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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Online ? Authors never shopped in real life (Score 1) 48

Online is much better, actually. As well as clearing cookies and using different browsers/VPNs, just abandoning your shopping cart often generates a discount coupon. Search engines and price comparison sites are more efficient than going to 20 different physical shops. You can Google for coupon codes too.

If I could do grocery shopping online reasonably well I would rarely go to town any more. Unfortunately groceries kind of suck online in the UK.

Comment Okay, but... (Score 2) 3

It would be nice if Tesla included charging for other vehicles. There are only so many sites on major routes where you can connect a megawatt or two of chargers to the grid, and Tesla has been fighting other networks to get them.

It would just kind of suck if all the best spots were Tesla only. I say that as someone who plans to buy a Model 3.

Comment Re:Nothing to do with Hollywood (Score 1) 480

Go watch the video. The point loss/recovery perfectly balances out.

Which is entirely unimportant for the point being made.

By the way, no response from /. about our debate. Any ideas? How about debate.org? Formal style, you make arguments and rebuttals, and other members of the site then vote.

I'm up for it. You can pick the first topic.

Comment Re:What's changed? (Score 1) 279

Using terms like "regressive" and "SJW" is just poisoning the well. Both are just ludicrous extremes that no one in real life lives up to. The only way you get there is by distorting people's positions deliberately.

That's why my sig quotes that AC. The moment you call me an SJW I know you aren't actually listening or making a genuine attempt to respond to my argument, you are just ranting at some imaginary degenerate.

Comment Re:Driverless (Score 1) 273

Sure public transportation is fine. You said Uber and Lyft.

Dude, I'm not the Emperor of the World. I'm making my predictions of the future. Whether you like it or not, whether I like it or not, I predict that Uber and Lyft and such services are going to become more common in the future (especially if there are self-driving cars). It's too bad you don't approve, I guess, but there it is.

(In principle a city or county could operate a service similar to Uber or Lyft. Perhaps that would make you happier?)

They have at least thought of these things?? Wow, drink the kool-aid some more.

If I'm understanding you correctly, you believe that Tesla is spending thousands of dollars per car to provide the hardware for self-driving, without having thought of common problems like driving in snow in the winter. They've been testing this stuff for years, but presumably you believe their testing was flawed and/or inadequate. I'd be interested to find out from you what Tesla did wrong, and why they are wrong to think that their hardware is adequate.

Would you say the Tesla hardware is completely useless, or would you say that there are some circumstances under which the Tesla hardware can do a useful job of driving the car? Also, in your opinion, are the various videos of self-driving Teslas all faked? And the videos where a Tesla equipped with "Autopilot" takes action on its own to avoid an accident, are those faked?

Comment Re:I'm surprised... (Score 1) 154

The video you linked to is over an hour long. I don't know where he said that and I'm not inclined to go looking because you didn't post a time code.

Anyway, Stalman has said that he isn't against selling software or services like development and support. And in fact companies do just that quite successfully, e.g. Red Hat.

Comment Re:Synonyms being used (Score 4, Insightful) 100

Any particular reason why we should just assume that only those nice, 'anonymized', 'statistics' were for sale; or that the 'anonymizing' done wasn't as pitifully weak as it often is?

Shockingly enough, people seem to be willing to pay more for data that are more or less cosmetically obfuscated, and trivial to correlate with information from other sources; and less for data that are actually anonymous enough to be impossible to reconstruct.

Slashdot Top Deals

We don't really understand it, so we'll give it to the programmers.

Working...