Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re: All you have to do is walk around Google... (Score 3, Informative) 632 632

I don't know if maps is a steaming pile, but I do know that the new maps and especially street view are really, really sluggish in comparison to classic.
As a n00b driver in a big city with heavy traffic I loved being able to "drive" through key points of an unknown route the day before to see what the streets were like, what lane would be best before entering a 5-lane-roundabout, what the parking situation near the destination looked like etc.
F_ck that with the new version, too slow; even on an i7, there's almost no such thing as having a _quick_ look.

Comment Re:Someone is doing something really wrong (Score 1) 167 167

Radio stations are usually limited to a relatively small geographic reach due to the physics of radio waves. The Internet has no boundaries. Larger reach means more potential value for advertisers.

I have to disagree with that one; I doubt that this is an advantage. I think that small geographic reach can be an advantage if the region is sufficiently populated.
I haven't listened to a lot of radio in years, but when I did, there were lots of adverts by local businesses or the regional branches of bigger chains; you don't have e.g Ford advertising how awesome their new trucks are, you have some car dealership with a couple of local branches promoting zero interest payment plans.

I don't think there are many brands where it's a selling point that a stream is really popular in New York, Buenos Aires, Tokyo and Vienna; even with globally operating brands it's likely that there isn't a global marketing department paying for spots, but national ones who might want to tailor the ads they're paying for to the local market (not to mention language).

It's a potentially(!) large audience of people lots of ad buyers don't care about

Comment Re:Culture Change (Score 1) 45 45

Pretty much this.
And IMHO a lot of the perceived hostility was people getting treated like they treated others by making the crime fit the punishment or simply holding up a mirror:
If you're by definition the tolerant, "aware", good person fighting bigotry for the greater good, you can't possibly behave like a bigot yourself and people pointing this out must be haters attacking you.
Most telling were the complaints about how Fark "has recently become" more hostile.
"Mommy Drew, the kid whose hair I've been pulling all week has started punching me!"

Comment Re:Contradiction (Score 3, Interesting) 45 45

I've stopped commenting in certain threads and just use them to add people to my ignore list.
My problem isn't even with that PC policy, but with the posters who applauded its introduction and felt it was necessary - I recognized a lot of names whose level of "discourse" and reaction to well-reasoned arguments I've come to associate with "lalala-I-can't-hear-you-lalalala"

Among them there are some of the most intentionally(?) obtuse, hypocritical people on the internet.
They don't even realize that they act exactly like people they complain or make fun of in other threads.
On certain issues they seem to switch off their brains, argue purely from emotion, apparently misinterpret everything to fit their views or emotional state and blindly attack everyone who doesn't echo their sentiments.

They made it impossible to have actual, reasonable discussions because they're e.g. apparently incapable of differentiating between trying to understand why some bad thing happened and endorsing it.
They also give the impression that showing the correct amount of outrage about a problem and the correct distribution of blame is much more important than actually fixing problems or preventing shit from happening again.
I gave up on Fark when I clicked on the profile of one of the densest, most hypocritical, most vocal, personal attacks launching, reasonable discussion killing douchebags - and saw that someone thought it a good idea to make this massive all-around asshole a moderator.

If 9/11 had happened with todays Fark, the first comment would be "in before some victim blaming terrorism apologist explains why the people in the WTC deserved it" and then you can watch how the first poor sod posting something like "I wonder what reaction Osama was hoping for" or "how do you brainwash 20 people to commit those acts" gets assigned the aforementioned "in before.." role and torn to pieces for shit that was never said or even remotely implied.

Comment Re:Is there an extension that...? (Score 1) 353 353

You might want to have a look at deslide.clusterfake.net.
It's not a browser extension, but there's a bookmarklet.
If your particular clickbait slideshow/listicle site happens to be supported, it'll reformat the clickbait into a single page and discard everything but the actual content.

Comment Re:type of assignment (Score 1) 320 320

If it's like the usual weekly assignments I've experienced, it's probably both small and specific AND really obvious cheating, as in copy&pasting without even bothering to change the variable names or removing code that had been commented out by the one who originally wrote it.

Usually there would also be parts where you had to write stuff - for a data structures and algorithm class there might be formal or informal proofs/discussions of the running time or correctness of the implementation of an algorithm or of some operations on the data structure.

I still remember that in a first semester CS class about formal logic, set theory etc, our teaching assistant was dressing down unnamed students in class for copying solutions 1:1; it was very obvious to her that several folks had copied their solutions from a very bright student from Russia who at this point hadn't quite mastered the language (German) yet.
The TA was especially angry that the cheating native speakers couldn't even be bothered to put in enough work to correct the little quirks and mistakes in the Russian student's grammar when they copied her solutions.

Comment Re:Bah humbug censorship (Score 1) 307 307

Are you ready to take responsibility for the next real world victims who might have been willing to protect themselves despite it not being their responsibility in happy ideological lala-land, but who didn't know how to or weren't even aware of the danger because your knee-jerk "victim blame" reaction suppressed that information and finally managed to alienate the last one who would have been willing to help?

On a slightly (un)related note, on some website there recently were some very vocal habitual "Victim blamer! MRA!"-screaming hypocrites apparently living in homes without mirrors wondering where that backlash of "SJW"-screaming came from and why "social justice" could have become(!) an insult and how the environment and the "discussions" have become(!) more hostile.

Comment Deaf people (Score 1) 235 235

I had the same reaction at first ("useless") .

Then I remembered my father whose hearing has gotten pretty bad over the years.
When my parents were out together riding their bicycles somewhere, my mom noticed that he clearly didn't hear some cars approaching from behind. She said that it was kinda worrying in some situations.
I guess when your hearing gets gradually worse, you can sometimes forget that not hearing a car doesn't mean there isn't one close by.

And thinking a bit more about it, I've already seen ("heard" would be wrong) an incredibly silent hybrid car; the loudest noise it generated was the dirt being crushed between the tires and the asphalt.

Then again, turning your head now and then or some of those rear-view mirrors for the handlebars will be a lot cheaper.

Comment Re:Lottery scratch tickets; not so random (Score 1) 166 166

but this guy can tell which scratch tickets will pay off by by reading their serial numbers, winning wasn't as improbable as one is led to believe

CSB:
My elementary school set up a sort of lottery during a yearly festival.

So two classes were tasked with preparing the winning and losing lots for the lottery by writing the kind of price or something like "no win" on little paper squares.
They then folded the paper squares and stapled them shut so you couldn't tell what was written inside.
During the festivities the kids ran a stand were you could buy and draw the lots from a couple of big, open bowls.

Almost all of the prices went to a handful of kids from my class:
A couple of guys from my class drew winning lots for smallish stuff, noticed something that had escaped everyone else, came up with a theory and successfully put their theory to the test by buying more winners.
As 10-year-olds are, they bragged to their best friends about it who then proceeded to buy most of the remaining winners.

Well, the winning and losing lots had been prepared separately and, not thinking about it and lacking the direct comparison, the teachers in charge of the two groups had been unaware that their staplers were loaded with silver- and copper-colored staples respectively.
So by looking at the color of the staples, you were able to pick only winners out of the open bowls.

Comment Re:Wooosh (Score 1) 166 166

Furthermore, in some books the million-to-one-chance even has an embodiment of sorts as "The Lady", one of the Discworld Gods http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D...

But yeah, Pratchett was mostly poking fun at the heroes in stories alway succeeding against all odds.
Another Discworld example would be a group of people being hesitant to attack a single guy if the guy looks harmless and smiles or if he shows characteristics in line with being a story's hero - because everybody just knows ta a vastly outnumbered hero always wins the fight.

Making fun of or playing with such story cliches is something that Practhett does a lot - to a point that such cliches have become something like a natural law and an (al)chemical element (Narrative causality / Narrativium) on the Discworld.

Some characters like the witches are even very aware of it and try to manipulate the narrative (e.g. Witches Abroad is a lot about stories (not) running their "natural" course).

In these matters the only certainty is that there is nothing certain. -- Pliny the Elder

Working...