Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


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

Comment Re:Ummm... (Score 1) 73

Amazon Prime's video selection was quite horrible for the several years that I had it, at least an order of mangnitude worse than Netflix's current selection, and the streaming performance was pretty bad too. Has that gotten any better lately? That's the main reason I didn't bothering addressing Amazon until you brought it up.

The selection is now pretty good, while Netflix's has decreased to only being pretty good. And yes, the streaming performance is now better than Netflix, at least here it is. In the evenings I can barely use Netflix. And I have the bandwidth setting set to be inoffensive.

Comment Re:horse has left the barn (Score 1) 328

People need to realize that the effects of global warming are at this point unstoppable.

I know horses can count to three and do simple arithmetic, but to bolt the barn at the very stroke of four hundred greatly surpasses my prior estimation of equine quantitative analysis.

"Storm's-a-brewin'," says the white horse, from behind the thoroughly bolted barn door.

"North of four hundred! Wouldn't be caught dead in that climate," says the black horse, giving the topmost bolt a final check with his teeth.

"Not with those bloody superstitious bipeds completely giving up on proactive management, just because they burst through the first screw-up milestone still in the same old business-as-usual blind gallop," agrees the chestnut.

"Typical glue-obsessed skin-pickling apes," agrees the white horse. "I'm waiting this out from in here."

"Agreed," says the black horse. "Unless. Duty. Summons."

"That creeps me out," says the white horse, moving another step away. "How will you know?"

"Stormy, moonless nights, black cats, one-eyed bats—all the assorted omens of end times and human fate," says the chestnut.

"Stop kidding around," says the black horse. "Salty white filigrees on the cement floor will spell things out all too clearly."

"Good to know we don't have to stand around counting bats eyes," says the white horse. "That would have sucked."

"Beats what the humans can manage," says the chestnut.

Here the white horse lets fly with a giant fart of approval.

"Hey, stop that, meth breath!" says the chestnut.

"Too late!" says the white horse, "better out than in."

"Wrong," says the black horse. "Better in than out," continues the black horse, after checking the middle bolt with his teeth one last time.

Comment Re:Ummm... (Score 1) 73

HBO and Disney in particular are both large enough to succeed with their own app.

Simply having a back library isn't enough. They have to have a war chest big enough to crank out a decent amount of quality new material, rivaling Netflix's, for many consecutive years for people to begin to take notice.

Sigh. It's almost like your reply isn't even to my comment.

Netflix has the branding (that people understand the meaning of. Yes, HBO and Disney have strong branding, but not as streaming platforms) and the cash stream.

Consumers may not be geniuses, but they can understand that Disney and HBO have video, and that it could be streamed to them. They already had to figure out that they could stream Disney's content from Netflix.

I think multiple giants combining forces (basically to create the original Netflix experience all over again, with a great back catalog and very low prices, but also publishing newer seasons of their popular shows fairly aggressively) is the only viable short-term threat,

The immediate threat to Netflix is that the distributors are not renewing their licenses to stream content through Netflix, whether because they're getting more money out of Amazon or because they're taking it to their own platform, or perhaps streaming is only cannibalizing their DVD sales. Whatever the reasons, Netflix already has to deal with the fact that their library is shrinking.

In addition, there's another clear way they can have their lunch eaten by competitors. Amazon is partway there already: when you watch video on an Amazon Fire TV device, and you have a Netflix subscription, you're offered the opportunity to watch content on Netflix. The next step is to unify the listings into one app, and I predict that Amazon will be the one to bring us that, too. That's going to require giving the user a little more control over search, but they'll still find ways to force recommendations on you — and no doubt, to autoplay them too, just like now, to inflate statistics.

Comment Re:Ummm... (Score 1) 73

more, the likes of Disney, Warner, HBO, and pals want it dead, and refuse to grant them content licenses. It isnt that they dont want to stream it to you, the media holders wont let them. Get it right.

Yes, and it's suicidal of them. There's no going back to pre-Netflix ways of distribution (unless maybe they make DVRs even more convenient and powerful, with remote sharing and stuff, which isn't something the advertisers particularly want to see happen) and nobody wants to maintain 10 different accounts to find stuff

Too bad, they're going to have to anyway. That's the model we're moving towards, and even if it fails, inertia will take us in that direction for some time. HBO and Disney in particular are both large enough to succeed with their own app.

Comment Re:But what is a lie? (Score 2) 176

When I tell stories I want to be detailed; but I have learned that people don't want the full story and prefer summaries. Summaries so short that I more or less have to reinvent the scenario in order to get my point or question out and paid attention to.

No. If you are having this problem, either autism is a lot more subtle than I thought, or you are just bad at summarizing. I have noticed that most people are very bad at this. I am not very good at it myself; I have a tendency to give a whole lot more detail than is absolutely necessary, which turns people off.

Since it's not the complete truth; it's a lie

That is not how it works. Here's how it actually works: let's say you didn't do something because of some other thing, which was foisted upon you by some other person. When someone asks you what happened with doing the thing, first you just say "I didn't do the thing." Then they ask why not and you say "Well, this other person interfered." And then when they ask how, then you get to tell them the next part of the story: They interfered with "action". Oh really? How did they "action"? Well, they did this and this and this thing (only give the names of the things the did.) Then if they ask for more detail on those things, you give the detail.

Remember playing Ultima back in the day? You'd talk to an NPC and they would give you a sentence or so with some keywords in it. Then you'd use one of those keywords to get more information. This is how people actually talk! Well, to be fair, a lot of people don't talk this way. They talk like they do in J-RPGs where you get a wall of text (press X for more...more...more...) and that shuts people down because it is not particpatory. If I want a wall of text, I'll pick up a brochure.

Lying isn't black and white

Yes, yes it is. What you say is either true or not. That's black or white, period the fucking end. There are many, many ways for a statement to not be true, and only one way for it to be an unbiased description of what happened — don't say things which aren't true.

You have to interpret how much and what information a person is looking for.

That has nothing whatsoever to do with telling lies. If a story changes because you're summarizing it, you're shit at summarizing.

Comment Re:progressive thinking (Score 1) 79

Well, yes, some of those peoples are still around, which matters to racists and fascists, who believe that races and peoples have rights and share collective guilt. None of those people are still around, which is what matters from the point of justice and liberty.

It was the peoples who owned the land. They were very much territorial. In some cases, land was owned by a smaller group like a tribe or tribelet. The land was taken from them collectively, so any redress must be to them collectively. You might not recognize the value of the collective, but they do.

The truth is that the land you currently possess was taken from the prior owners by force. It's quite possible that they or their descendants are still around, and if you actually believed that taking property by force is wrong, you'd give it back to them. You don't, but you sure to like to claim the moral high ground that you're not even vaguely close to approaching. There's no way you can in good conscience sit there and rant about property rights you clearly don't believe in, and also be taken seriously.

Comment Re:Hardware is so much better? (Score 1) 77

When I was a kid and turned on a BBC Micro, it was ready to use instantly.

And for its time, it was awesome. And today, a pocket calculator makes that BBC Micro its bitch. But the truth is that most of us never turn our computers all the way off, so it doesn't matter much what the power-on-to-usefulness time is unless we're experiencing a lot of crashes.

Comment Re:Best attempted on Earth first! (Score 1) 215

Hint: The delay is completely impractical

While that's true, you probably could come up with a semi-autonomous solution that was smart enough to run a drill by itself if you told it where to drill and how far, that sort of thing. At this point, complete automation of the process is an unreasonable goal, but we already have automated mining equipment on this planet.

Slashdot Top Deals

The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. But the opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth. -- Niels Bohr