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 What would you make? (Score 2) 233

I think the single biggest problem with 3D printing is that most people don't have any idea what they would use it for. It's a neat concept, and it does seem useful that you could create a custom-made little plastic doodad of any specifications you want. The idea of being able to share designs seems to also have potential. Still, if someone gave me a 3D printer for free, I can't think of what I would use it for.

Maybe I just don't have enough imagination, but I think most of the population probably has even less than I do. There are only so many little plastic pieces of junk I need in my life. I think I'd get more use out of an automated loom that could make clothes, or an automated printer/binder that could make books. Or a system that made custom Ikea pieces for assembling custom furniture. I suppose you could make plastic furniture with a big enough 3D printer, but I don't want plastic furniture-- or a big enough 3D printer for that.

I've read through articles online about all the useful things you could make with your 3D printer. It's always stuff like book ends or door stops. Basically stuff that I don't really need, but if I did, the same purpose could be served by a small rock.

Comment Re:Labor Participation Rate, the Unmentionable... (Score 1) 504

"What about all of those people who have been out of work for over a year, and stopped looking?"

A bunch of them are retired, or decided to be homemakers?

Also, there's a limit to how much you can say "the job market is bad" because some people have stopped looking for work. Even just talking about those who stopped looking for work because the economy is bad, the job market could improve, and if they're still not looking for work, they're still not going to find a job.

Comment Re: Finally, the gloves will come off! (Score 1) 1042

Call it what you want. It's still filtering out a lot of messages so that you'll never see them.

The only real difference that I see is that the filtering is done by users of the site, rather than by an administrator. And as I said, the administrators still intervene at times. I also think that Twitter might be too unruly a setup for a moderation scheme. It's not really a discussion forum.

Comment Re: Finally, the gloves will come off! (Score 1) 1042

I tend to agree. In fairness, though, I think part of the reason it works it that moderation effectively removes a lot of the worst of what people say. It's still basically censorship. The administrators will also step in sometimes when someone who is being abusing of the system.

It's not as though Slashdot is absolutely uncensored. If it were, I'm not sure I would like this site.

Comment Re: Finally, the gloves will come off! (Score 3, Interesting) 1042

And just as much as the freedom of speech protects your ability to say something, it equally protects my right to refuse to provide you with a platform for saying it. The owners of Slashdot have every right to delete this comment that I'm writing right now. They have every right to lock my account and even block my IP address.

The great irony here is that Trump is busy empowering people who oppose net neutrality while his followers complain about a private company controlling the content of their own website. Forget about Twitter, ending net neutrality would allow ISPs to exercise much more strict control over your access to the whole Internet, potentially blocking or slowing traffic that they don't feel is advantageous to their business. If Verizon decides they're anti-Trump, they could just block access to his websites because "Fuck you, it's our network and we'll do what we want." The principle that the Internet is communication infrastructure and should treat traffic without bias-- that's the concept Trump is looking to tear down.

Comment Re:Better Idea (Score 2) 105

It's not even an issue of cost. A lot of content owners don't want Netflix to have a complete catalog. NBC/Universal/Comcast, for example, controls a lot of content and *also* services for distributing content. If you can get all of the Comcast content without paying for Comcast services, then Comcast loses a bunch of money. Comcast will, therefore, go out of its way to hobble Netflix and prevent it from having access to all of it's content.

Comment Re: He sounds like an idiot (Score 2) 332

People around here hate C# (those that do) because it's from MS. When it comes to MS, there are no technical merits that can redeem the technology. They are not rational people.

The complaints I've heard didn't generally sound so irrational. I thought the consensus was "It seems like a good language, but still most useful in building things for Windows. Maybe that will change as the cross-platform stuff improves, but for now, I'll stick with [whatever language they're using]." Admittedly, I'm not a real programmer and only get a sense for what programmers think from this site.

Comment Re: government regulations (Score 1) 333

a Federal judge could order a company that continues operating against a court order to pay a daily fine until they stop

And then the company could say it stopped. Or it could stop temporarily. Or they could put a tiny little drop of real aloe into each bottle, say, "Fine it has aloe now," and call it a day.

Or they could order an import ban on the product should they exist outside the US.

And then the company can restructure a little, sell the same product under a different brand name, and hope no one notices. No matter what, you need something in the government that has the ability to monitor what's happening in the market, looking for fraud and abuse, setting some basic fair rules, and enforcing those rules. The federal judge cannot actively go looking for abuse, cannot proactively set rules (can only decide particular matters brought into court), and has no direct ability to enforce.

Comment Re: Own It (Score 1) 1321

You want the kleptocracy to continue?

You wanted to end the kleptocracy, so you elected the guy who said that it's impossible for him to have a conflict of interest? The guy who, already before getting elected, has started merging his personal business with government business, and leveraging his political position to drive customers to his private business? The guy who has repeatedly cheated on his taxes, refused to pay vendors and contractors the money they're owed, and driven several businesses into the ground?

Good luck with that. It's almost as funny as the people who say that they voted for Trump because they're tired of rich, arrogant, entitled people from big cities running the country, and they wanted someone who understood the plight of the common man.

Comment Re:One question (Score 1) 1321

To clarify my position above, I'm not opposed to calling foul if you find actual evidence of fraud. If someone finds reason to believe fraud has happened without real evidence, then it should be reported to the proper authorities and investigated to see if credible evidence can be found. However, unless and until evidence is found, the results of the election should be accepted.

I'm not a Trump supporter. That's just my consistent opinion of how elections should work.

Slashdot Top Deals

I have a very small mind and must live with it. -- E. Dijkstra