Forgot your password?

Comment: Using DD-WRT (Kong latest "old" driver version) (Score 1) 98

by aussersterne (#46782987) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Which Router Firmware For Bandwidth Management?

on a Netgear R6300 and it has been very fast, great with signal quality, and the QoS features are working as expected.

Both the R6250 and R6300 have a dual-core 800MHz CPU, so they have the power to handle a decent QoS requirement without bogging down potential throughput too much. I'm satisfied, and it wasn't that expensive. If your situation isn't too terribly complex (many dozens of users and extensive QoS rules) then it might be a good choice.

The R7000 is even faster and supports external antennas, so I second that suggestion, but it's also twice the price of the 6250/3000, which can be found on sale from $100-$125 brand new if you're a good comparison shopper and/or patient.

Comment: Re:I Pay (Score 1) 325

What people don't realize here is how efficient Comcasts business model is; They create a problem and some company that uses their network pays them to resolve it -- no in-between muss and fuss and no need to involve the customer.

If Comcast can grow larger, they can create more toll booths on their digital superhighway to guarantee that people who use their network a lot, pay for it a lot.

If we all buy Comcast stock, we'll make a bundle and be able to afford to move to a country that isn't putting up with this fascist shit.

Comment: Re:Not possible (Score 1) 416

Ideally, a lot of ways that people avoid taxes would be to put money into endeavors that help society.

The MOST important thing is election reform and getting rid of all the pro corporate rulings of the Roberts Court -- those fascists have turned this country into an Oligarchy so tax law will become increasingly jury-rigged in favor of cheaters and not creators.

Comment: Re:What the tax form should look like (Score 1) 416

I agree that we should have a simple tax --- and it could look like that, but it would also need Progressive taxation -- and perhaps no taxes on people below the Median income. There is no way to have a Democracy if you do not redistribute wealth -- a point that will become very clear to everyone if we allow our current pooling of money with the top .1%.

The other issue here is -- we have to do something about the jobs this would remove. If you think that "make work" is wrong and our society is all about efficiency -- then you probably have one of the few jobs that is essential. Teachers, builders, doctors -- those are some of the "must have" jobs. I worked in marketing doing multimedia -- I only have a job because there isn't one company providing the product (and thus efficiency). Competition does lead to better products -- but it's very wasteful, why have two or more companies? Advertising is a large expense -- and it produces nothing. It does not really inform, it merely drowns out mindshare of other companies.

The fact is that MOST employment is created by government regulation and artificial rules of the game -- like not having monopolies.

If there were no complex taxes -- you don't need all the accountants -- much less TurboTax. But you also lose a lot of other professionals involved in this process. If you have no pollution controls -- then you don't need scrubbers and technicians to build them. It's more efficient to have only trains and houses set up on a grid -- you don't need people to build and service cars.

So yes -- make taxes simpler and fairer -- but we also have to have ways for people to be employed and that requires government -- it's really sad that the people who propose free market everything don't notice the cesspools on this planet where there are no rules for the game.

Comment: Re:Another thing (Score 2) 135

Then we have the people who don't get that concern over nuclear war prevented nuclear war and concern over ozone depletion pushed laws to reduce ozone depletion. We have an overabundance of people NOT listening to the sirens because they don't trust the smoke alarm.

The problem is if there is NO MONEY going to research -- there won't be enough people trained in the science because selfishly, they want to eat and raise families while doing their job.

Companies are perfectly happy to make billions a year pimping new formulations of old drugs or cough medicine -- next year's innovation; Avocado flavor! Evidenced by the fact that there is more spent on marketing at most drug companies than research.

Comment: I like this idea Japan! (Score 1) 80

by Vitriol+Angst (#46756093) Attached to: Humans Are Taking Jobs From Robots In Japan

It's great that they are forward looking and value craftsmanship.

In the USA, we are now stealing jobs from Canada -- because we are so awesome!

Oh wait -- no, they just underbid Canadian workers who were bending over backwards in negotiations to keep Caterpillar jobs -- after they won the contract from workers in Georgia. Next, India will likely "win" the contract as they underbid Wisconsin even with the ever lower wages.

I've already paid for my college education -- so I still have THAT advantage over a robot.

Comment: I think you're missing the point (your "not into (Score 0) 245

by aussersterne (#46738441) Attached to: PC Gaming Alive and Dominant

FPS" comment at the end is evidence of this).

In the PC gaming world, getting it to run at the highest settings *is* the game. It's like the "bouncing ball" graphics demos on 8-bit systems in the 1980s. The actual software isn't useful or meant to occupy the user's attention for long. The challenge is in *getting it to run* and the joy is in *seeing what my super-cool computer is capable of* in processing and graphics rendering terms.

Running on last year's card/settings? Sorry, you don't get the game.

This is why I stopped being a PC gamer in the late '90s. All I wanted was a better Tetris. What I got was a better bouncing ball demo.


Will Living On Mars Drive Us Crazy? 150

Posted by samzenpus
from the can't-you-hear-them?-didn't-you-see-the-crowd? dept.
Hugh Pickens DOT Com (2995471) writes "When astronauts first began flying in space, NASA worried about 'space madness,' a mental malady they thought might arise from humans experiencing microgravity and claustrophobic isolation inside of a cramped spacecraft high above the Earth. Now Megan Garber writes in The Atlantic that NASA is hoping to find out what life on Mars does to the human emotional state by putting three men and three women in a 1,000-square-foot habitat shaped like a dome for four months. The volunteers in the second HI-SEAS mission — a purposely tiny group selected out of a group of 700 applicants — include, among others, a neuropsychologist, an aerospace engineer, and an Air Force veteran who is studying human factors in aviation. 'We're going to stress them,' says Kim Binsted, the project's principal investigator. 'That's the nature of the study.' That test involves isolating the crew in the same way they'd be isolated on Mars. The only communication they'll be allowed with the outside world—that is to say, with their family and friends—will be conducted through email. (And that will be given an artificial delay of 20 minutes to simulate the lag involved in Mars-to-Earth communications.)

If that doesn't seem too stressful, here's another source of stress: Each mission member will get only eight minutes of shower time ... per week. The stress will be compounded by the fact that the only time the crew will be able to leave their habitat-yurt is when they're wearing puffy, insulated uniforms that simulate space suits. In the Hawaiian heat. Throughout the mission, researchers will be testing the subjects' moods and the changes they exhibit in their relationships with each other. They'll also be examining the crew members' cognitive skills, seeing whether—and how—they change as the experiment wears on. Binsted says the mission has gotten the attention of the TV world but don't expect to see much inside-the-dome footage. 'You wouldn't believe the number of producers who called us,' says Binsted. 'Fortunately, we're not ethically allowed to subject our crew to that kind of thing.'"

Comment: It's early days yet. (Score 1) 180

by aussersterne (#46639493) Attached to: A Third of Consumers Who Bought Wearable Devices Have Ditched Them

There were a whole bunch of smartphones before the iPhone. Anyone remember them? I stumbled across my old Palm Centro the other day, which replaced a Treo 680. These devices were useful to some (I was one of them), but the cost/benefit calculation was finicky, and they didn't find widespread adoption.

Pop consensus was that smartphones were a niche market. Then, someone got one right (iPhone) and the whole industry took off. These days, people don't even realize they're using a "smartphone" (I can remember the early press using the term "supersmartphone") because it's just "my phone."

The same trajectory outlines the computing era in general—from 8-bit boxes that were fiddly and full of cables and user manuals and coding to the Windows era during the '90s—at first, it was a geek thing, and lots of people got in and then got out, deciding it wasn't useful. Then, suddenly, a few UX tweaks and it was ubiquitous and transparent and a market we couldn't imagine the world being without.

I suspect the same will happen with wearable tech.

Your fault -- core dumped