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 Re:Coal's not cheap (Score 1) 167

You can talk about that when wind and solar no longer need endless, catastrophically-indebting levels of State subsidies.

But fossil fuels are already getting endless state aid in the form of tax breaks and access to public lands. If you want to set the bar there, I'm all for ending that aid as well.

Comment A well-written headline (Score 1) 44

Army Vehicle Disappears (after being camouflaged)

Porn Star Sues over Rear End Collision

Oh Hail No

There Will Be Hell Toupee

The whole point of a headline is to be attention-getting. If you can make it clever, all the better. Nuclear Plants Leak is pure gold. Don't pretend people don't make jokes about how wind farms are hot air yuk yuk yuk. On the other hand, if you're a bit sensitive about jokes about nuclear plants leaking, well... u mad, bro?

Comment Re:Paranoid Russia (Score 1) 454

Actually, my question is, what do any of these three nations have to gain by invading any of one another? We all have the same stuff, which is to say that we all have land, water, oil, and mineral resources. Even in that case, where they have a shared border so it's relatively convenient, what is there to gain? Certainly nothing that couldn't be had cheaper at home.

Comment Re:Feeding the trolls (Score 0) 454

You have to be either a troll or a completely moronic fanboi to actually believe that statement.

Does Trump have any other kind of supporters? AFAICT there are only two kinds. The trolls are trolls. The fanbois are suffering from cognitive dissonance, specifically they have to think they're great because in their model anyone who isn't great is a turd. Trump makes them feel embiggened because he's just as much of an asshole as they are, and he could become president if we're not careful.

Comment Re:Why? (Score 1) 454

Here's the fundamental problem: we need a hippie solution. Nothing but making the world more peaceful is going to reduce the risk of nuclear annihilation. Why's that? Because even if one nation conquered the planet, it would only wind up splitting from within and becoming multiple competing nations again. And it's a problem because warmongers tend to react violently against... well, everything. And violence is something that hippies aren't prepared to deal with.

I guess what's needed is a sort of warrior hippie.

We could call them Social Justice Warriors ;)

Seriously, though. There's no military solution to the threat of endless war. It really is true that only cooperation can solve this problem. It's not enough to hold hands and wish real hard, though. The lovers of peace have to become as creative and determined as the makers of war.

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:It's not the FWD that are the real problem (Score 1) 127

And based on the preorders they have investors lining up to loan them money. It's like the US national debt, it's only a problem if you don't expect to be able to repay it or if nobody wants to lend you money at reasonable terms. Tesla is not going to fold due to lack of funding sources, they might be less profitable in the medium horizon because they're paying off loans (but really, corporate rates, even for a company with their run rate, are at historic lows right now so it's not THAT much of a drag on future earnings), but they've got access to plenty of capital.

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) 179

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.

Slashdot Top Deals

BASIC is to computer programming as QWERTY is to typing. -- Seymour Papert