Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Slashdot Deals: Prep for the CompTIA A+ certification exam. Save 95% on the CompTIA IT Certification Bundle ×

Comment I'm inclined to agree, but there is hope (Score 1) 87

I loved that movie.

However, it was about a bunch of actors thrown into a situation their characters on a long-canceled TV show should be in, who eventually figured out how to use their own abilities to win. You can't have character development like that in a typical TV show. The stupid parts of the ship that were created just to match things in bad episodes were fun, but that wouldn't last long before they'd either exhausted the possibilities or more than filled the ship with idiotic sets.

Unless they're going to do something like the Galaxy Quest TV show in the movie, which looked fairly mediocre.

The Galaxy Quest TV show reboot could be very awesome - there are tons and tons of Trek (hell, even B5) stuff that's great parody material. Super-powerful aliens (Q), weird alternate-realities that are too-much-like-reality, time travel... or things like how reboots and retcons are done.

And then there's sci-fi comedy like Red Dwarf which could lend some ideas. Or maybe pull stuff from Aliens or other scifi movies. There is a rich vein of material that awaits good parody.

I think there are dangers of being repetitive and derivative but there are opportunities out there too.

Comment Re:I work in online advertising (Score 5, Insightful) 256

Thanks for the explanation of how the advertising industry works. I really do think that commoditizing things that should really never be commoditized (i.e., home loans, ad placements, etc) creates a perverse incentive to such razor thin margins that cheating or lying becomes the only way to stay profitable.

In a larger sense, commoditization prevents competition on value. Everything competes on price, and quality isn't quantifiable as easily as price, and so there's a race to the bottom. Even if you build up a good name, a bigger player can undercut you on both price and quality for a while, drive you out of business and then completely drop the ball on quality and still rake in the profits (send a few $$ to reviewers or quality inspectors and buy a higher rating than you deserve).

Comment An iPad aint cheap (Score 1) 435

Race to the bottom? They're already there. They arrived with the debut of the iPad. That's a great irony of the situation that many people don't fully grasp. Apple created a new market by being the cheap option.

You're just making the mistake of assuming that fruity logo actually means something. Except for the novelty form factors, Apple is a PC maker just like anyone else. The same random collection of spare parts that's in a Mac are also in Dell and any other brand.

I'm surprised you think an iPad is a race to the bottom. It's not even a general purpose PC (wake me when I can code and compile iOS app on an iOS device without jailbreaking). An iPad is likely in the top-tier of most expensive tablets - you can get a Kindle Fire for about $150 these days - about 2-3x cheaper than the basic iPad.

Sure you could keep confusing the tablet market with the PC market, why not throw the smartphone market in there as well? That's just about as valid.

Comment Re:Yes - known for years. (Score 1) 435

I will ding Apple for seemingly starting the widescreen fad.

You'd be wrong then. Mac laptops are some of the few remaining that even support 16:10 while most PC laptops are 16:9. I mean, yeah, I prefer 4:3 but it's actually a huge difference to lose the last 10% of vertical space as you go to 16:9.

Comment Google DNS vs. Comcast DNS (Score 2) 278

Towards the bottom of the link you shared:

While OnHub doesn't track the websites you visit, your DNS provider can associate your web traffic with your public IP address. OnHub sets your default DNS provider to Google Public DNS. (This can be changed in the Advanced Networking settings of the Google On app.)

What could possibly go wrong?

Compare contrast with Comcast's DNS - Comcast owns NBC now so they have a vested interest in hunting down sharing of pirated content. I'd bet every single /.er is a legitimate target for them.

So do you trust Google or Comcast more here? Unless we're all running OpenDNS, and even then are you sure they're not selling your info too?

Comment Re:dump trump (Score 1) 686

You also further assume that anyone voting Republican must agree with their stances on issues that are against scientific consensus. I'm right leaning, but I don't vote Republican, nor do I agree with their stances on climate change among other issues.

While you may instead be supporting them due to immigration polices, or their "free trade" or "reduced taxation" policies - if you agree enough with them to vote for their candidates, then you are voting for those polices - even the ones you don't support.

We don't have a per-issue or per-policy voting like direct democracy, so for right now you vote for people and you get their agenda, you don't get to pick and choose.

Comment I've driven behind one of these cars (Score 4, Interesting) 549

They do very unpredictable driving school-level things like slow/stop where deep shadows fall on the road. Like very suddenly. And then they stay there for a few seconds.

I'm not surprised there's finally a rear-ending. I'm actually surprised it took so long.

Comment Re:Please reveal (Score 1) 101

Apart from SCO, RightsCorp, Righthaven, Lodsys, and other organizations that have built up "troll" reputations in certain circles, I can think of One Rich American Called Larry Ellison.

And that's just in computing. If you want to go up a league in EVIL, take a look at Cargill, Monsanto or any major oil company. Their list of sins are large and not debatable. If you go even further, take a look at international financial institutions like UBS or HSBC. And that's before we get into politicians, dictatorships, and the good ol' CIA (who was Oracle's #1 customer, now that I think of it).

Yeah, If Google's on the list of EVIL they've either got a long way to go, or have been completely stealth in comparison.

Comment Re:For 100 points... (Score 1) 101

It is much better to have a company which promises not to pull the trigger take possession of it, rather than leave it unattended for some sue-happy patent troll to get their hands on it.

Are those promises legally binding? If Google sold the patents, would new patent holders be legally bound to uphold those promises? I'm guessing the answers to both are no. I'm not so sure that tomorrow's Google will have the same intentions as today's Google. All it takes is a bit of revenue pressure, or hell, just a small change in management.

Comment Re:Seems reasonable. (Score 1) 53

Apple's 30% cut(apps that can only be signed up for online are OK; but such apps are forbidden to link to the signup page in-app; either no sign-up information, or Apple-provided payment mechanism only); which more or less assures that they'll be able to undercut their competitors on iOS, unless some miracle has made the labels 30% or more more generous in their dealings with that competitor.

When I setup my Amazon/Audible account, I did it on a web page (even if it was on iOS), and in fact, that's where I continue to make my purchases (the webpage simply directs back to the app once I've bought a book). It's fairly easy. With Spotify, it's even less of an issue - the user only has to do this transaction once. Arguably, Spotify should simply force users to do what Amazon/Audible do - transact outside of the App for purchases.

Why should Apple be forced to help Spotify make their App simpler piggybacking on the simplicity of iOS without renumeration? Allowing purchases within an iOS app is not some sovereign right of an app creator. It's Apple's rules, and is not dissimilar from Google's rules (even the % is the same - 30%).

Finally, Spotify is owned (20% from last accounting) [1] by the music industry - it's their (very successful) stalking horse into streaming music, which is partly why they've been so successful - Spotify got deals/labels that other apps (Pandora, LastFM) simply could not. It's quite ironic that Spotify is complaining that they can't compete -they've been the ones benefiting from an unlevel playing field for years.

[1] http://www.swedishwire.com/job...

Comment Small Greek potatoes in a large Euro salad. (Score 1) 364

I mean 300 billion $ (build up over the course of decades) Vs 3.5 trillion $ (in a month) ...

The thing about Greece is that if #grexit happens, Spain, Italy and other weak economies with large debt/GDP ratios will be "emboldened" to also exit the Euro.

While greeks are suffering crippling unemployment under the austerity measures approved by their former leadership, the rest of Europe is scared shitless of letting them "off the hook".

As you said, for $300B. The ECB and politicians are essentially incompetent, but are dealing with a very poor situation, the real fix should have been that the investors involved in the Greece debt take some pain, but they were made whole and the EU countries are now on the hook for Greece's debt.

Same ol' recipe for crony capitalism: privatize the gains, socialize the losses. And you wonder why banksters are held in such contempt...

Comment Re: How is this news for nerds? (Score 1) 1083

The restriction to look at now is whether the marital status of each spouse in the marriage at hand is single. Today it has to be. But there's not a good reason for it. (As already mentioned, administrative convenience is not a good reason). So why can't Alice, who is married to Bob, now also marry Carol? Bob isn't marrying Carol; the A-C marriage would be between two people only. You're treating Alice differently merely because she is already married.

So what happens to Alice's stuff when she dies? How are property rights naturally divided? I can tell you there would be different interpretations of what happens and that's a problem. You need new law or legal precedent to establish how that works.

Sure, it's not intractable, it's also not even something I'd be against. Equal protection, however, is based on "protected classes" and the state of "being married" is not one of those. Why should it be? Someone who is married is denied the joys of ... being married? That doesn't compute.

"The identical is equal to itself, since it is different." -- Franco Spisani

Working...