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


Forgot your password?

Comment There is no uncertainty (Score 0) 249

Every time I point out the shaky grounds on which the so called climate "science" is founded I get lambasted by very vocal, very fanatical shouters telling me I am a denier.
The conclusion is clear: I am wrong, all others with doubts about climate "science" are wrong, climate "science" is really science, and there is no uncertainty AT ALL in climate science.

Comment Agree (Score 1) 333

I have been looking for a 13 inch ultrabook for a while now and I had been thinking exactly the same.
I already have a 15 inch laptop with 1920x1080. There is no way I would need or want a higher resolution on this screen size; it fits perfectly. The same on 13 inch would be nice as it gives a bit more room to play with how much content you get on the screen versus the size of the content.
But 3200x18800 on 13 inch is overkill. In addition, I would be paying lots of EUR extra for something that does not "do" anything for me. And I would say does not do anything for anybody.
In my eyes this is a marketing trick, just like the whining about how many petapixels your camera or phone cam has and how many 1000 times it can zoom in.

Comment Re:Sorry, you're wrong. (Score 1) 335

"Computer Science or Engineering". When do programmer boys -also the "professor" ones forever walking the halls of "computer science" "universities" finally get it: /Nothing/ in or around computers is science. It's just and only a craft.

Your text is misleading; the difference is only between worse and better craftsmen.

Comment Question flawed and misleading (Score 1) 273

There's probably many more angles to reply to this. Naming just a few:
One thing would be the /spirit/ of privacy laws; the government should not access our data, /regardless/ of the method.
Another point: the rules are outdated with repsect to information we give to companies: a) Much information we actually don't /want/ to give to companies, but are forced to or enticed to anyhow (and the government doesn't protect us from this); b) Information to companies is enourmouisly easier and more effeciciently abused or leaked by compnies than before the digital age; c) Privacy laws should already always have included (bits of) private information we choose to, or have to share with companies.
Another: (Extension of above) We don't simply "willingly" share; we are coerced into giving up this data, it's just that not all people see it as clearly as that (even so many do, and many more would if explained and explicitly asked), and even fewer are vocal about it. But it's still the case. So the question posed by this government is actually flawed to begin with.

Comment Re:Downfall (Score 1) 98

Aha, a karma whore. Well, I might be mentally retarded in your view, but that mostly just gives good insight on your own mental capacities ...
You are probably too young and unexperienced to have seen the fallout of the first ten years of centralised computing on Windows platforms, it was hell, outright hell.
Properly implemented centralised computing can be good for a few scenarios, like the one you mentioned. Problem is that Citrix has taken around 10 years to come anywhere close to maturity, but has been forced long before that already upon troves of unsuspecting and understandably unwilling clients. Further it really is outright unfit for quite a number of use cases. And finally, maybe most importantly though rarely touched upon, is that to properly manage (not technically, but "IT manage") such an environment, really big changes have to be made in IT departments, which rarely happened. And still rarely happens.
Maybe things have dramatically changed in the last few years, but at least until a few years ago, SuckTricks was indeed, as you say so colourfully, "shit".

Comment Re:US Metric System (Score 1) 1387

"Imperial: Bringing down rockets, satellites and planetary orbiters since 1957".
It's retarded morons like you that can bring a whole country to standstill. If you're not willing to improve becuase you see no benefit, you're voting for regression, becausae other WILL improve. And you will fall victim to those others who do ...
And especially the "ehance your [own] life" argument is really often-stated, but nonetheless really, Really, REALLY dumb. "Mhooo; I see no enhancement in my own limited 1 foot [sic] range of sight, so it must be worthless".

Comment Re:Why do we need a desktop client? (Score 1) 464

... and labels are superior to folders (objectively so--they do the same thing as folders, only with an added feature)...

You are a fool. Probably a developer or so.
Labels are not superior to folders. Yes technically they offer more possibilities than folders. No that's not necessarily a good thing.
Having a predefined structure that you thought about, that is always visualised, and which fits for you to place all your mail in, is far better usabilty than being forced to attach zero, one, up to infinite criteria to each mail each time you receive one; It costs more time, your set of criteria will grow to infinity over time, you will get double labels meaning the same, you will not label emails in the same class with the same labels over time. In the end you are left with a bizarre pile of puke that has become usable only by searching it. And for searching a pile of puke you do not need labels.
Labels are very much inferior to folders.
And by the way, dargging in gmail sucks mightily, just like any other functionality. Both Yahoo mail and even Live Mail (sic!) are enourmously better, go figure what that means :(.

Slashdot Top Deals

I judge a religion as being good or bad based on whether its adherents become better people as a result of practicing it. - Joe Mullally, computer salesman