Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
Compare cell phone plans using Wirefly's innovative plan comparison tool ×

Comment Re:You are missing the point (Score 1) 214

There's a simple solution for that: You can vote as many times as you want, but only your most recent vote counts.

Vote buyers would insist on the votes being cast just before the polls close, though that does create a manpower bottleneck if you want to buy lots of votes, unless they keep a watch on all their sellers via video link.

Comment Secret online ballots with random code selection (Score 1) 214

One way to do a secret online ballot would be to have each voter attend a place of registration, where their identity is checked before they get to choose one unique voting card from among thousands. Each card contains online voting codes, which could be used for dozens of ballots.

The main problem with this is that it makes vote-selling easier than it is with physical poll attendance.

Remote secret ballots that prevent vote-selling may be impossible, because if you have to verify your identity remotely, there's always the possibility of shenanigans that link this to your subsequent vote, no matter how much the authorities say they are separated.

Comment Re:I predict that this will be totally ineffective (Score 1) 534

Yes, it could be a war.

One thing the blockers have on their side is that legally Facebook have to mark posts as "sponsored" (or a limited number of synonyms). If a blocking rule can match this in HTML text, and can find the right parent or similarly-positioned block to hide, this should be hard for them to counter.

Comment Re:The age of subscription services (Score 1) 534

While I agree that there is moral pressure to stop using sites with ads you can't tolerate, and also that ads are intrinsically bad, there's often an unstated understanding that those who block ads can continue to use a site because of their contribution to either a site's content or its viral propagation. For example, either you tolerate Slashdot ads, you've chosen to hide your subscriber star, or you believe that your posts and moderations are an adequate quid-pro-quo.

Such an understanding is less likely to be present the more aggressively a site blocks ad-blockers, and the more prominent their pleas for users to turn off their blockers.

Comment Re:Why use FB? It's a social network (Score 1) 534

That's what I don't get about Facebook. I could send pictures of my cats to everyone because they make me happy, but the things that make me happy have already made me happy it adds nothing for me to share them.

Most people are also made happy by the validation they get when people like (and Like) their stuff. Any critics are shamed or blocked as trolls and haters, so it's one big soma love-fest that you never want to leave.

Comment Re: Good (Score 1) 534

Small and big businesses alike have stopped displaying their own websites in ads and have opted instead to provide a Facebook URL or simply say visit (of like us) on Facebook. The Facebook experience is becoming all to persistent.

Yes, this is because, unlike websites, Facebook provides businesses with both a push subscription service (Like) and a viral propagation service (share).

Comment Re:raging asshole, maybe, but he is right you know (Score 4, Interesting) 637

The best way to view Slashdot today would be to make invisible anything which has an equal number of +1 and -1 votes. If one troll faction hates it and the other troll faction loves it, it's probably not worth reading.

That touches on the problem of thumb-up/thumb-down moderation often turning into agree/disagree. Slashdot tried to avoid this by naming the different downmods. But this may becoming less effective as newer users moderate as thumbs.

Comment Re:The mighty data (Score 1) 326

So you switched because your doctor focused on medical issues rather than providing you with emotionally comforting talk therapy?

You are not alone. If you look at doctor review sites, by far the biggest reason for low ratings is a rude receptionist. The 2nd biggest reason is doctors that avoided chit-chat. Actual quality of treatment and medical outcomes are rarely even mentioned.

It wasn't chit-chat I was missing. It was someone who could concentrate on listening to me and asking the right questions, instead of on data entry. My current doctor does this. He must update my record after I've left.

Comment The mighty data (Score 1) 326

It's not only outside of consultations that doctors can spend time entering data. I once switched doctors because he spent most of every consultation oriented towards his screen and keyboard, entering symptoms, treatments, and medication into my medical record, and little time speaking with me face-to-face.

Comment Re:Microsoft (Score 1) 174

Large corporations are usually not very innovative.

Often true. But Apple seems to be an exception. This may be one legacy of Steve Jobs. A willingness to take time to perfect things, to relentlessly improve their offerings without getting distracted trying to clone the current-big-thing, to bet the company on an opportunity, and to aggressively steer a large company faster than would be possible without a BDL as CEO.

Perhaps the need for time and space to perfect their products is the origin of Apple's notorious secrecy.

Slashdot Top Deals

"When people are least sure, they are often most dogmatic." -- John Kenneth Galbraith