Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Get HideMyAss! VPN, PC Mag's Top 10 VPNs of 2016 for 55% off for a Limited Time ×

Comment Re:As the saying goes. . . (Score 1) 96

Way back before twitter was hyped on TV, before it was big, it was being talked about in the RubyOnRails community, since it was a new site that used Rails. And so I saw it before the hype, though I didn't sign up. Actually, when I first saw it, you didn't even have to sign up, it was just some sort of unannounced beta. And it wasn't "microblogging" or whatever. Instead, it posed a simple question: What are you doing right now? And you were supposed to answer in less than n characters. And everybody was like, "huh? Wtf is this for?" They still don't really know what it is for. It is a communication medium that actually managed to promote the tagging of comments in a way that causes users to use tags.

Impressive, whatever it is. Though we had public communication and subject tagging even in the 80s on the BBSes.

Comment Re:Even if you disagree with the judge . . . (Score 1) 98

and the crime is on the mandatory reporting list (child abuse, and that's about it)

There are lots of things, multiple lists, but they only apply to certain jobs. In addition to crimes involving children, often elder and disabled abuse. Engineers are required to report certain things that create physical dangers. A lot of types of licensed inspectors or auditors have lists of things they are required to report if they find it. Some types of accountants.

Comment Re:Herd (Score 1) 181

The news seems to miss the news, and pat itself on the back.

Nintendo "doesn't actually make Pokemon Go," they just own a significant portion of the Pokemon company. Oh, so they do own that. Oh, they don't actually make the software for the game... but they are the major owner of the company that sells the license and makes the money off merchandise.

Who is more clueless, the investors that thought this being such a huge market hit that there are Pokemon zombies on all the sidewalks would sell merch, or the reporters who can't figure out that the game itself makes less money than the brand boost? They have existing, entrenched retail presence of their merch.

Who is more clueless, the people who think that the stock shouldn't have gone up because Nintendo already included Pokemon Go in their revenue forecast, or people who assume that their forecast was realistic enough that they might have exceeded it?

I don't know if the stock is overpriced or not, or if it was overpriced at its peak. And that makes me better informed than the media on this question! ;)

Comment Re:Breaking news: investors are idiots (Score 1) 181

Not only that, but they don't understand the costs involved. 18% sounds like easy money, but you pay a commission to buy and sell, and you also pay rent for the stock that is already priced based on the fact it might go up/down. In the end you could have made a tiny bit of money, or lost some. And if you're shorting things frequently, you'd be losing a lot of money even if you believed each of them would move 18% because you have to be right, and right on the right days.

Probably a lot of these people saying it don't even know what "shorting a stock" means; for those of you, it means you borrow the stock for fixed time, pay rent, and give it back at the end. If you sell it right after renting it, and then buy it back right before you have to return it, you can make (or lose) money. But you have to make more than the rent, which means you have to know more about the stock than the person you're borrowing it from, because they include expected price volatility in the rent. Clearly, if you're some percent smarter than the average existing investor, you'd make more with regular buying and selling than with shorting, because shorting adds overhead and you're still competing with the same other buyers and sellers over prices.

Comment Re:Cheesy 80's movie excuse (Score 1) 740

As somebody who has been following politics continuously since elementary school, I find it shocking that there are people who consider "employee of a major political committee has a preference for a particular candidate" to be a sign of "corruption." Wow. Just wow. Imagine if these people read a one page discussion of Halliburton and war funding! Their heads would explode.

Comment Re:Cheesy 80's movie excuse (Score 1) 740

That's a rather absurd thing to say.

Back in the 1990s it was widely reported that Bill and Hillary had discussed both of them wanting to run for President... while they were college students. Before they were married. As young lovers, both of them becoming President is what they were dreaming of together. And they're achieving those dreams.

Comment Re:Cheesy 80's movie excuse (Score 1) 740

IME it is a lot easier to protect a single server than a whole office network where some of the computer inside the network have to be shown respect by other computers. With a single computer, you don't have to trust anything else on the LAN, and with a good firewall it might be nearly impossible to break into it unless you get lucky. With a big office full of computers, a stray wifi printer plugged into the wrong port might turn into a major attack vector.

It was already reported in the past that while Hillary was using the "wrong" email account, her work emails were likely accessed by foreign agents, and that her private server is not believed to have been. But that gets ignored by people who pretend to care about this stuff, for obvious reasons.

Slashdot Top Deals

Nothing will ever be attempted if all possible objections must be first overcome. -- Dr. Johnson

Working...