that copyright trolls are scrambling to take old movies out of the public domain and congress has seen fit to extend copyright to ridiculous lengths makes that a problem. So even though I subscribe to Netflix, I find myself looking to torrent sites and the Internet Archive to scratch my film noir, King Vidor, Vittorio De Sica and Busby Berkely itch. Because sometimes Jack Lemmon and Catherine Deneuve in "The April Fools" or Lee J Cobb in John Boorman's "Point Blank" is just what the movie doctor ordered. Sometimes, a creepy-as-hell Richard Widmark in the 1953 Sam Fuller classic, "Pickup on South Street" is preferable to watching Ryan Gosling try to create an expression on his face.
Hell, a little while ago, I just wanted to sit back and enjoy the 1973 blaxploitation classic, "The Mack" and learned that Netflix doesn't have it available for streaming (but you can get a DVD if you still use that legacy format). I mean, what the fuck. Who's gonna mess with physical media and snail mail just to watch a movie? Not only that, but they don't carry "Trouble Man" at all, and that has one of the greatest soundtracks ever by Curtis Mayfield.
In case you aren't familiar with cinematic masterpiece "The Mack", here's the scene where Goldy and Pretty Tony face off. Check the very young Richard Pryor: https://youtu.be/sdR_t5nsZqI
I'm spoiled because back in my university days, I worked as a projectionist at a revival house for seven years and got the most thorough education in film history one could ever hope for. But some of you younger folks might not know what came before The Avengers and Fast and Furious 7, and that makes me sad. Hell, the 1970s were a veritable golden age for independent films and hardly anybody gets to see those movies today. Even the "classic movie" channels on cable only play the same top forty old movies over and over again, never digging deep into back catalogs. There is so much cinema to be discovered. Don't fear the black and white or silent.
I actually wonder if anyone needs to be paid to handle this stuff. It's a useful service, and hence potentially profitable - why wouldn't the market deal with it? Once we start getting substantial excesses of power from residential solar, the energy companies would be seeking for places to dump it, and one can offer such a thing, for a fee. And then sell that power back to the company when they need it (peak of consumption) at a slightly higher rate. So long as this roundtrip is cheaper than the cheapest generated power, the energy companies would participate.
No, but it *IS* what I said that you apparently didn't comprehend the first time.
As the amount of electricity you draw from their generators goes down, they're going to reach the point of needing to charge you a flat fee just for the connection to the power lines, plus the usual fees for actually using their electricity.
Natural gas is already paid separately for the connection and for the gas itself, so adopting such a model wouldn't be breaking any new ground.
:-) I always speak the truth. Some people just don't like hearing it.
The show must go on