Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
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! ×

Submission + - Once Slashdot beta has been foisted upon me, what site should I use instead? 2

somenickname writes: As a long time Slashdot reader, I'm wondering what website to transition to once the beta goes live. The new beta interface seems very well suited to tablets/phones but, it ignores the fact that the user base is, as one would expect, nerds sitting in front of very large LCD monitors and wasting their employers time. It's entirely possible that the browser ID information gathered by the site has indicated that they get far more hits on mobile devices where the new interface is reasonable but, I feel that no one has analyzed the browser ID (and screen resolution) against comments modded +5. I think you will find that most +5 comments are coming from devices (real fucking computers) that the new interface does not support well. Without an interface that invites the kind of users that post +5 comments, Slashdot is just a ho-hum news aggregation site that allows comments. So, my question is, once the beta is the default, where should Slashdot users go to?

Submission + - Slashdot beta sucks 9

An anonymous reader writes: Maybe some of the slashdot team should start listening to its users, most of which hate the new user interface. Thanks for ruining something that wasn't broken.

Comment Re:Bar commercial use of this spectrum (Score 1) 40

That's actually incredibly illegal. You're not allowed by the FCC to intentionally put noise out that interferes with other people's equipment.

Also, ALL wifi stuff is considered 'low power' because of it's power levels. It's not talking about 50mw cards in your home router vs the 200mw cards put up on the towers. It's talking about devices which compared to traditional radio equipment is 'low power'. Generally speaking, this is stuff which has a transmission radius of approximately 10-15 miles without amps, etc.

Finally, commercial wireless carriers are a way of providing an alternate means of internet connectivity in places which are notoriously hard to get connected such as dense urban areas (Because you need to get permission from the city to use the right of ways), or rural areas which could cost thousands to run copper or fiber miles out just to get $20-100/month.

And, yes, there are grants for that stuff. But generally speaking it's not very feasible for small companies to do as the government is very strict on how you manage it. It can actually cost a small ISP a large chunk of the grant itself just proving to the government that they're spending the grant the way it was meant to be.

Comment Fixing DFS would actually do more. (Score 1) 40

The real problem right now with DFS is that a large chunk of the current 5GHz spectrum (5470-5725) is actually required to use it. So, of the 555MHz, 255 of it is actually more or less unusable for carriers due to the constraints imposed upon it. Since you typically provision a new sector with the current interference in mind, it's possible to set an AP to a "good" channel, and connect a client to it, only to have DFS kick it to a new channel when it hears relevant interference. Causing the AP to move to a subpar channel, possibly one that has a lot of interference on the client end (Because the AP does the choosing, and doesn't take into consideration client noise levels on every channel - too much work when you've got 20-30 clients on one AP).

Anyways, more spectrum is always good. But if we could somehow migrate radar and such away from 5GHz, that would be a huge improvement on wireless broadband speeds. 5GHz is actually used a lot for WISPs as it has a much higher throughput capacity and seems to do better over longer distances than 2.4Ghz.

I'd be interested in seeing what sort of catches comes with this new spectrum being freed up. If it's more DFS spectrum, I don't see how this is really going to help long-term. If it's actually free, clear spectrum being freed than it could actually greatly help WISPs gain more speed as they can reduce the overlap between channels.

Comment Re:California (Score 1) 398

I think proximity does cause califonicancer. Everywhere I look, there's people here (In Oregon) attempting to make Oregon more like, well, California of all places. Somehow they get tired of Cali, decide fuck it, let's move! And then want the place they move to be just like the place they left.

Ah, well. Maybe someone will develop some kind of cure. I know, we could have a gold colored ribbon! Oregon for the cure!

Comment Re:Three hardware changes? (Score 1) 473

If it's windows 7, why are you even bothering to register/activate it seeing as you're just going to reload from an image? FWIW, I've had my son's computer running win7 pro for 6 months without activating it. (Because he was tending to get viruses from "free game" websites, arg). No usability problems at all. Unless you count MSSE not working a problem. Nothing a reload wouldn't fix anyways.

Comment Re:This is cool, but not revolutionary... (Score 1) 397

Yes, PCs "break". Caps go bad, fans seize (without the owner's knowing), heat sinks become detached.

After repairing computers for 12 years, if you can think of something that's happened to a computer - I've seen it happen. The fact that you have 20 year old working computers doesn't suprise me at all.

I had a gentleman bring in a 486/25 SX (Circa '92 or so). Ran perfectly. No real dust buildup, all original parts. Windows 95 even booted up fine. But I have to tell you, that's a total and complete anomaly. The last time I saw a running 486 was about 10 years ago, and the last time I saw one in that condition was when I was still in high school in the early 90's.

Modern consumer-level computers tend to last about 4 years or so. Heck, even server-grade parts tend to fail with alarming regularity. Honestly, I don't think they're much better than their desktop brethren, just more expensive and oddly enough in more minimal (Re: Cheaper) packaging.

Comment Re:Raiding (Score 1) 175

Not only that, but it's also impossible to PUG heroics in BC. I know, I've camped for hours (Admittedly, as DPS) with my aff lock waiting for someone - anyone - on any server - to also queue for them. It just ain't happening.

So the only way you can reliably get into the BC heroics is via either a specialty guild, or attempting (ROFL) to convince your guild that BC stuff is going to be "fun" when they're grinding to get >5k GS to go do ICC (hahaha, sure..)

Anyways, that's what really ticked me off right before I quit about 8 or so weeks ago. After a week of queueing while grinding quests, I did a grand total of... *1* BC heroic. yay.

Pretty much the only "easy" stuff is crap that you use to level. Even the drops in the instances totally suck, and as far as I can tell, the dungeons only exist so you have something, ANYTHING to do after you've wasted all the time you could grinding rep/quests/etc trying to get into the final heroics/raids.

Blah, sorry.

Comment Re:For those who wonder what Gnome Shell is ... (Score 1) 514

Really? I've been using ubuntu since about 6.04, and I haven't really noticed a dumbing down of the interface. Sure, the default theme's been cleaned up (and changed every damn version), but all the options are still there in System-> Preferences / Administration. The synaptic package manager is still there in 10.10, and the terminal is still included by default, as is aptitude (Or did I install aptitude?).

Anyways, Ubuntu getting easier to use isn't a bad thing. It's not dumbing down, you can still manually do anything you can do in a debian install. It's just not geared towards the hands-on powerusers who want to micromanage their desktop. What's so bad about that? :)

Slashdot Top Deals

We will have solar energy as soon as the utility companies solve one technical problem -- how to run a sunbeam through a meter.