Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Yup. (Score 1) 23

by Guspaz (#48941591) Attached to: Wi-Fi Issues Continue For OS X Users Despite Updates

I've got a 2012 Macbook Air running Yosemite. Wireless has been giving me problems on wake. Once it gets connected, it's fine. But just the other day, I woke the laptop up, and no matter what I did it could not see my 5GHz network, despite the fact that a bunch of my other devices could see/connect to it just fine.

I rebooted the Mac and it worked fine... but I shouldn't have to.

Comment: Re:Wow (Score 4, Informative) 98

by Guspaz (#48932905) Attached to: Canada Upholds Net Neutrality Rules In Wireless TV Case

The CRTC isn't corrupt, although they can sometimes get a skewed view of reality. They sometimes give too much weight to incumbent filings or taking on faith that the cost studies submitted by incumbents are accurate.

It's difficult to examine the cost studies, because they're filed under seal, so when Bell files a cost study that defines the tariff rates that independent ISPs have to pay, nobody can challenge the cost study.

Ironically, in one of the rare instances where Bell did expose a small part of one of their cost studies, it was found that they were costing out huge routers and then assuming a tiny usage of them. I think the specific case was Bell would include a 48 Gbps router in their cost study, and then claim that they only used 1Gbps of capacity on it. This meant 48x the cost for that part of the study, letting Bell charge more.

The CRTC did correct Bell's costs for that instance, but that is just the rare public thing we know about. How many other instances of fudging is there in cost studies that nobody ever gets the opportunity to challenge because they're filed in secret?

The independent ISPs have been asking for years to get the right to examine incumbent cost studies and other things that are filed under seal. The indies have proposed restrictions that would protect incumbent privacy, such as nominating a tiny number of people to see the data (such as a lawyer for the indie ISP), and to be under a nondisclosure agreement... the CRTC still hasn't done anything about it though. As a result, incumbent ISPs charge absurdly inflated costs for capacity to indie ISPs. I think Videotron is charging $23 per megabit for capacity on their last-mile network, and that's on top of all the other fees they charge like the cost of the DSL or cable line itself.

Comment: Re:That thing is enormous (Score 1) 33

by Guspaz (#48915415) Attached to: Getting Charged Up Over Chargers at CES (Video)

The difference is minor. You're talking about 10W per port on the Anker product, and 12W per port on the Octofire. This does not explain the enormous size of the Octofire product.

You could practically take half a dozen Anker charges, consuming less space, and get 360W of charging... not that there'd be much value in that.

Comment: Re:Good news (Score 1) 420

by Guspaz (#48889059) Attached to: Disney Turned Down George Lucas's Star Wars Scripts

Except Lucas didn't direct or write Empire, and he didn't direct or solely write Jedi. He came up with the story, and then other people wrote the screenplay and directed it. I think George Lucas isn't too bad at coming up with plot, but he's not so great at writing or directing. We've all heard the stories about how Star Wars was originally a rather terrible film that was saved in editing, but compare the quality of the dialog between Star Wars and Empire. There's a huge improvement between the two...

Comment: Re:They cured my acme, the cancer patient said.... (Score 2) 420

by Guspaz (#48889021) Attached to: Disney Turned Down George Lucas's Star Wars Scripts

Many of my problems with Into Darkness had to do with problems with the film itself, rather than as a Star Trek fan. Now, I've still got problems with it as a Star Trek film, but more on the level that they poorly copied something existing instead of coming up with something new. I think that the elements that they copied didn't work because they were trying to force many of them in for the purpose of making references rather than to make the film work. Even then, that's not really a problem because I'm a fan, it's a problem because of lack of originality, something not unique to Trek.

My main problems, though, were that they decided to fill the film with too much deus ex machina. It's like they wrote themselves into corners, and then decided to just do crazy stuff to resolve it that didn't make much sense, or that seem like they didn't think through the plot consequences. Like the whole "Did they just cure death with the magic blood? So death isn't a problem going forward?" issue.

That's not bad Trek, that's bad film-making.

Comment: Re:Less creepiness (Score 1) 324

by ClintJCL (#48869233) Attached to: What Will Google Glass 2.0 Need To Actually Succeed?
Sure. Literally, it did not.

In context? Switch out some of the nouns and verbs, and you get:

s/they/women/; #(men can get raped too) s/google glass/short skirts/; s/Glassholes/Sluts In Short Skirts/; #update pejorative s/punch/rape/; #update verb s/America/Saudi Arabia/; #helps my metaphor

You get:

Unless Saudi Women can make their short skirts less sexy, people are still going to want to rape Sluts In Short Skirts.

Sure, literally that does not justify it because they don't use the word justified.

But who are we kidding here? You insert a victim-blaming aspect into a situation that involves violence, but want to pretend that gives no justification to the perpetrator.

You're not fooling me.

Comment: Re:Less creepiness (Score 1) 324

by ClintJCL (#48869049) Attached to: What Will Google Glass 2.0 Need To Actually Succeed?
It's good to see the same fallacies dragged out over and over again. Helps cement the fact that wrong people aren't wrong due to being misinformed, but because they choose to repeat the same mantras to themselves over and voer again. I think I understand why the world is so full of violence now.

From Sharp minds come... pointed heads. -- Bryan Sparrowhawk

Working...