Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


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! ×

Comment Re:work less (Score 0) 723

I think most of the people will just spend the time playing games. If someone paid me enough money to cover my living expenses I'd only work as much as necessary to have the entertainment I want and no more. This is a pipe dream that's just a recycled flavour of communism. We all know how well that worked out in *every* instance in which it was tried.

Comment All of the above, but mostly Active Glasses (Score 1) 435

Were early 3D TV sets too highly priced?
- Yes! But the content was also ridiculously expensive. Any 3D version of a show is at least $10 more expensive. Manufacturers and content producers thought that they could milk people for 3D and it failed.

Were there too few 3D films and 3D TV stations available to watch (aka "The Content Problem")?
- No, but there were too few who did 3D well. Mostly producers used 3D as a gimmick. Avatar did well because they did 3D correctly.

Did people hate wearing active/passive plastic 3D glasses in the living room?
- I blame Active 3D technology here for being just plain shitty. Most people didn't even know that there was such as thing as Passive 3D. When I tested Active 3D out it gave me a splitting headache within about 30 minutes. It was unwatchable for long periods of time and the glasses were ridiculously expensive. However, when I tried a passive 3D TV/glasses they worked great and I was hooked. I love passive 3D. Any of my friends that came over and watched something in passive 3D also liked it and most of them went and bought an LG TV set. The downside being loss of horizontal resolution. Now I'm waiting for 4K 3D where that will fix the resolution issue.

Was the price of Blu-ray 3D films and Blu-ray 3D players set too high?
- Players no, films absolutely, and they still are.

Was there something wrong with the stereo 3D effect the industry tried to popularize?
- Only to the degree that it generally was not done well. Film makers need to learn what makes a good 3D film and sadly in many cases it is an add on gimmick and the director doesn't spend any time learning how to use it effectively.

Did too many people suffer 3D viewing related "headaches," "dizzyness," "eyesight problems," and similar?
- Yes, because of Active 3D technology, which sucks horribly IMO.

Was the then -- still quite new -- 1080p HD 2D television simply "good enough" for the average TV viewer?
- Yes, but only because they've made 3D so hard for the average person to adopt. Expensive sets, content, glasses and poor Active 3D technology.

Another related question: If things went so wrong with 3D TVs, what guarantee is there that the new 3D VR/AR trend won't collapse along similar lines as well?
- I fully expect this to happen. People complained loudly about 3D glasses and now you expect them to wear a HMD? Really?

Comment And........ Romney is still right! (Score 1) 1028

My 2 cents....

Romney: "Russia is America’s number one geopolitical foe”
Obama: “The 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back becausethe Cold War’s been over for 20 years.”
Hillary: "“It’s somewhat dated to be looking backwards”

If you'd all have voted for Romney you wouldn't be in this position and wouldn't have to choose between twiddle dee and twiddle dumb.

Comment Re:Or... (Score 1) 702

Totally agree. All this shows is that another segment of the market that reads sci-fi has finally taken an interest in the awards ceremony process.

It's analogous to the same rise in reported crime that happens when you put more cops on the street. Does that mean that there is really more crime or do you just have more people to report what is there? I view this the same way, you're just seeing 'conservatives' who read sci-fi actually come out to vote. I'm a conservative and I've been reading sci-fi/fantasy all my life; the same goes for most of my family and extended family.

Comment Re:Anonymous (Score 1) 145

Well it's certainly better than shutting down their twitter accounts..

My point was more that the CIA/FBI could potentially take over the accounts and impersonate them. If they can't then yes, they should just monitor (which is probably more practical.)

Comment Anonymous (Score 2) 145

Now, Anonymous should be finding these 5-6 guys, discovering their true identities and sending that information to the CIA while knocking them off the internet and locking them out of their account (while turning over their account credentials to the CIA as well.)

Comment They haven't taken them down... (Score 1) 320

Because intelligence agencies use them to infiltrate terrorist groups and to network through terrorist organizations to the guys calling the shots. By shutting down these channels they are actually making the job harder for intelligence groups as they push terrorists to use more obscure forms of communications like the PSN which are harder for analysts to track. Not that terrorists aren't getting wise and doing this already but not all terrorists are as clever and we certainly want to keep them and their communication mechanisms lazy.

Comment They going to bother to maintain them? (Score 1) 77

I spoke to 2 support reps just Wed. One from the US and one from Canada. Neither could give me an assurance that another Samsung device won't end up as abandonware. All I got were vague answers that Samsung will update Android as long as the hardware is compatible; but they couldn't say when or how often. My Note 10.1 tablet hasn't had an Android update in 2 years and they couldn't promise me one was coming either.

Now that we have a Mac in the house, despite the fact that I hate my iPhone, I'm considering transitioning all of my devices to Apple (shudder.)

Comment Reasonable Access (Score 5, Insightful) 267

I've been an IT manager and an IT director so I'll make a few points from that perspective.
1) IT is there to serve the needs of the business and one of the needs of the business is to create / facilitate a productive and encouraging work environment. Now, this doesn't need to mean that you give people everything they ask for, but it does mean that you need to trust people. If there are legitimate reasons for concern then get a firewall product that can measure the amount of time someone is spending surfing the net; however, this is really a business concern and this capability is not for IT to worry about its for the different LOB managers to worry about. If they have that as a general concern then pursue it, otherwise it's not IT's concern.

2) What is IT's concern is the security, availability, and integrity of the computing environment and business data and that does mean taking reasonable measures to protect the assets under your control. That means that perhaps you need AV / Anti-Malware / etc. protections. Perhaps also a webfilter that blocks sites that are known for producing malware with the intent to exploit the visitors to that site. Those sites should come from security vendor watchlists and not some arbitrary list put together by the sysadmins.

3) Doing this is about finding an appropriate balance. That balance can only be maintained through constant communication and feedback with the business leaders (i.e. you need a governance process.) The business leadership / executive will need to decide what that balance is. IT's job is to appropriately communicate the risks, consequences and options and let the executive make the decision on how much risk they are willing to take on. This is why communication is crucial, especially in IT, and why often managers who are non-technical or barely technical, get those positions instead of the very technical people who "know better."

Slashdot Top Deals

Refreshed by a brief blackout, I got to my feet and went next door. -- Martin Amis, _Money_