Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Richard Stallman Does This. (Score 1) 36

EMACS is indeed the only software that ever caused me physical injury.

After a multi-day editing binge on a CKIE keyboard I went to the campus medical center. Muscle strain on my left pinky from rotate/stretch/curl of my large hands to hit control ...

Now, I would never tamper with University property but a couple of days later days later, there was a little piece of plastic next to my keyboard , and the shift-lock no longer toggled allowing me to remap the control key to where God meant it tone. . .

hawk

Comment Test your equipment (Score 5, Informative) 118

When it comes to USB, test your equipment, even if you haven't upgraded to Type C yet.

I've personally discovered two counterfeit or substandard (depending upon your personal definitions of the terms) USB charging cables.

What I use to test is a Samsung Galaxy Tab 3 10-inch tablet. This tablet wants approximately 0.7-0.8 amps at 5 volts, but it will charge in a degraded mode if the charging cable isn't up to snuff, or if it's plugged into a desktop or laptop (which normally only supply 0.5 amps).

Every cable should begin by charging in the degraded mode when plugged into my laptop and then upgrade to normal charging mode when plugged into any of my half dozen or so 2 amp USB chargers. Among over a dozen cables, I detected two that were not up to snuff, and you'd be surprised at my results. One cable from the dollar store was garbage, but another, colored cable from the dollar store that had fancy LEDs was fine. Three 10 feet cables were fine. The other reject was an average-looking cable with an average feel. It did not appear to be substandard or counterfeit.

If you want to get fancy you can get a device from banggood.com that measures current and voltage across the USB port. They cost about $3 shipped. That is how I determined that my tablet will draw approximately 0.7-0.8 amps. From that experience I'd be surprised if many devices actually draw a full 2 amps. It's nice to have a 2 amp supply, though, because it gives you a safety factor if your cables are somewhat substandard. Maybe the newest 2016 phones will draw close to 2 amps. Get the meter and find out!

Based upon my experience, the best USB chargers are from Samsung and anything else that has a counterfeit-resistant UL sticker. And also based upon my experience, if you notice that a charging cable is getting warm, you should probably replace it because it's dissipating electricity as heat rather than conducting it.

Comment Re:Caller ID Blocker (Score 3, Insightful) 232

We're talking about telemarketers here. If you can physically harm them over the phone line... it might delay the next call. Totally worth it.

If no innocents are being killed, I say fire at will, stake those vampires!

They have no right to call you, you merely don't have methods to stop them. Often they're calling in violation of the law, and if they harm themselves doing it, well they should buy telephones that don't harm them. Blaming their victim for screaming too loudly is pathetic; it is their telephone manufacturer who has a duty to make a safe device, not the person they call with it.

Comment Re:Thanks, Obama (Score 1) 129

It is pretty derpy of you, though.

Did you know how health care is done in Europe? Did you check if their system is a failure? You make a bunch of assertions based on speculation about things for which there are real comparisons available in the world.

You're just hand-waving about the 5th Amendment. You heard on some radio program some blowhard mad about it, so you want to say stuff. But for somebody who hasn't been fed that issue, you don't even identify the claimed problem. If you were complaining about the 4th Amendment, there are well established complaints to be made indeed, but you'd still have to actually make the complaint in a reasoned way at the start of any discussion about it, even with people who might agree; if those people are rational beings, anyways.

You are certainly right that if Republicans of yesteryear had actually meant any of the shit they were claiming to support, they would be dancing in the streets over Romneycare having been passed, among other things.

It may be that some you'll realize that the Democractic Party is the center-right pro-business party in the US, but I won't be holding my breath. Few people can overcome the color-coding of the flags. Once a red, always a red.

Comment Re:Yeah, right... (Score 1) 129

Sorry Mr Nutcase, but you seem to have gotten that backwards. The UK authorities will apply directly for the US warrant, and if it is approved then the data will be collected by the US and handed over to them. When they say that US citizens data won't be given even when they "emerged" in the investigation, that is what they mean. The way you read it it would contradict itself, but actually it doesn't. This is data that is already stored by the NSA, but requires a warrant to view. This is not a warrant that would allow UK agents to come to the US and install phone taps. ;)

Comment Re:So it begins (Score 1) 129

No, we didn't even need to stop shooting them for invading our country until January, 1815.

But we're good friends, now.

Anyhow, this only applies to UK citizens who are physically in the US. It seems reasonable, but of course the details of whatever the actual proposed bill in Congress is is what will matter. If the actual bill is what is described in the summary, it won't be scary or even controversial outside of tin-hat circles.

I'm very suspicious of those people claiming that it is bad for there to be clear rules about wire taps. Are you people sure you're actually fighting on the side you tried to take? Don't just presume... stop, check your own uniform, make sure. ;)

Comment Re:Bet Alsop isn't used to being fired (Score 1) 337

It's little wonder then why Americans are so dependent on coffee, antidepressants and psychologists.

No, that is your tee-vee. Also known as a "boob tube." Don't believe everything it tells you. Also, the anti-coffee nonsense has been consistently disproved by science for decades. Coffee is good for you, and it is not strongly addictive.

The people who take a lot of anti-depressants are mostly the people whose private lives consist mostly of watching television. Without drugs, it would be an empty life. It has nothing at all to do with their work. If they work more hours, they will be happier, not the reverse.

As for psychologists, that is more of a European thing. It isn't even easy to find one here. Few people go for that nonsense. Way more common here are traditional "counselors," who simply listen, and talk to somebody in a supportive way. Working class people can't afford counseling, and often wouldn't even have time off during the right hours to schedule it! 1 session would cost 2 days wages for the working class. That is about 2 hours for a middle class professional.

I don't see how anyone can maintain a healthy work/life balance with those sorts of demands unless their working day is very short or long weekends are the norm.

Where I live all full time workers are entitled to four weeks annual leave, with some employers giving their staff a fifth week. Plus a certain number of days sick leave, but it's considered fraudulent to take those unless you're actually sick. Not unreasonable I think.

Right, you don't imagine workers who enjoy working hard. You can only imagine workers who just want to go home early, or stay home. Here we have workers for whom working hard is a moral issue; they agreed to be a laborer, and so be good at their position in life is to labor enthusiastically. You presume that to work harder or be more dedicated they must be less happy; what if they have increased sense of self, sense of place, because they are truly more dedicated to their toiling? Many of these workers keep working after they reach retirement age, and receive reduced pension payments because they're still working, but refuse to stop working even thought they're effectively throwing away half their wages; why? Because they enjoy working, they don't want to retire. They're already living the life they value, day after day.

You find it shocking that they only get a tiny bit of paid vacation, but many of them refuse to take it. What would they do, sit in a chair all week and be bored? I've seen workers forced to take a 1 week vacation hang out in the break room at work for most of the week, because that is where they want to be! With their team, their comrades, at work.

People who want a life/work balance don't work as laborers. But don't assume our laborers are their by mistake. The idea that workers would be more productive by being given a worse lot is funny; no, they're more productive because they believe in themselves, in their role in society. Extra time off is for people who don't believe in their role, and they'll never be the most productive even when they're doing a good job.

Most of the rich people also work a lot, also believe in their role, are highly productive at their hoarding activities, and take lots of "working vacations" where they don't actually take a single day off but they're working from the beach with a phone and laptop, and can take breaks to pose for photos with their families, who are actually vacationing.

Think about it; these are the people Europe drove out because they weren't willing to conform. Maybe conformists are less productive? Conformists see a dreamer staring out the window instead of looking busy, and think they're lazy. They don't see them toil all weekend building whatever they were dreaming of.

Comment Re:We've been goosed (Score 1) 113

Right, the non-actor acted but was not an actor, so now you can stop trying to correct me and shut up and go read about it.

In the phrase "paid actor" that is not the same word as just, "oh, a person was lying so that is acting so they are an actor." No, "paid actor" implies something different. It isn't even more or less bad, that's the stupid part of your argument. You want to be right because what happened was immoral and you were shocked and scandalized, but the problem is that instead of arguing for your moral outrage, you're arguing for details that were hyperbole rather than accurate description.

So go away, you're not even arguing for anything. You're arguing incorrect details. When somebody says, "it wasn't an actor it was an involved principle" you're not even contradicting them to say, "gosh saying a lie is acting so the person is an actor." You're just failing to comprehend the words, and insisting that words mean different things than the context makes clear. But no, telling your own lie is just lying; it doesn't make you an actor, or an acrobat, or a space alien, or whatever, even if acting or acrobatics might be used in a colorful description.

Comment Re:Bet Alsop isn't used to being fired (Score 1) 337

I didn't say that, so no. Your statement has 0% possibility of refuting what I said. Try again. If you didn't even re-phrase it to pretend that it is the same thing as what I said, you won't even convince me that you understood what I said; much less that your insight is superior.

Also, to change my opinion I warn you that you'll need to be using 30 year charts, not just 1 year where the accounting games gave certain countries inflated numbers that year. And I won't consider numbers that plot and scheme to include passive banking income as "worker productivity," because it isn't. Those profits aren't even "workers" in that phrase. Dollars are not workers, humans are workers.

There are other countries you could make a case for being #1, but they aren't Norway, Luxembourg or Ireland.

Comment Re:The Republicans are destroying our lives (Score 1) 174

Clinton was undecided, when she was Secretary of State it was her job to support whatever trade deals her boss, the President, was having negotiated. The deal was not yet actually negotiated though. Secretary of State is a diplomatic role, not a political role; they are not even supposed to be providing their opinions, they provide the official US Government opinions, because they're not elected they're appointed.

Post Secretary of State, when she is giving her own opinions, she started out undecided but hopeful, and as soon as the details of the agreement started leaking, she was opposed. She's been solidly opposed to it.

"You know, take the trade deal. I did say, when I was secretary of state, three years ago, that I hoped it would be the gold standard. It was just finally negotiated last week, and in looking at it, it didn't meet my standards. My standards for more new, good jobs for Americans, for raising wages for Americans. And I want to make sure that I can look into the eyes of any middle-class American and say, `this will help raise your wages.' And I concluded I could not." --Hillary Clinton, during the Democatic Party debates

Fact-checking isn't even hard. https://ballotpedia.org/2016_p...

She didn't change her position for the primary, that is a silly accusation. Was she supporting it during the TPA debate? No, she was already opposing it. When she was Secretary of State and made statements in support, she had also been told that they were going to include strong worker rights protections, and environmental protections, neither of which are included. None of the people who supported the idea of the deal before it was negotiated were told the deal would be as it actually is; they were told it would have the worker and environmental protections that past trade agreements lacked. Lots and lots of people would have supported a deal that had the right sort of protections, because trade barriers are often bad. The deal that was negotiated does a lot of other things, and almost none of those hopeful early supporters are supporting the deal.

Clinton has opposed the deal consistently since it was actually negotiated and existed as a thing with known details.

Slashdot Top Deals

There is very little future in being right when your boss is wrong.

Working...