Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Who uses inkjet? (Score 1) 172

They're actually not that expensive anymore (i.e. $100-$200 range):
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...

I bought an Epson All-in-one inkjet a couple of years ago. I've printed maybe 100 pages over its lifetime, yet have changed the cartridges twice. I bought a black original Epson cartridge recently (because apparently the ink in the previous cartridge had evaporated or something), only to find out that after a certain period the printer refuses to print anything if you don't replace your color cartridges as well.

That was the point when it became just a scanner with a document feeder (which was what I originally bought it for). Fuck it. When I need to print something, I go to a copy shop. That was what I ended up doing everytime I tried and miserably failed to print something on that ridiculous inkjet anyway.

Comment Re:By my calculations (Score 1) 504

Just because so many people are retarded and the people making dictionaries want to appease them or themselves, doesn't mean the result is correct.
Do you say jigaton?
jigabyte?
jigabit?
jigaflops?
You may be an American. Almost everybody else in the world speaking English will pronounce it properly.

I'll see your Merriam-Webster and raise you the Oxford dictionary, the Cambridge dictionary and dictionary.reference.com:
http://www.oxforddictionaries....
http://www.oxforddictionaries....
http://dictionary.cambridge.or...
http://dictionary.reference.co...

Comment Re:By my calculations (Score 0) 504

Screw Back to the Future, man.

Due to that movie my pronunciation of gigawatts is permanently incorrect (even though 'gigabytes' is not a problem at all). It is a matter of time before I fuck up some important conversation by sounding infinitely stupid:
- "The power output of the proposed plant is 2 jigawatts."
= "Did you just say.. 2.. Jigawatts?"
- "Yeah, amazing isn't it??"
= "We're leaving."

Comment Re:Do it in Kanji [Re:I hate hieroglyphics] (Score 1) 193

They already did that.

They didn't.

Yes, they created a 'recognizable' symbol for concepts, but they did not create the equivalent of emojis. Emojis generally make sense even if you have never seen them before. Chinese characters do not. At all.

The thing with most languages however is that you need to be able to read and write with them. Emojis are fairly good at being readable, but they really suck at being writable (as apposed to Chinese characters). Try using emojis with pen and paper, it's completely unworkable. Besides that, emojis are inherently incapable of representing abstract or otherwise non-visual concepts whilst still being intuitively readable. These are two of the main reason why hieroglyphics as an all encompassing language representation is unfeasible.

Comment Re:Looks promising (Score 1) 24

The patients had slight movement before the treatment, so there were functioning fiber connections, but the ability was minimal

I'm not seeing that anywhere in TFAs. In fact, the term "complete motor paralysis" is mentioned several times. Where did you get that from?

Comment Re:$4.3 billion == guaranteed failure. (Score 5, Insightful) 185

As far as I can tell, any IT project costing a billion or more is 100% guaranteed to fail.

No kidding.

If you pay everybody $200 000 per year, that equates to 21 500 man-years (!) of work. I don't know what kind of problems in record keeping they're going to solve, but for that kind of money it'd better involve employees doing that in gold plated jets flown by an artificially engineered unicorn that continually snorts prime-grade cocaine.

Comment Re:Not sure I understand.... (Score 1) 170

No I don't. I don't have to prove anything in this discussion, because I'm posting on an Internet message board and voicing my opinion.

That is kind of weak.
It is true that there is no strict necessity to prove anything, but it is also true that without that support, your opinion is unfounded and flawed.

You could go buy yourself an XBox for every room of the house, and hey, it's your money, you can do that. I'm still aloud to post on the Internet that it seems excessive and stupid.

I never said you weren't allowed to do so. I just pointed out that your logic and thus your point of view is faulty.

As far as whether streaming PC games to your XBox is a good idea, my guess is that the experience won't be great for twitch games, but if it's a good enough experience for you, then again, by all means, have at

Agreed. Again, that is why I would prefer the HDMI-over-ethernet solution. I'm pretty sure however that in its current state, that is far too big a hassle for most consumers.

I'm not going to be an asshole and claim that you have to prove that's the best choice for everybody.

Nice implicit ad hominem. Also: straw man. I never said that it was the best choice for everybody. I argued it was an adequate solution for some people.

At the same time, if what you really want is a method to stream your Steam games to your TV over your home network through a set-top box, I would guess that there are cheaper solutions than the XBox.

Agreed. At $50, the Steam Link doesn't even compete with the $350 Xbox One for that specific purpose. It is severely limited, though. There are generic streaming devices for $100 out there which would be preferable. I do think that when people are faced with a decision between a Playstation and an Xbox, the streaming capabilities of the Xbox could influence their choice significantly.

Comment Re:Not sure I understand.... (Score 1) 170

You are completely missing the point.

If you argue that something is useless or inferior to an alternative, then you need to prove that it is that for everybody, not just for some people.

Calling people whiny bitches is not going to change their purchasing behavior. I'm arguing that it does make sense for a group of people to stream their gaming PC-activities to an Xbox.

Comment Re:Not sure I understand.... (Score 1) 170

Buying an XBox would still be redundant hardware

You forgot a little bit of argumentation there.
Let me do the same: No, it wouldn't.

Also, at least for me ...

Your personal situation is irrelevant. There are plenty of massively powered existing PCs not hooked up to the living room TV. You can't dismiss (or at least haven't dismissed) the point that that power were to go unused if gaming took place in the living room without utilizing some streaming or remote display kind of solution.

Simple question: suppose you have some awesome 8-way SLI/Crossfire monster of a gaming PC, do not want to put it in the living room, want to use its processing power and want to move from gaming in the room where it is in to your living room. How do you propose solving this conundrum in the easiest and cheapest manner?
Hint, some potential answers were given by TFA and some guy with the nick 'dinfinity'.

Don't sweat it -- it's only ones and zeros. -- P. Skelly

Working...