Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


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

Comment Twitter is Enforcing Additional Censorship (Score 3, Informative) 75

The emails reportedly document Turkey's use of pro-government trolls on Twitter -- though ironically, it's Twitter that's now being used to document the censorship.

According to a Turkish journalist, Twitter is also helping out with the censorship:

At the request of Turkey, Twitter decided to block my Turkish account within Turkey.

I'm not the only journalist whose Twitter feed is restricted in Turkey. The process is simple: Turkey asks, Twitter shuts down.

And lists a few more who have been banned.

Comment Could Be Worse (Score -1) 410

They have a long way to fall before they outdo the old /. regime in promoting people who don't deserve it.

Remember when they brought back the Beanies and slipped an Anita Sarkeesian nomination in, trying to put her on the same level as Malala (the same year she won the peace prize) and Snowden? The comments rejected the idea so harshly that there wasn't even a follow-up submission naming a winner.

The old regime also did an Ask Slashdot for Brianna Wu for no reason, and unquestionably hyped Zoe Quinn's and Randi Harper's scams (CON and OAPI).

Say what you want about the current editors letting Shkreli answer questions here, but at least they're not going out of their way to spin everything he does as positive (like the old editors did with those other folks), or to avoid posting negative stories about him.

Comment A Lot of Effort to Bury the Lede (Score 4, Insightful) 109

So the mainstream press really never did come up with a way to spin the DNC Leaks.

They've repeatedly shown they had NO answer except to try to ignore the real story (like with Snowden), and pretend that the source of the info is more important than the fact that the DNC was nothing but a branch of Hillary's campaign, colluding to push Bernie to the side at all costs.

Comment Streamed Games = Next Level DRM (Score 3, Informative) 54

Since Onlive was in the news, I repost this every time streamed games come up because it's the best way I know to explain this kind of DRM:

Imagine if the Ubisoft always-on DRM had been an inherent, unremoveable aspect of the game system rather than just something tacked on to a few individual games after the fact, such that Ubisoft couldn't even begrudgingly neuter it in a patch. Well, streamed games are even worse than that would be.

The game doesn't even run locally. All you get is streaming video/audio and all the lag you'd expect (including controller lag), which is a recipe for disaster in North America.

Let's say you're lucky enough to have a 30mb/s connection. Why would you want to use it to transfer your game's video instead of, uh, a DVI cable, which is capable of 4 Gb/s? The people who developed DVI apparently understood that that 1920 x 1200 pixels w/ 24 bits/pixels @ 60Hz results in bandwidth well over 3 Gb/s. The people who push streamed gaming seem very, very confused (at best).

Some people consider IPS monitors unsuitable for games requiring fast reflexes (i.e. FPSes) due to their double-digit response times. Internet latency is often worse and certainly more unpredictable than LCD monitor response time, and with streamed games it applies to audio and keyboard/controller/etc input too.

Those of us who know anything about bandwidth and compression and (especially) latency can see the enormous technical obstacles facing a service like this, and I've never heard anyone explain how they intend to solve them. Onlive (for example) did everything they could to lock out independent reviewers with NDAs and closed demonstrations. A friend of mine described it as the gaming equivalent of the perpetual motion scam, and IMO that's spot on (except that streaming would still have the draconian DRM issues even if it worked perfectly).

Streamed gaming appears designed from the ground up to benefit the game publishers and fuck the customers, exactly as you'd expect from any DRM system.

Comment Consistency (Score 5, Insightful) 197

Twitter itself buys into (through their vague ToS and uneven/biased enforcement) arguments equating disagreement with harassment, and criticism with threats. And it throws even those stances out the window when the "harassing" party aligns with the right politics. Their Trust and Safety Council contains known harassers and doxxers.

If Twitter consistently took up a principled position to protect free speech (instead of cracking down on political thoughtcrime at the drop of a hat), they'd be in a much better position to resist this.

Comment It's Tor That Didn't Want it Investigated (Score 4, Insightful) 229

I wouldn't put it quite that way, but I cant help but note the usual crowd banging on about "cucks" and "SJWs" or whatever the meaningless /pol/ slur of the week is yet again complaining about sexual assault being investigated.

If anything, they're complaining that the police didn't investigate--because they were never called--yet headlines were written as if there'd been a trial with a guilty verdict.

Are you really surprised that the "crowd" complains when they see potentially life-ruining sexual assault allegations handed over to a private company hired by Tor to do a secret investigation, instead of the justice system?

Slashdot Top Deals

"And remember: Evil will always prevail, because Good is dumb." -- Spaceballs