Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


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:They still don't get it (Score 1) 204

I have a feeling they're not talking literally, ie they're not presenting a UI for desktops that's touch based, or a UI for phones that's WIMP based. I'd assume it's more "If you have a feature available in one place, unless it's totally irrelevent, it'll appear in the other."

Comment: Re:B0ll0cks... (Score 1) 518

The allegation against Clinton is that she used a third party email account, not that she didn't retain records.

I find it improbable to say the least that Clinton's email wasn't backed up by her own staff on a regular basis. It gets kinda important when the President of Hostilatia tells you that she's going to invade Allyastan because of a slight she perceived in an email you sent three years ago.

Comment: Re:B0ll0cks... (Score 4, Informative) 518

Not defending her, but both your excuse that the other lizards did it

Did you respond to the wrong post? Nothing I wrote can be read as "The other lizards did it" - not without cropping the entire post to remove all context.

The point I made (I'm not even "excusing" her) is that the law she's accused of breaking is an executive decree that was made TWO YEARS AFTER SHE LEFT OFFICE.

Comment: Re:B0ll0cks... (Score 2) 518

Back up a bit: what if she's right? What if the rules that applied during her tenure are not the current rules? What if Obama created the current rules two years after Clinton left the State Department?

And what if she was doing the exact same thing as (to name a largely reputable figure on "the other side" that few people suspect of corruption) Colin Powell had done?

Comment: Re:The idea was a good one, the execution poor (Score 1) 201

by squiggleslash (#49169035) Attached to: That U2 Apple Stunt Wasn't the Disaster You Might Think It Was

I'm pretty sure that my analogous hypothetical contract with my cleaning service doesn't include a clause about being allowed to deliver an unsolicited U2 CD, but nonetheless if they did it I wouldn't be upset in the way the other people on this thread are being.

Slow Down Cowboy!

Slashdot requires you to wait between each successful posting of a comment to allow everyone a fair chance at posting a comment.

It's been 4 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment

Chances are, you're behind a firewall or proxy, or clicked the Back button to accidentally reuse a form. Please try again. If the problem persists, and all other options have been tried, contact the site administrator.
Reply to: Re:The idea was a good one, the execution poor </pre>

Comment: Re:Deja vu all over again (Score 1) 108

No, I'm not confusing the two, they're not the subject of this discussion which is ARM vs ix86. It's certainly correct that you also need the hardware to be open, but that's another entirely unrelated issue, and has nothing to do with ix86's legacy software compatibility.

Comment: Re:The idea was a good one, the execution poor (Score 1) 201

by squiggleslash (#49166239) Attached to: That U2 Apple Stunt Wasn't the Disaster You Might Think It Was

Apple didn't break into a house though, they had an arrangement with you where they had the keys. It'd be more like the cleaning service (OK, I know, you don't have one, I don't either, but bear with me, the point is it's a commercial entity with permission to enter your home) coming into your home one day and leaving a U2 album, with a sticky on it saying "Thanks for being our customer - the maid", prominently on your CD shelf.

In order to receive the music, you had to already have an arrangement that newly bought music would be automatically downloaded and installed on your iDevice. If you didn't have that enabled, no U2 album. You'd already given permission to them to "put (other) music on your iDevice", what you hadn't necessarily done was given them permission to put this specific album on it. They had a key. You gave them the key.

Did it matter that they used it? They used it to give you a free gift. Why is this a major problem?

Comment: Re:Deja vu all over again (Score 1) 108

Not being cruel but being open source and ARM a recompile away was supposed to be their big boon

Yeah, but you and I and the rest of the world knows that this isn't true in practice. Developers are familiar with x86, some ports don't simply recompile flawlessly (though 99% do), and there are benefits to having a single base of binaries that need maintaining - if there wasn't, we'd all be running Gentoo. There's also some binary-blob stuff out there, Flash plug-ins, "official" builds of Chrome et al, some video codecs, and, of course, Wine.

Pretty much the only person who can happily hope from CPU arch to CPU arch with merely a recompile is Richard Stallman, because he's really the only person in the world who actually doesn't run code unless he has the source code to it. But he's not going to be buying a 3G tablet anytime soon so...

Comment: Re:The idea was a good one, the execution poor (Score 2) 201

by squiggleslash (#49164735) Attached to: That U2 Apple Stunt Wasn't the Disaster You Might Think It Was

I think terms like theft are a little over the top when we're talking about intentionally linking a device to a third party's download service, especially when that third party is delivering a service that barely impacts you in any negative way whatsoever.

Honestly, I'm still baffled so many people were upset about getting a few album from a popular, well respected, rock band, simply because it found its way directly onto people's devices. It's not as if it woke you up at 3am and started playing it!

Comment: Re:Deja vu all over again (Score 4, Interesting) 108

There wasn't really a legacy software advantage for x86 in the Mac arena either. In fact, of the three major tablet OSes, one actually does have a bit of a legacy software advantage if run over x86. I'll go into that in a moment but first:

As far as performance goes, I got an HP Stream 8 a few months ago. It's running Windows 8.1 and has a recent Atom in it, but obviously not a top-of-the-line thing because it's a really cheap tablet, despite supporting 3G. And I have to say I have no complaints whatsoever about performance. It's running everything I throw at it at a decent speed.

Now I'd admit, mentally I'm comparing it to Android. The fastest Android device I've used was a Galaxy Nexus, and the Stream is easily smoother and more responsive than that. It may well be the difference is, in part, Windows and Metro - I get the impression Google really doesn't understand the importance of UI responsiveness. But the truth is with the Stream I really, really, have no complaints relating to speed.

Back on x86 legacy advantages: The other issue I'd raise is that there are quite a few "tablet operating systems" that are languishing in "Not Android" land that might well do well if more hardware comes out supporting x86. The stuff Ubuntu and GNOME are trying to make work might, for example, end up turning into something very, very, powerful if they can get the UIs fixed and if a surfeit of x86 tablets comes out.

Comment: Re:Soshill Justus (Score 0) 101

by squiggleslash (#49156323) Attached to: Twitter Adds "Report Dox" Option

but feel free to go back to Kotaku, which came out and actually BRAGGED about how corrupt they were

No, this never happened.

ignore the chat logs of GameJournoPro, where they literally got together to formulate a response when they got caught accepting both monetary and sexual favors

No. Two members of GJP did have a discussion about whether or not reporting on the harassment campaign against Zoe Quinn might be counter productive. GamerGate/Milo spun that as the drivel you just posted.

Bonus GG points for misusing the word "literally" in classic GG fashion BTW.

(which is why no less than 13 different websites all printed the EXACT SAME ARTICLE about how "gamers are dead" within an 18 minute span of each other)

No. This never happened. There was never a post claiming "gamers are dead". An article in Gamasutra was spun by those harassing Zoe Quinn as claiming that, but was actually about the market for games widening beyond the small set of violent insular males the industry has traditionally targeted. No article was posted in 13 different websites. Several articles expressing a similar point of view to the Gamasutra piece were posted within a 24 hour period, but the Gamasutra piece and the others were responses to current events, noteably the escalation of the attacks on Zoe Quinn, which had, before the articles had been published, been labeled "Gamergate" by prominent C-list right wing actor Adam Baldwin.

I'm not even going to bother continuing here. Every single statement made in the first few sentences of your piece is an outright lie, dating back to the false narrative posted by Gamergate supporters a month or so after Baldwin's coining of the term where, at Eron Gjoni's partial prompting, the phrase "Actually it's about ethics in gaming media" became GamerGate's defense.

We know GamerGate is about harassment. Other than a small number of women journalists, none have suffered harassment, not even the one supposedly at the center of the "Quinnspiracy". Meanwhile female gamedevs, and feminists posting critiques of the gaming industry, continue, today, to receive violent threats and other abuse. From you guys.

Stop whitewashing your repulsive movement, and grow up.

Information is the inverse of entropy.