Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Re:Huh (Score 4, Informative) 567

It actually evolved entirely the opposite way. I'm a former employee of Progressive. They started out piloting it by having it in 24/7 (it was called MyRate at the time). They determined that largely, the behavior that they saw in 30 days was a good enough picture of someone's actual driving habits (i.e., it's exceedingly difficult to represent yourself as an amazing driver if you're not). That's why they switched to the current model and named it SnapShot. It costs money monthly to operate the device (SMS service), so if they can get the information without continually monitoring, it makes sense to operate with the current model.

Comment: It's the only way to kill him (Score 3, Informative) 533

There are only a handful of things that will get you sentenced to death under federal law. Yes, he could be charged with first degree murder, but that wasn't done on the federal level, so the jurisdiction of the commonwealth of Massachusetts would take precedence over federal law there (and there is no death penalty in MA). He can be charged FEDERALLY with nothing else that would be able to get him the death penalty. He wasn't smuggling aliens, did not destroy aircraft, did not perpetrate a drug-related drive-by shooting, didn't kill law enforcement officials, etc. Thus this is the only charge that the federal government can bring against him that could result in the death penalty. It's not about being politically charged - it's about them desiring to be able to kill him, and not having another way to go about it.

Comment: "Performance should closely match" (Score 3, Insightful) 271

by somarilnos (#43978133) Attached to: AMD Making a 5 GHz 8-Core Processor At 220 Watts

The summary suggests that the "performance should closely match the recently released Intel Core i7-4770K Haswell processor", but nothing in the article, or anything released about this chip so far, supports that. It's all just guesswork until we see some actual benchmarks from the chip.

I don't honestly expect we're going to be seeing performance parity from this chip (although I'd love it to be true). But that hasn't been AMD's selling point for me for a long time. Chances are, we're going to see a chip that breaks the 5.0 GHz barrier, under-performs relative to Intel's top end chip, but costs about half as much. That's been their game for a long time now, and I haven't seen anything that leads me to believe that this chip is changing that.

Comment: Re:Where's that checklist when I need it (Score 3, Interesting) 216

by somarilnos (#43341547) Attached to: FTC Awards $50k In Prizes To Cut Off Exasperating Robocalls
With that in mind... Rasmussen still gets enough people to respond to actually publish polls, and they strictly make automated calls to gather this information. That means that their intended purpose (spamming a large enough population with a low percentage chance play) is still a successful business model. All it is is spam for phones, and it wouldn't happen if it didn't work. No matter what peoples' attitudes are towards it.

Comment: I'm actually surprised... (Score 1) 48

by somarilnos (#43305577) Attached to: Razer Edge Gaming Tablet Reviewed
Given the brand name, I was expecting a cheap piece of plastic with some sort of glowy light, labelled 'gaming' to sell some units. Couldn't they instead have focused their energy on making a single product that a legitimate gamer would want to use, and then maybe branch out into trying to create a market for an overpriced, underpowered wannabe laptop with a low res screen?

It is the quality rather than the quantity that matters. - Lucius Annaeus Seneca (4 B.C. - A.D. 65)