Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:what? (Score 1, Informative) 194

to add to my above, those who are in charge of firefox no longer interested making its core product better and secure. it is interested market and marketing, bowing to establishment ideology and legalese, etc etc

And making sure that it's not run by some guy who holds the same beliefs on gay marriage as Hillary and Obama did a couple of years ago.

Comment Re:But they're not white, so it's OK (Score 1) 197

And Americans are awfully quiet when christian politicians harass transsexuals with bathroom bills, and christians try to introduce bills that would authorize the killing of LGBTti people (fortunately, after the paperwork was filed, a judge ruled the attempt unconstitutional).

Did you even read that article? "After the paperwork was filed"? What does that even mean? He filed it with the "justice department" (all lowercase) according to the article.

So, in order to make something into law all I have to do is write it up and submit it to "the justice department", right?

Do you understand how utterly fucking stupid that whole thing sounds? Do you know how a state legislature even works?

Comment Re:No global deletion (Score 1) 91

Remind me again who is having their free speech silenced by this

Google. And in practice, the people who rely on it to have their content be found (i.e. everyone else).

3. Why does Google have free speech rights that normal companies don't, e.g. credit references can't report things that happened long ago by law, and can't claim free speech allows them to.

Maybe those companies should? The solution to "some idiots excessively weight events that happened 20 years ago" is not censorship of facts, it's to educate people that other people change and that needs to be taken into account.

Comment Re:Subpoenas and the right against self-incriminat (Score 1) 171

It sounds to me like the problem is a flaw in the constitution or the way it's being interpreted, to be honest. The prohibition against incriminating yourself is very obviously there to stop people being tortured until they falsely claim they are guilty. But giving up a password is not a proclamation of guilt or innocence either way. All it can possibly do is yield more evidence, hopefully leading to a more accurate outcome of the case.

I mean, under the same logic, search warrants should be illegal because by letting someone into your house you'd be "self-incriminating". Doesn't work that way.

I think the simplest fix to this problem the FBI has is for courts to stop treating "you must tell us the password" as falling under the self-incrimination clauses. It doesn't make logical sense, would yield a reasonable balance of power (FBI/other agencies cannot do bulk data harvesting from phones, which is the real danger here), puts protection of the device or not under the control of the court, etc. This is the compromise other countries have arrived at and it seems to work OK most of the time.

Comment Re: No problem (Score 1) 660

No it isn't. Absolutely nothing stops ad blockers using heuristics to identify "ad shaped images" or simply having manually written lists of DOM paths to nuke.

I find this whole attitude of "shut up whiners, make your ads EXACTLY meet my unique criteria or else I'll just benefit from your work for free - see if you can stop my nya nya" to be appalling.

Apparently people haven't thought through where this ends. It ends with someone eventually making a non-web content platform that doesn't support ad killers, uses video-game like "anti cheat" techniques and which gets the lions share of the best content because publishers are sick of being ripped off. You know, kind of like how the PC used to be the primary gaming platform in the world and eventually most of the AAA games were coming out on consoles first, and PC maybe or never. Basically, because of piracy and the console makers commitment to fighting it.

Comment Re:Cheap foreign helium atoms (Score 1) 336

I don't know about you, but I'm not getting any cheap, shoddily made helium atoms.

I'm with you. I always buy the Morton Salt at the grocery store because they use only premium sodium atoms. Also, some cheaper salt is made from chlorine atoms that are scavenged from public swimming pool water, basically old and worn out.

Comment Re:Roll-back as in play-back? (Score 2) 72

Banks can roll back transactions for various reasons, e.g. bankruptcy proceedings, mistakes by their own operators or by customers, or ... transactions that are fraudulent. The Metel gang obviously had a sense of irony in exploiting this ability to undo fraudulent transactions to their own benefit.

Comment Re:The 0.01% (Score 3, Insightful) 217

Doesn't it burn your ass to know that if she were to get fired, she'd walk away with tens of millions of dollars?

Why would it? To the class of workers Marissa Mayer belongs to, tens of millions of dollars is not a huge sum. Her net worth was about $300 million in 2012 when she took the the Yahoo job. Tens of millions of dollars to her is more like a tens of thousands of dollars to me, which would be a very reasonable severance package to someone in my position.

Just like you probably make far more money than people working in third world slums, Marissa Mayers makes far more money than you. Comparing the salaries of people in completely different classes of society is not very useful.

I totally agree with what you're saying. Here's where it breaks down. Mayer has a bunch of money due solely to incredibly good luck and timing. Nothing more. It has nothing to do with her abilities (obviously), education, or any of that. She was in the right place at the right time.

So she's in a "class" that's occupied by people who made a bunch of money at business, and powerball winners. Although she made her money in business technically the reality is that she's on the "powerball winner" side of the aisle, if you catch my drift. So it's not terribly surprising that when you put her into a position like this she falters.

Of course, she is in an impossible position, anyway, but the company should have pulled a real entrepreneur in if they wanted to have a radical turnaround.

Comment Re:If she really wanted to rescue the company... (Score 5, Interesting) 217

The company was going in the wrong direction before she was even hired. They hired her as a gamble to make a big change to save the company. It didn't work. Going back to the way it was is stupid, it wasn't working before. The only things worth keeping are its overseas holdings. The core company is worthless. Firing her and hiring a replacement won't change that. They took a big gamble and lost. There is no going back.

I would argue that the core company isn't "worthless", it's just worth far less than it used to be. Plenty of people still go to yahoo.com, use it for email, news, etc. i still go to the financial part if I want to find out more about a company as I've found their tools to be pretty decent for aggregating everything of interest about a public company.

That said I tend to agree with the investor who says that they should be around 3000 staff members. My question to him is also "what is the proper CEO compensation for a company with this revenue?" My guess is that it's not even in the ballpark of what Mayer is getting.

The bottom line is that there's still a business there, probably not any real growth potential. So the proper thing to do is downsize, concentrate on the core(s) that are profitable and be really good at those areas where you're known to be really good.

That's odd advice in the internet world where everybody wants perpetual growth, but there are plenty of stores in my town here that aren't looking to grow but rather provide steady income until retirement. We have to be realistic and understand that that particular model is also relevant on the internet.

Comment Re:Editing Comments (Score 1) 1834

Please! Don't do it! I beg of you! Say NO! to editing of comments! EVER! A person can post a response and or correction. Editing will ruin everything! Comments set in stone is Slashdot's saving grace, that and the archives. Don't ever let them be edited... And resist the temptation for unicode also. You don't need the hassles.

Well, at least allow emojis even if not all of Unicode.

Comment Re:No more paid posts by Nervals Lobster (Score 1) 1834

The problem that is correlated to this is a lot of these sorts of submitters also would submit a story about a story, just clickbait to bring traffic to their own site. It was doubly frustrating because for many such stories there were rejected submissions that actually went straight to the source.

Slashdot Top Deals

Consider the postage stamp: its usefulness consists in the ability to stick to one thing till it gets there. -- Josh Billings

Working...