Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


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

Comment Re:Not sure you have a lot of options? (Score 1) 213

If you do a fresh install of Windows 7 these days? The update process is PAINFUL! You'll literally need to leave the PC downloading updates for a good 8-10 hours or more before it finally starts doing anything obvious.

That's why you slipstream updates into your installation image. Slipstreaming the various post-SP1 patch rollups as they're released will slash your installation time significantly, and there are only a relative handful of them at this point.

The only thing slipstreaming doesn't cover is updates to the .NET Framework. For whatever reason, they're not provided in a compatible format, but only as installer .exes. RT Seven Lite, however, will create an image that will run these installers (or others) in a post-Win7-installation step. It also facilitates slipstreaming the other updates, so it's useful to have on hand.

Comment Re:Slime-balls (Score 0) 294

Excellent point and well made. People who are coming out saying the drone operators are perfectly fine obviously haven't though more than six inches in front of their face. Short-sighted idiots, they can't envision a situation because they refuse to think about it from the "how could a bad guy misuse this" perspective.

Comment Re: Rule of thumb (Score 2) 294

It is just kids having fun.

I wonder how you'd feel if someone parked a drone over your back yard with a camera watching your comings and goings, what time you went to bed and woke up, what kind of property you leave out, who visits your house and when, how many kids you have and what ages they are, and so forth. That's just the tip of the iceberg. Someone WILL eventually do that, most likely a LOT of someones, because there are some fucked up people in this world. A law that says it's perfectly alright for someone to fly a drone in close proximity to your home would enable this exact behavior.

And please don't go with the "so what, I have nothing to hide" defense. Even if you didn't mind a private citizen doing it, I'm willing to bet you'd be out of your mind upset if the government did it. If it's not good for one to be doing it, it's not good for either to be doing it.

Comment Re:Are you smarter than a Trump supporter? (Score 3, Informative) 526

What I don't understand is why Clinton supporters always resort to insults.

It's all they have. They can't run on her record or her predecessor's record, they have to know their policy prescriptions stink on ice and would be about as popular with the public as pralines-and-dick ice out come the insults.

Comment Re:Tax (Score 5, Informative) 539

From what I can see, there's a correlation between being religious and being conservative, and also a correlation between being progressive and donating.

If by that second point you meant an inverse relationship, then yes. Amazon's description:

We all know we should give to charity, but who really does? In his controversial study of America’s giving habits, Arthur C. Brooks shatters stereotypes about charity in America-including the myth that the political Left is more compassionate than the Right. Brooks, a preeminent public policy expert, spent years researching giving trends in America, and even he was surprised by what he found. In Who Really Cares, he identifies the forces behind American charity: strong families, church attendance, earning one’s own income (as opposed to receiving welfare), and the belief that individuals-not government-offer the best solution to social ills. But beyond just showing us who the givers and non-givers in America really are today, Brooks shows that giving is crucial to our economic prosperity, as well as to our happiness, health, and our ability to govern ourselves as a free people. [Emphasis added.]

Comment Re:Civilized (Score 1, Insightful) 180

10% of us—probably the poorest people who can least afford to pay for the infrastructure improvements to bring their speeds up to snuff—will be 1000x behind.

I'm still missing the part where this is somehow my problem and I'm required to pay higher taxes to fix it.

Live in a rural area with shitty service because it's unprofitable for the ISP to run millions of dollars of fiber to service fifty customers? Too bad. Move. Or get satellite. Or deal with slower speeds. You're there by choice. Nobody's stopping you from moving somewhere that offers fiber to the curb for $75/month if that's what you really want.

Can't afford faster service? Again, not my fucking problem. Get a job. Or if you have a job but it pays shitty, too fucking bad. You chose poorly when it came to selecting careers. Still not my fucking problem.

If this sounds cold-hearted, too bad. You have no right to anything I've earned through my own hard work just because you've made choices that put you in a bad position. You want charity? Fine. Ask for it through charity. But the moment you suggest the government should forcibly confiscate my earnings to fund your Internet is the moment we become enemies.

Comment Re: Civilized (Score 1) 180

It's quite astonishing that spastics haven't worked out that every fucking cunt knows free means free at the point of use, no cunt in the whole of fucking Europe is labouring under any other understanding

And thus the Orwellian mangling of language becomes so commonplace it's accepted as the new norm. Let me re-acquaint you with the actual meaning of "free" as it pertains to payment for good or services: it means you don't pay anything. Period.

The usage of "free" in the context of this article is completely false. The proper term would be "taxpayer subsidized" but nobody likes that term. Thus "free" is appropriated, misused, and defended by the likes of you.

Comment Re: In other words. . . (Score 2) 314

I favor the libertarian model. Just to be clear, I'm not a Libertarian but I like many points of their philosophy.

Many people are surprised by this because as a black man, they don't expect that I'd argue in favor of someone's right to discriminate but yes. If you want to discriminate, it should be legal BUT you have to face the consequences of that decision.

I suspect that the vast majority of the people I know, of all racial backgrounds, would refuse to do business with someone who mistreated me just as I would refuse to do business with someone who had mistreated them.

Being that this is AirBNB, a private entity, I like it. If you're going to discriminate, they will not do business with you.

The power of the Free Market at works.


Slashdot Top Deals

10 to the minus 6th power Movie = 1 Microfilm