Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
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! ×

Comment Re:Plutocracy (Score 1) 231

I was under the impression it is under the FCC's remit, as they regulate telecommunications businesses. But either way, if it's just a "We think it should be under this agency's jurisdiction, not that one" thing, then that's at least not terrible.

Like the sibling post however, I'd like to see evidence the FTC will actually step up to the plate on this.

Comment Re:Plutocracy (Score 1) 231

Because, in my experience, libertarians - both self described, and described by the dictionary - would generally rejoice about any reduction in regulation, arguing instead that somehow consumers and ISPs can just sign contracts that agree to the levels of privacy they want.

In the real world, that's bullshit, because you have to hope that an ISP with a service and price level that's acceptable would consider it worth offering.

Comment Re:So, it's not only the Russians that hack, huh! (Score 1) 78

Just to be clear: you think the CIA doesn't spy on anyone with modern technologies, and you think this because the media didn't report it?

First: Are you aware what the CIA is? Or the NSA?
Second: Do you really read newspapers? I mean, there's this Manning person, and another guy called Snowden, who passed quite a bit of information to the newspapers during the last part of the last decade, and first part of this one, about how groups like the NSA work. Did you not read those articles?

Look, I'd point you at some links, but why not just hop over to guardian.co.uk, and do a quick search. You'll find quite a bit of news you apparently missed.

Comment Re:Conversely... (Score 1) 238

If the situation is exactly the same up to the point of your two options, then there is a "Self digging shovel" available at some level in both situations. In situation #2, it isn't for sale, and unless you can conclusively promise shovel in one year, for only $5,000 then option 1 is still the only valid consideration. Further, if option 2 says there are no patents (assuming that is the change) then I can build a shelf digging shovel today for whatever price, and as long as the value I get out of it is better than before, I'll get my $20,000 shovel either way.

1) 20000 for shovel get 30000 use from shovel in year one. Year two is how much (no answer in option 1) is it free, or nearly free? Does it cost 20K / year forever (unlikely) or what. Incomplete information leads to bad decisions.

2) Can't buy Self Digging shovel (unknown reason). Promise that they will be available in a year for $5000 (if you believe vaporware promises)

all the unknown variables make your assumptions useless, which is why I chose (and still choose) option 1. Based on the INFORMATION I have, it is the only real choice.

Comment Re:Conversely... (Score 1) 238

Heck, you can still charge the same amount as a well-written patent, but can crank it out in an afternoon!

Legal profession robots coming soon for this reason alone. Yes, good lawyers will always be needed, but most "lawyering" today is boilerplate legal forms and processes that can be replicated by a series of questions that pick which process one needs. We can get rid of most lawyers and and streamline the legal processes.

Comment Re:Conversely... (Score 1) 238

In that world, do you think we'd successfully get rid of patents? Also, have you given thought to the implications of getting rid of patents?

No. And Yes.

We'll never because its in the Constitution, and that is next to impossible to change. And I have, and it is liberating of enterprise. I prefer "trade secrets" to Patents for protection anyway.

Comment Re:Plutocracy (Score 2) 231

Seriously, is there an actual reason for this that isn't corruption or some kind of libertarian ideological nutcasery?

I try not to take these things at face value, but everything looks like blatant corruption from here. It might give me some faith in humanity to know there's a good reason beyond "Ayn Rand would approve, and so does my wallet."

Comment Re:Huh? (Score 1) 368

Well, then you managed to avoid the context given by the preamble to the summary. They're saying Fivvvvvrr.com 2.0 (or whatever the f--- they're called) sucks. It doesn't really matter what they make, because that's not what the article is about, it's about how they're an example of a company that dresses up the fact they shit all over the people they work for them by dressing up Victorian labor conditions as dynamism.

Comment Re:Finally, I can switch to Gnome! (Score 1) 110

The Windows 10 UI would be fine if the latency issues could be fixed (it shouldn't take between two and ten seconds for the notifications area (always) or start menu (often) to appear): the real issues with Windows 10 are the privacy invasion crap and the underlying operating system.

I'd like to see a real effort to build a modern 2-in-1 desktop for GNU/Linux, perhaps using Cinnamon as a starting point. It just takes someone who knows what they're doing, and wasn't born three days ago, completely unaware of what's been done in the past, what worked, and what didn't.

Comment Re:So? (Score 1) 110

It definitely is. Gedit has been cited already, but what pissed me off more is gnome-terminal: the double click selection behaviour cannot be configured in the GUI any more. You need a CLI command reminiscent of registry manipulations on Windows. Insanity for a terminal. The definition of a tool used by power users...

Slashdot Top Deals

Backed up the system lately?

Working...