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


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

Comment Re:5.38 hours per day (Score 1) 152

Is it really "abusive to bandwidth" to have background entertainment while doing menial tasks? How close are you coming to the cap?

Very. I had a 250GB cap until this month, when I had to spend more money to raise it.

Autoplay is a setting, and it's per-profile, as is bandwidth - If the use case is just listening to the audio, why not set the bandwidth to the low setting?

But then you have to twiddle it back and forth every day, that's annoying.

Comment Re:74 at time of crash (Score 1) 469

The level of entitlement in this thread is truly astounding. "You must remain stuck in the slow lanes so that I may go as fast as I fucking want."

That is not what is being said, but if you want to apply the logic in that way or spin it in that direction, go ahead. It's actually "you are not to impede the flow of traffic because that creates dangerous conditions", which sounds a lot less selfish, doesn't it?

In addition, frankly, I'm just fine with that. I get the hell out of people's way. I pull over for individual cars on twisty roads. I give bicycles a wide berth. I slow down when a pedestrian appears to have problems walking. If I need to pull over, I signal and then I get completely off the road. In general, I am an extremely considerate driver. In exchange, everyone should get out of the fucking way. I do it, it's not that hard, they can do it. It costs you a few pennies at most even if you're stopping and pulling over to let people go by. I make people wait a bit if I'm on an uphill and driving something slow, but far less than just about anyone else, and I don't understand why so few people can display even inexpensive courtesy.

And just in case it was not clear, I am on your side in this.

If this is an example of what it looks like when you're on our side, we don't need you, coward.

Comment Re:74 at time of crash (Score 1) 469

There is zero requirement to let someone behind you go faster than you providing you're passing someone,

The law already prohibits driving in an unsafe manner; interrupting the flow of traffic does that. You're creating an unsafe condition by causing traffic to bunch up. You're not permitted to merge if you would interrupt the flow of traffic, as a rule. (In some cases drivers are required to let you merge, e.g. onto freeways, but we're talking about the other side of the highway right now.)

Fuck em.

Asshole confirmed.

Comment Re:a BAD sports team will pay for GOOD players (Score 1) 158

If you don't own shares in the company, it's none of your business how much the owners (=shareholders) pay the CEO.

The shareholders don't pay the CEO. The company pays both the shareholders and the CEO. And the company - and for that matter the entire concept of ownership - is legal fiction created by Us The People. We have every right and duty to ensure our creations perform the purposes for which they were created, rather than run rampant or be perverted or looted by parasites.

If a company also happens to enrich shareholders, good for them, but its purpose is to organize economic activity. Shares are just a way to rise capital.

Comment Re:It will succeed, or at the very least, won't fa (Score 1) 110

Like, say, mostly that Nintendo wanted everyone and their dog to include the stupid handheld-screen-gimmick in their games that didn't really make it very possible to port your games to any other console, so unless you got some Nintendo-exclusive deal you probably didn't want to tie your company's fate to a console that had a lukewarm reception?

Comment Re:Netflix v. Cable? How about Netflix v. HBO (Score 1) 152

As as city dweller, I don't want my bill going to subsidize those people in the rural areas.

Yes, you want to live in a third-world shithole. But everyone else recognizes the value of extending communications to a whole nation, which is why we formerly had funding going to spread land lines to rural areas, and why we now have funding going to spread internet access to those same areas. As it turns out, we actually want internet access in those areas when we visit them, so covering the last mile benefits everyone. Unfortunately, there's a lot of short-sighted people like yourself out there who don't comprehend the benefits of a connected populace, and who only care about themselves.

Comment Re:It will succeed, or at the very least, won't fa (Score 1) 110

Wrong question. The question isn't "Why wasn't the WiiU a hit?" The question is rather "Why is an abomination like the WiiU, the biggest design blunder in console history (and yes, I do remember the Atari 5200, the 3DO, the Saturn, the Philips CD-i and yes even the Hyperscan, why do you ask?) selling AT ALL instead of going into blissful ignorance like the aforementioned other design atrocities?"

Comment Re: uhm, no.... (Score 1) 152

And televisions + cable boxes are cheaper than the computers that you'll need to watch Netflix with separate people.

You can watch Netflix on a $40 tablet, or on the cellphone you already own. Thanks for playing, though:

People are more likely to watch Netflix on phones in India, South Korea and Japan, but televisions are more popular with U.S., South American and Australian customers. Africa, the Middle East and Southeast Asia prefer tablets, while some parts of Africa, the Middle East and Eastern Europe use desktop and laptop computers the most.

So you have kids using tablets, teenagers using their gaming desktops... you don't have to buy a TV for each additional station. But you do for Cable, because you can't watch Cable on anything but a TV, or something more expensive: a PC which can take a cablecard.

Comment Re:Still hasn't learned (Score 3, Interesting) 110

Nintendo is in the fortunate position that they needn't rely on third party games. They have a pretty well stocked catalog themselves. Mario, Smash Brothers, now probably Pokemon, too, what more "exclusives" do you need?

Noticeably, Nintendo has always been the "odd man out" when it came to games libraries. Non-exclusives for XB or PS usually eventually came out for the other system, but Nintendo always had a nearly distinct game library from the other two. That does matter. It means that Nintendo doesn't have to compete with them on their turf. XB and PS have always been busy one-up'ing each other in specs, mostly because, well, if you have the same games on both systems, what matters is simply "where does it look better" and "where does it run more smoothly". If you're dealing with a completely different game base, you can't compare. More over, the games have a vastly different focus. Where PS and XB focus on action oriented games where multiplayer is mostly a thing of online gaming, Nintendo's consoles always had a distinct focus on local multiplayer, complete with a lineup of party games and controllers that were, compared to XB and PS controllers, VERY basic and simplified, so you didn't first have to learn to play, you could simply pick them up and play. Maybe not perfectly, but most games were of the "easy to pick up" kind that lends itself well to party gaming.

So I do think that Nintendo can (and will) survive as this "niche" player. It has a few strong IPs in their pocket, and since they themselves own that IP, there is exactly zero danger that this IP would ever go to another console, hoping for a bigger market share there. Even the WiiU, which was a train wreck from conception to inception to realization to actually playing with that piece of garbage, couldn't prevent that. I still don't see why anyone thought the WiiU was a good idea, and I don't know anyone who really wanted that console, but, well, there's nowhere else you could play Mario games. And Smash Brothers. And the other consoles simply suck as party consoles. Even more than the WiiU, believe it or not.

Slashdot Top Deals

Time is an illusion perpetrated by the manufacturers of space.