Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


+ - Ouya (pronounced OOO-yah) is developing an under-$100 video game system->

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes "From USA Today..
Upstart technology firm Ouya (pronounced OOO-yah) is developing an under-$100 video game system that connects to the TV, a $16 billion market that has traditionally been owned by Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony and the big-budget titles designed for their consoles.
Its new game console, which will use a customized, open Android-based operating system for high-definition video games, could provide the first direct-to-market pathway for independent developers to bring the next Angry Birds and Temple Run to the TV.

The sub-$100 price could perhaps drive Microsoft and Sony to drop prices on their systems..."

Link to Original Source

+ - BlackBerry CEO on What Went Wrong->

Submitted by
AZA43 writes "After releasing some very ugly financial numbers in late June, BlackBerry-maker RIM went on a media blitz to downplay the significance of its latest earnings and counter increasingly negative media attention. Its CEO even published a bit of desperate corporate cheerleading in the Globe and Mail. But a new Q&A with BlackBerry chief Thorsten Heins offers a unique take on what exactly went wrong at RIM—Heins blames the company's downfall on LTE in the US—and he actually seems genuine in his answers."
Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:Only the SEO Part Is True (Score 1) 165

by eventi (#40600719) Attached to: How Huffington Post's Clever Traffic-Generation Machine Works

OK so I said "the way people find news is shifting to social" and you said four things which say "I think HuffPo is bad"

Did you want to say anything that counters my assertion, or are you just trying to get ratings or votes or something? It's sad that many people will read what you wrote, and agree with it because they don't think logically and realize that you said nothing. Go google straw man. You attack something which I didn't say. Everyone thinks they're on Fox news.

Anyway, if you're capable of logic, follow me for a minute. Do you really claim that if an actual piece of journalism, an actual news item, one that met your discerning standards were to be shared on Twitter or Facebook it would somehow become not real news? That seems completely illogical and counter interintuitive, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you meant that the things that people share are not real news. But again, that does nothing for your claim.

It kinda feels like I'm doing all the work for you, right?

You might have meant that it's not true that people are shifting from search to social in order to find news. Maybe you don't like the things people consider news, but it's happening. News is entertainment, whether you like it or not.

And I don't care about being "useful or respected in any way" especially by a random douche on the internet.

Comment: Re:Only the SEO Part Is True (Score 1) 165

by eventi (#40590535) Attached to: How Huffington Post's Clever Traffic-Generation Machine Works

The reason comments/shares/engagement are important is because the way people find news is shifting to social. SEO is still important because news on TV and Radio (and read over the shoulder of the guy in the subway) necessitates searching for the article when you get yourself online.

Disclaimer: I'm - Jonah Peretti (Huffpo's technical co-founder) is our CEO

The use of money is all the advantage there is to having money. -- B. Franklin