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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Security is an illusion (Score 1) 153

There's just too much volume to track all the content everywhere.

There are 350 million people in the USA, more or less. Including kids not of age to use computers. One computer, just one, operates at billions of instructions per second (when the code is written in anything efficient, like c.) The NSA has a newish huge data center located on the main trunks.

You do the math. If you still think they can't sieve that amount of data effectively, why then, good on you for your optimism. :)

Comment Re:Trump Derangement Syndrome (Score 1) 487

Trump is assumed by some to have won based on (anticipated) EC votes. However, three facts:

1 - The EC hasn't voted yet.

2 - The EC does not have to vote for Trump.

3 - Clinton got (a lot) more votes from, you know, the people.

Trump may well end up to be president. But he isn't the president yet; he isn't even the president-elect yet.

Comment Re:DEA already has rescheduled and overruled itsel (Score 1) 146

Actually, their constitutional authority to exist is that the Executive Branch calls them into existence to execute the provisions of laws passed by the Legislative branch.

It took a constitutional amendment to ban alcohol, and that amendment has been repealed. This leaves no authority for any branch of the government to prohibit the manufacture, sale, or use of any drug. Any act of the congress that purports to do so is not a law at all, it is as James Madison would describe it, a usurpation.

-jcr

Comment Re:As soon as we get a legitimate source like Netf (Score 1) 69

What you are saying and I am saying are not contradictory.

Netflix was $10 and included DVD's.

Netflix (from $7.99 per month) ...
Amazon Instant Video (from $8.99 per month) ...
Hulu (from $7.99 per month) ...
Showtime (from $10.99 per month) ...
HBO Now (from $14.99 per month) ...
Starz (from $8.99 per month) ...
CBS All Access (from $5.99 per month)
Warner Movie Service (From $10.00 a month)
Sling TV (for Disney) is $20+ a month

For people with less money (college students?) the difference between $10 a month and $50 a month is sufficient to spur piracy. It feels silly to pirate for $10 a month and take the legal risks. But $100 for the content now fenced off in the services above (and more- some things not streamed or even legally available for purchase) is more tempting for people of limited means.

Comment Re:LOL (Score 1) 76

Yeah, because that is exactly what I said.

Let me ask you a simple question, does any regulation state its goals, and if it doesn't (or no longer) reach those goals, is it repealed?

I don't know of ANY regulation that has a repeal clause in it if it doesn't meet its goals.

I don't know of ANY regulation that has a cost benefit analysis requirement before being employed.

I don't know ANY regulation that self monitors for effectiveness.

I don't know ANY regulation that was revoked when it was found to be ... ineffectual. Just more regulations to fix the broken bits of the previous (and bad) regulation.

So, yeah, "No" regulation is an option. AND not all regulations need to apply everywhere in a "one size fits all" over the top method.

I'll give a really good example of bad regulations that can be completely avoided by changing the term of the problem, CableTV (and Internet) franchise agreements. The whole "Net Neutrality" is a top down draconian implementation of regulations that is completely avoidable if you change where the problem exists; the last mile. Fix the last mile problem (monopolistic franchise agreements) AND you don't need a whole bunch of Government red tape on how Internet traffic is handled.

Freedom is expensive, and tyranny comes with a costly price tag. So, yes, I err on the side of Liberty.

Comment Re:Should really be "President Elect Trump" or... (Score 1) 183

Interesting article on that here
http://www.mediaite.com/online...

Looks like the shift is occuring during the last few years.

It's still not correct according to the major manuals of style.

http://thegrammarexchange.info...

"Hereâ(TM)s what the New York Times Manual* states at the entry president:

â âoeIt is President Lamm(without a given name) in a first reference to the current president of the United States. In later references President Lamm; the president; Mrâ¦.Lammâ

This style is seen in todayâ(TM)s New York Times, as in the example in this article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01...

The order of mention is this: âoeBarrack Obama, President Obama, Mr. Obamaââ¦..âPresident George Bush, Mr. Bushâ

As you see, though, the Times sometimes goes against its own rules, citing the first name, too, as in this example.

â President Barack Obama moved quickly on Wednesday to lay some touchstones for the âoemore responsible, more accountable governmentâ he has promised, ordering a salary freeze for senior White House staff, tightening rules on lobbyists and establishing what he said was a new standard of greater government openness. âoeHowever long we are keepers of the public trust, we should never forget that we are here as public servants,â Mr. Obama said at a swearing-in ceremony for staff members in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building.
_______

So, in answer to your question, I think it is correct for the first mention of the president to be President (Barack) Obama, and for subsequent mention to be Mr. Obama.
The style may be different in different publications or in different situations. I like this particular style.

There is something else to be considered: you could leave out the honorific President or Mr., as well as the first name, and use only Obama. Some newspapers use this style. I find it jarring and rude in a newspaper, but in a personal letter, it would be acceptable.
"

But I'm not going to loose my cool over it.

Comment Re:Still a need for what he was origally doing (Score 4, Insightful) 73

There is a strong vision in something like CyanogenMod, and that can be leveraged into "profits" given the right view.

I personally thought the original vision of Cyanogen Inc was towards the right track. However, once they kicked OnePlus to the curb for "more" (India) they lost almost all credibility they had in going that route. No real Handset Maker would ever do business with them after that.

The rest of whatever credibility they had left over , was gone the moment they were "bought" by Microsoft and started to Bing up the joint.

I don't care what the reasons were for either of those two "missteps", they killed Cyanogen Inc.

There are two valid moves Steve can make at this point, both I've seen mentioned elsewhere. First is take CM, and put it under a 501.c.3 Umbrella, and crowd source development. The other option is to "restart" the Company, but without a douchebag running it, and focus on taking lagging older handsets and getting them patched and updated, with (preferably) the blessings of the maker (good PR for both) or without.

IMHO these are not mutually exclusive either. The latter is going to take some time to get trust rebuilt, but it would pay huge if he found someone who knew the vision and could keep the focus tight (I volunteer, but I rather doubt anyone would take me up on it). There is still a need for custom/slim ROMs out there that aren't branded Nexus/Pixel/Chrome/Whatever

Comment As soon as we get a legitimate source like Netflix (Score 1) 69

They descend on it like wolves, divide the content, and raise the prices by 1000%.

To get what you got on netflix just a few years ago, you'd need to subscribe to a half dozen services which are really overpriced for the content they provide.

There is room in the market for Netflix vs Amazon but not netflix vs a dozen other services.

Slashdot Top Deals

You can tune a piano, but you can't tuna fish. You can tune a filesystem, but you can't tuna fish. -- from the tunefs(8) man page

Working...