Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:The problem is lackadaisical battery manufactur (Score 1) 275

If they were investing into the R&D to keep up with Intel and Moore's law... doubling their capacity every 18 months as well...

Li-technology batteries hold about 25% of the energy of a similar mass of TNT explosive at the moment. If the manufacturers kept up with Moore's Law as you would like then within three years or so they'd be equivalent to TNT in energy density. Wouldn't that be fun?

Comment Re:Advisors? (Score 1) 68

I don't understand why the term financial advisor is used when they are just salesmen. What advice do they provide other than, "you should definitely buy our products", or maybe, "I would advise you against closing your account with us"?

There is more to it than that.

How to Choose a Financial Planner

Look for a financial adviser who is a certified financial planner (CFP). They're licensed and regulated, plus take mandatory classes on different aspects of financial planning. . . . Financial planners advise clients on how best to save, invest, and grow their money. They can help you tackle a specific financial goal—such as readying yourself to buy a house—or give you a macro view of your money and the interplay of your various assets. Some specialize in retirement or estate planning, while some others consult on a range of financial matters.

Don’t confuse planners with stockbrokers — the market mavens people call to trade stocks. Financial planners also differ from accountants who can help you lower your tax bill, insurance agents who might lure you in with complicated life insurance policies, or the person at your local Fidelity office urging you to buy mutual funds.

Anyone can hang out a shingle as a financial planner, but that doesn’t make that person an expert. They may tack on an alphabet soup of letters after their names, but CFP (short for certified financial planner) is the most significant credential. A CFP has passed a rigorous test administered by the Certified Financial Planner Board of Standards about the specifics of personal finance. CFPs must also commit to continuing education on financial matters and ethics classes to maintain their designation. The CFP credential is a good sign that a prospective planner will give sound financial advice. Still, even those who pass the exam may come up short on skills and credibility. As with all things pertaining to your money, be meticulous in choosing the right planner. . . .

A growing number of financial planners make money only when you pay them a fee for their counsel. These independent financial planners don’t get a cut from life insurers or fund companies. You might pay them a flat fee, such as $1,500, for a financial plan. Or you could pay an annual fee, often 1% of all the assets—investment, retirement, college-savings and other accounts—they’re minding for you. Others charge by the hour, like lawyers. . . . more

Comment Re:And is an example of the worst... (Score 1) 102

One reason why there was prosperity for all and not only the top 1% was related to the strength of unions. As the unions in the US got weakened and disbanded, so did the salaries and rights of workers decrease. The working class lost a lot of their negotiating power, and by now even lost the memory of those different times and conditions.
In the 50s, 60's and 70's, being left-leaning actually meant something. Today it's often a synonym of politically correct moron. Back in those decades the ultra-rich feared socialists and communists. Today's "liberals" are no threat to them. They would be ecstatic if Hillary became president.

Comment Re:How is this newsworthy? (Score 1) 282

So you think that just because you decided to kill them, they didn't have the right to live? That's really your take on things?

If you initiate violence, you are giving up your OWN claim on your right to live. You have the right up until you infringe on someone else's. That's simple, rational stuff. If you can't use reason in your world view, then you are by definition looking at things irrationally. If you act irrationally, and it results in you doing something like killing those 9 people, then you have waived your own right to your life. Do you get that? You don't need a government to tell you that. But if you can't figure it out without a government telling you that, please do the rest of us a favor and don't do anything dangerous like voting.

Comment Questionable sanity (Score 1) 114

One crappy cord, and his $1500 computer would be fried.

From the article. It almost sounds like the guy was determined to continue his quest for a crappy cable until he destroyed an expensive laptop.

Any sane person - or one using equipment they have paid for, themselves - would have tested on something less expensive if not actually sacrificial. But no! This guy decides that a high-end computer should be his victim.

Comment Nope (Score 3, Interesting) 17

It didn't stop developing this. It never started.
The "Quality of Life" shit has been teased by Nintendo for years and nothing had ever come of it, and nothing ever will.
It was simply a buzzword bandied about to tease investors along with in order to prevent them from demanding that Iwata step down.
Iwata died, so it's not longer needed.

The mobile shit is going to be quarter-assed at best, as is their My Nintendo and Miitomo shit (register your account names if you give a shit on the 17th, but it's just another abortion of an account system to replace the existing abortions of Miis, Club Nintendo, NNID, etc.).

Nintendo's job right now is stringing along investors until they can reveal their next console, which is codenamed "NX". Nintendo swears up and down that this won't be a console/portable hybrid, so you can bet your ass it'll be exactly that. Nintendo is a very Japanese company and in Japan consoles are dead, dead, dead. Portables are dying as well. The only games that sell in the Japanese market today are trashy mobile games. Nintendo of America has absolutely zero say in what Nintendo does, so despite the western markets being where Nintendo can make money they will continue to chase after a market that has largely given up gaming.

I expect the NX to be nothing more than a handheld like the 3DS (dual screen or not, who knows, but probably without the 3D) that you can connect to your TV like the failed version of the Vita or the nVidia Shield things. Nintendo's mobile efforts will be side-games and shitty apps no one will care about. You won't be playing a proper mainline Pokemon on your phone unless you're emulating one of the classics, despite the fact that Nintendo would make obscene amounts of money if they let it happen (Pokemon is made by The Pokemon Company, but Nintendo has control and oversight). Instead you'll get an app where you can have your Mii store notes for you, you'll get a Pikachu-themed calendar that does 10% of what your current Google / Outlook shit already does, and you'll get a Pokemon-skinned game like Pokemon Shuffle.

I'd love for the "X" in "NX" to stand for x86, meaning that Nintendo is:
1 - Developing a traditional console based on x86 hardware
2 - Giving 3rd parties even less reason to not port to their platform
3 - Cutting off backwards compatibility with the Wii U / Wii / GameCube (yes, the Wii U can run GameCube games since it's inherently the same architecture as the 2001 console, it just lacks the controller ports and ability to load the smaller discs - homebrew lets you get around both limitations)

But I'm used to Nintendo's ways, and I know whatever they trot out will be a disappointment overall, but worth it for the few stellar IPs you can only get from Nintendo.

Comment Re:What a bunch of jerks (Score 1) 415

Of course a vast majority of private companies are willing to throw money at any conservative group who will take it if it will get them taxed and / or regulated less. Both sides of the economic political spectrum have their major backers and there is a shit ton of money in the right's

That's not really true. Big companies always hedge their bets by contributing to both sides. The large ones actually like more regulation because it stifles the competition and helps them retain their market share. Corporations like being partners with government, and avoid candidates that eschew corporate influence in crafting regulation. Commerce of every kind is so heavily regulated these days, that companies lobby for specific forms of regulation that provide them a competitive edge. They rarely if ever lobby to reduce regulation. And they already have so many tax loopholes in the thousands of pages of tax code they just hire accountants to avoid taxation, using foreign subsidiaries if necessary.

Comment Re:Better transistors? (Score 1) 275

People may have restated it in many silly ways, but what they actually mean is "Computers become twice as good every 18 months or so." Whether it's multiple cores, or faster clock speeds, or better RAM throughput, that's still what it amounts to: twice as good computers.

I think that's pretty much failed, then, for general purpose computers. At one time, I actually used to upgrade about every 18 months, and would see a really nice boost in performance. That's not so much the case anymore, it takes more like 3-4 years.

Comment Why do we need a new block cipher? (Score 1) 68

What is wrong with existing block ciphers like AES?
AES has been in widespread use for over a decade and to the best of my knowledge, there is still no practical attack on it (unless someone has built a working quantum computer and not told anyone about it). Its totally free of patents and IP issues. Its been implemented in a huge variety of hardware and software (including the Intel CPU that I am using to make this posting).

Even the NSA trusts AES enough to certify it for use protecting top secret information.

Comment Re:How is this newsworthy? (Score 1) 282

In a modern society arms are useless.

Really? Then why does every single political leader - across the spectrum, including flaming lefty tyrants, eastern European strongmen, laid-back Scandinavian royalty and elected officials, mayors of cities, etc. - have armed protection at their disposal?

Why do police departments train in the use of arms? Why do militaries, even strictly defensive ones, understand the need to be able to use arms?

It's nice for you that you live in a fantasy world where there is no need for a 90-pound woman to ever defend herself against a man three times her size. Where is it, exactly, that you live that there are absolutely no violent people, no robberies, no rapes, no crimes that endanger lives? Please be specific, and if you would, please link to some reports that show your zero crime rate. Not that you will, of course, because you're full of it, and you know it.

Comment Re:How is this newsworthy? (Score 1) 282

What a load of shit. Without a government, you have no rights. Go live in a jungle sometime...

Wow, you really haven't thought this through, have you? You should.

So, you and another 100 people are in the jungle. 10 of you decide to get together in a group (you know, assembling) and chant something they think is important (you know ... speaking). Who is giving them the perfectly natural behavioral elbow room to assemble and express themselves? The other 90 people who aren't even paying attention to them? The trees? No. These are perfect examples of "natural rights." If some of the other 90 people decide to get together and force those 10 people to no longer gather, or no longer speak their minds, they are infringing on their freedom to assemble and speak.

The US constitution recognizes this, and its first amendment explicitly says that the government can't infringe on that right. There's no place in the constitution that defines the right to assemble or speak ... those are a given. They are self-evident, natural freedoms that can only be limited by other people or groups. Those 10 people don't need the other 90 to do anything in order for their group of 10 to be able to gather and speak. They can do that without any action or permission from anybody. If someone decides to take action shut them up, that's infringement of that right.

Without a government, a society, a rule of law, etc there is no such thing as 'rights'.

Nonsense. Without rule of law, there is no protection of rights. You really think that your right to speak comes from the government? You truly don't understand that it's the government's job to prevent other people (and those same government institutions) from forcibly shutting you up?

Slashdot Top Deals

Elliptic paraboloids for sale.

Working...