Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Sure (Score 3) 445

I have. It's easy. You can buy entire systems with an Android-based phone built right into them. You will (of course) need an account (contract or PYG) with a carrier to use the phone, but they are available aftermarket.

More commonly, people just replace it with a Bluetooth calling enabled system that allows them to connect to their existing smartphone. So unless you are driving a 1980's era Bentley with the "Robin Masters" built-in telephone handset, you won't have a problem.

Comment Re:This is already the case with in-dash GPS. (Score 1) 445

Why go to all that trouble? Why not simply replace the existing system with a drop-in aftermarket one with Bluetooth connectivity for smartphones? Or, if you MUST have a built-in system, build your own with a Raspberry Pi as a processor.

This is why I never buy the fancy stereo option. It's easier and cheaper to go buy an aftermarket one with all the same features and more and have it installed than to buy the top-of-the-line auto system with no support.

Of course, I also drive a Jeep, so I'm not exactly the "bells and whistles" kind of guy anyway.

Comment Re:1st! (Score 1) 205

Technically speaking, the "current" Congress is the Lame Duck Congress. The Congress that is in effect for the next 2 years is seated Jan 1 2013. So as long as this isn't voted on until after Midnight on Jan 1 2013, then it is indeed legal as it only binds the sitting Congress.

Personally, I am all for a Constitutional Amendment to keep the Internet free of regulation. I am also for a Constitutional Amendment stating that Congress may not delegate it's lawmaking ability to unelected bureaucratic government organs. As it stands now, it can do that, only the laws that come out of these organs are simply re-branded as "rules". Which is how the Internet would continue to be messed with even WITH Issa's law in place.

We HAVE to prevent any unelected officials from being able to make rules which act as de-facto laws. People making laws must be answerable directly to the people or the states. Thus, we need a Constitutional Amendment to do that.

Comment Re:When Hostess closes.. (Score 4, Informative) 674

It didn't matter either way petteyg. The pensions were dead anyway. They were utterly unaffordable and had already hit the cutting room floor. At this point it was either "save your job and get a 401k" or "lose your job and get jack squat". The Baker's unions chose jack squat for themselves and the other 18000 employees and management at Hostess.

As an example of how bad it was there, the Teamsters Union, probably one of the strongest Unions in the US took the deal Hostess offered them, which was the same as they offered the Bakers union.

The bakers union refused to face reality, and 5000 people in a union sunk a multi-billion dollar company and put 18000 other people out of work.

Who's the effing dimwit now?

Comment Re:And nothing of value was lost (Score 5, Informative) 674

it wasn't Hostess management that did this. it was the Baker's Union. Hostess was in the midst of a managed reorganization to try and save it. Even the Teamsters union was going along with Hostess because they could see that it was this or no more jobs.

The Baker's Union (and possibly you as well) is living in a Marxist fantasy land where behind every "evil proletariat oppressing capitalist" is an endless pile of money that he just won't share. Back in reality the money was gone and it was this, or liquidation. The Baker's union chose liquidation. Not just for themselves (about 5000 people) but for the OTHER 18000 employees (including Management) too! Don't blame management for something they didn't cause.

Hostess will now be entering a court-ordered liquidation, and the brand rights will (if fate has a sense of humor) be sold to a non-union company in a right-to-work state. As it should be.

Comment Re:It's a sad sign of the times (Score 1) 467

until those externialities are captured in the cost of a barrel of oil, the playing field against clean alternatives is not level. thus the need for subsidies on clean alternatives. because the free market simply cannot handle external costs in a legitimate way.

Except that these "clean" alternatives have externalities of their own which are close to, if not equal to those of the oil industry. More complex ones, and much more difficult to quantify ones, but they are there nonetheless. EVERYTHING has externalities that aren't counted into the cost. This is a fact of life.

So demanding that your preferred form of energy production receive special treatment over other forms because of your personally most hated externality is not only irrational, it entirely undermines your argument in favor of "clean" alternatives.

To wit: The government should simply stay out of it. No repressing or encouraging one form of energy or another. The Market will out the most cost effective and desirable energy supply without government interference.

Comment Re:Huh? (Score 1) 816

I thought of that too. He would be perfect in the role. (Would be funny too as he is quite rotund. Seeing his flab sticking out from under the Darth life support suit would be a hoot.)

But modern Disney is not nearly that creative. They've been riding on Eisner's "lawyering" via continual copyright extensions for YEARS now. Most of their best recent stuff has actually been Pixar's work with Disney acting as financial backer.

Frankly, Eisner should have spun off the corporate side of Disney into a generically named holding company (Mickey Holding LLC or something like that) and allowed the creative side to remain as Disney a long time ago. It would have kept the Disney brand pure and untainted and probably have made him more money in the long run.

At any rate, I'm not really upset about this. Honestly, Disney can't do any worse than Lucas has with the Star Wars franchise, and frankly, their animated version of Star Wars has not only been more Canon faithful, but better written than the first two prequels. It was long past time for Lucas' ego to be removed from the Star Wars universe. Disney will do fine with Star Wars, although I suspect that our chance to return to the "gritty" universe version of the original trilogy is long past gone.

Also, if I remember my Canon, Don't the next 3 books (Ostensibly the most logical choices for the follow-up trilogy) follow almost immediately after ROTJ? All the OT actors are OLD now. Are they going to do a series reboot or are they going to just CG the entire thing?

Comment Re:Looks like the AG actually read the law (Score 1) 817

And this is where the OSCE is wrong, due to the way that the US Constitution is written.

No treaty signed by the federal government can trump the Constitution. And it is in the Constitution where the states' control over election law is enshrined. Therefore, the treaty is simply invalid.

Regardless of whether OSCE polling observers is a good idea or not, it is, under Texas state law, via the Constitution of the United States, ILLEGAL.

Comment Re:Pry XP from cold, stiff fingers (Score 1) 727

It's worse than even that. The only "new" hardware in my house other than smartphones is my wife's netbook, which I bought for her back in 2010. My own laptop is a Lenovo T60 with a dual-core CENTRINO processor in it. Both the netbook and my T60 run Win7 32bit with all the pretties turned on without trouble. I have an old desktop running win7 32bit as well, it's an old old AMD x3200 system with 2gb of RAM.

Why haven't I bothered to upgrade? Well, most everything I need to get done I can get done on this older but still fully functional hardware. I don't game on my PC, mostly because as a busy 40+ yr old father of three I simply don't have time for that in my life anymore. When I game, I play casual games on my Android phone. Not only am I not alone in this, I'm actually fairly typical of people in my age group.

The people who would normally be gaming on Windows PCs and the target market for new OSes and new PCs would be the 20-30 demographic. This is the EXACT demographic that is hurting the most in the current recession. Many of the younger members of this group can't get jobs, or are underemployed. As such, they aren't in the market for new PCs and are sticking with what they have. if they have any money, they will spend it on a new phone first, a PC is much farther down their list.

So it's bad all around for Microsoft. I see Win8 getting about as much traction as Vista did. Enough for them to be able to SAY it was a success, while quietly excising Metro from desktop and server versions of Win9.

Comment Re:Good that he reported it (Score 2, Interesting) 249

This is true enough. Since the 1960's much of the US Government has been infected with Leftists who don't believe in Property rights. thus they have spent 50 years slowly whittling away at it through laws passed at midnight on a weekday, various "rules" passed by unelected leftists bureaucrats, and by activist leftist judges. All with the intent of placing into law that you DON'T actually own any land or anything on or in it. this has been happening both at federal and state levels, with the more leftist controlled states being worse.

By way of example, see New York State. You own a farm? Discover oil, or coal, or some other mineral resource on it? Go ahead and TRY to sell that resource. You will find that your "Mineral Rights" don't actually exist. Oh, you still legally HAVE them, but you can't actually USE them due to all the other regulations in place.

The same goes with Archaeological finds, treasure finds, et al. If you find anything of potential archaeological, historical or intrinsic value on your property, TELL NO ONE.

- If it is archaeological, DESTROY IT or re-hide it as fast as you can. Or your entire property is forfeit to Eminent Domain as an Archaeological site.

- If it is historical, Keep it to yourself, unless you want your property declared a historical site and thus ineligible for further improvement. (IE: You won't be allowed to fix up your now historical house without a mile long ream of paperwork. Even if the roof is leaking.)

- If it is intrinsic, such as gold or silver coins, jewels etc, then TELL NO ONE, buy a small jeweler's forge and melt down the coins into small bars, remove the jewels from any settings and melt down the settings, then quietly place all of it into a safe deposit box (preferably in the caymans if you can afford it). Otherwise the US Government will simply TAKE IT from you and you will then have to pay a tax on the value of the stuff you now no longer have, thus bankrupting you for having the temerity to find something valuable.

One of the first things that despots and leftists do is remove personal property rights. If not directly, then by a thousand regulations. If you want to keep your stuff, then you keep quiet.

Comment Re:Learn to spin news like this... (Score 1) 208

I don't know how you think a reduction in the extent and power of the government is going to lead to less corruption/quote

Really? So you've never heard the truism "Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely"?

The founders understood this. that is why the US government is supposed to have powers that are both Limited, and strictly enumerated. And anything left off is either assigned to the states, or remains with the individual.

Sadly, since about the turn of the previous century, the US government, via egregious and intentional misreadings the Commerce and General Welfare clauses of the Constitution, has been rapidly gathering power unto itself while straddling Americans with ponzi schemes like Social Security.

We have reached the tipping point on the size of our government. We must now either reduce it's size and scope back to what was originally intended, or travel down the path to insolvency and collapse.

Comment Re:Laugh... (Score 4, Insightful) 140

I don't think Laxori666 was intimating that "The Market" was broken, but rather that our regulatory systems (that would include the Patent system) have shackled it to the extent that it can be more profitable to engage in legal assaults against your competitors than to actually PRODUCE something new for sale.

Now, Apple is clearly doing both, but the fact that the legal avenue is even viable for them to bother pursuing should be of great concern to anyone wishing to see greater vibrancy and energy from the marketplace.

Slashdot Top Deals

Honesty is for the most part less profitable than dishonesty. -- Plato