Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Traffic shaping and QoS is now evil? (Score 3, Insightful) 29

I guess they're assuming that offering these features will slow down other traffic.
Giving the customer the choice is a good thing. Forcing a choice on the customer is a bad thing.
If I don't use VoIP, I don't want part of my bandwidth cut off because I don'y use that type of service. If I do use VoIP, I don't want my call quality to suffer because someone else just started watching a video and it's buffering.

Comment Re:Welcome To The Machine (Score 3, Interesting) 90

"Now don't lie about how much you make and how much you owe. WE KNOW how much you make."

By and large that's true. That's the whole point of W2s and 1099s.

Intuit isn't protecting me from anything by attempting to force me to shell out $70+ per year for a scripted walk through the government forms.

If there's value to add, it's in live advice from tax professionals (which Intuit already markets as well). So whether it's federal, state, or local governments versus commercial services guiding the data entry doesn't bother me at all.

Comment Re:Mobile Video Quality (Score 1) 41

One risk is that non-discriminatory bandwidth management (eg, the stuff the bufferbloat team does, like fq_codel and CAKE) will not be easy to distinguish from the discriminatory stuff that enables the ISP to demand kickback and/or being paid extra by the provider of the service. That would result in shitty service for everyone and, perversely, more motivation to pay the ISP to work around the rules.

Comment Re:Makes no sense (Score 2) 91

The news sites share their content with readers so they can make money from ads. It's been that way since news papers were a thing.

Google wants to take their content and share it, bypassing the ads that pay for the content, showing ads that pay Google instead.
Do you see why those spending money to create the content might get mad?

Comment Re:Question (Score 1) 86

They're listed in Article I, Section 8.

general welfare of the nation.

Delivering wads of cash to some random non-profit organization does not fit that description.

Even presuming that your premise is correction (which non-profit organization would that be?), a large portion of the electorate and a string of court decisions say otherwise, so you'll just have to ineffectually rage at the country for "doing it wrong."

Comment Re:Question (Score 1) 86

Where does the federal government get the legal authority to "invest" in "clean energy?" I'm pretty familiar with the constitution and I don't see the word "invest" in Congress' enumerated powers.

You're not very familiar with the Constitution if you don't see the words "provide for the... general Welfare of the United States" and understand what it means. If your argument is as basic as "Congress can spend money," hence that part of Article I, section 8, clause 1 being known as the Spending Clause, "but it can't invest money in technological development through spending," then you're going to have a bad, bad day in court.

Could bullshit like this be the reason we're $30 trillion in debt?

No, that's attributable to Republicans' near religious belief that wherever we are on the Laffer curve, the optimal tax rate is still lower than it is now. Of course, the very notion of the Laffer curve belies that argument, because at a tax rate of 0 you collect, get this, 0.

Comment Re:unwise (Score 1) 49

Not even GNU C, the kernel is written in kernel C and C compilers have to be adapted to be able to compile it correctly.

GCC and Clang are the only compilers that work. There used to be support for icc as well, but compiler-specific tweaks are required for every compiler, and it was not worth the effort.

Slashdot Top Deals

Elliptic paraboloids for sale.

Working...