Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Note: You can take 10% off all Slashdot Deals with coupon code "slashdot10off." ×

Comment Re:Pretty sure it's true (Score 1) 282

Valium or a hot dog. Given, they both have about the same amount of weird chemicals in them. I was going to say hot dog, but now I don't know, it's a toss-up. I guess at least I could put more mustard on the hot dog than on a valium, so that's a plus for hot dogs.

I can't remember ever getting any "anti-psychiatry" vibe in his stories. I'm sure not "anti-psychiatry" now. Maybe I was reading a different story about they guy stepping off the path and killing a butterfly than you did?

Comment WD Live TV (Score 1) 158

I have a Western Digital WD Live, with a wireless adapter plugged into one of it's USB ports. It works fine for what I want, which is to watch most mkv files. It has YouTube and a few other "apps" on it. I've got an older model, but apparently they've kept it up to date, it seems to plays most things I try on it. I keep a shared directory that I put files in on my PC and the WD Live connects and lists them all for me to choose. Connected to the TV via HDMI. These go for around $60-90 or so, depending on model, plus the USB WiFi adapter, $10-15. I keep thinking I'll get a newer one but this one still works well and my needs are not that complex. I've had it for probably 10 years or more.

Comment Re:Too much money? (Score 1) 106

They are not improving shit. I wanted the original product. I was FINE with that, that's why I signed up. And I'd like it when promised. Since they are announcing it now, it's obvious that they could not manufacture it correctly on time, and they knew this months ago, given the lead time needed to make something like this. So they are trying to placate people with "we added more cores" and "now it'll run Netflix" and crap like that. And in August, they'll come back with "We think we can put 6 cores in by December", if they come back at all and don't just skip out to Cancun or something.

I expect nothing now except getting ripped off. Should have seen it was too good to be true.

Comment Re:RACTER (Score 1) 187

Drat, you beat me to it. I liked the book for the most part, although you're correct, could have used a bit more editing.

Wikipaedia article here: RACTER

There was also a program that Larry Fast (Synergy) used to create an album of spacey tunes. It was interesting but not all that listenable-to for very long.

Comment Re:It's the post office (Score 2) 182

I agree that it would be nice if a real person, and not just a postal employee, or worse, just the programmer(s) involved, actually tried to use the site and give suggestions ("This may mean something to YOU, but I speak English, not Postalese"). And over the holidays I did use and get frustrated with their site. Mostly because I would say "Hey give me a label" and go through all the stuff and it would drop back to the beginning a number of times before I could actually print out the labels. But I never had all the errors he's talking about, so I can't say how broken the site is; it was better than going and standing in line at the post office.

Getting slapped with a ruler was better than getting hit with a brick, I guess?

Comment Re:And? (Score 2) 448

There's another part to this as well. It could cut out some of the marginal channels that a few people like, but are supported by the one-size-fits-all bundles. If only a few people are paying for the Knitting Channel, then the price will go up for that channel. But ESPN's price won't go down, because it is generally popular (I think it's the most popular channel on cable), so they'll just charge a bunch for it because they can, and sports nuts will pay it. It seems like unbundling will probably raise the price on everything.

So screw the Knitting Channel, sure. And all the dinky little channels, only to be left with a few big ones that can survive on their own.

"There's no variety on TV anymore."

Comment Add the phlogiston (Score 1) 130

Did any one else read this and think they were making stuff up? Using magnets in beer, microorganisms making hydrophobins, antifoaming agent binding to proteins, anti-gushing. Speak English! It's hard enough to compile my object-oriented code using re-entrant methods with my two pass compiler, linking into a MySql relational database without having to wade through a bunch of jargon.

Comment Re:Why no taxi company's app? (Score 1) 329

This sounds reasonable. It's a lot to expect from our legislatures, especially the "let the free market work it out" types, but yeah. Reasonable regulation, making sure the thing is safe, then, if you qualify, you're in. Could apply to cabs, Uber, whoever.

And for the commenter below that indicated the "hailacab" app, yeah, I figured there was one, at least one if not more. Why, though, would anyone use Uber or Lyft if you could get a "real" cab? And is it just inertia that the cab companies don't become more responsive? "We've always used buggy whips! How would you get around without one?"

Comment Why no taxi company's app? (Score 4, Insightful) 329

I'm at a loss to understand why the taxi companies don't come up with their own app. They could legitimately claim that their drivers are not crazy wackos that drive run-down Chevy Vegas or something. I mean, the slogan for Uber and Lyft is "normal people in their crappy cars swinging by if they can", right? I rarely take cabs, and don't think I'd ever call Uber. It seems to me taxi regulation is a good thing. We don't let just any joker with a subway train to ride down the rails picking people up when he feels like it. Don't you want to be sure that the car you get it is maintained, driver vouched for and accountable to someone, the cost calculated and constant? It's all bizarre to me.

Now you kids over there, off my lawn!

Comment Yes and no, maybe (Score 2) 189

I can see how this would be considered frustrating. However, it seems to me that the Wikipedia idea is still a valid one. This article can now be changed, corrected, as it were. And overall, most people that come along and care about the information are going to try to correct it. If this were in a physical book, and wrong, it's wrong basically forever.

Encyclopedias are (were?) expensive, and for instance, my folks bought me a set when I was young and didn't get a new set for probably a decade or more. But I always "knew" that they were correct. However, teachers always made you have several sources, not just an encyclopedia. That cross-checking should be in place even today with Wikipedia. In fact, this could help fix a broken entry.

Of course, they need a process to stop "back-and-forth" changes of things. I think they need to have some indication that over all, an article is getting more and more correct, and thus should be harder and harder to change. I don't know, maybe they have something like this in place.

Real Programs don't use shared text. Otherwise, how can they use functions for scratch space after they are finished calling them?

Working...