Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


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

Comment Apples and Spotifies and Oranges (Score 1) 204

Their comparison between what Spotify has paid them and what YouTube is paying them is a pretty poor comparison. On Spotify, the vast majority of the music played incurs some for of royalty. On YouTube, although there is a lot of copywritten material out there for sure, the bulk of the content does not necessarily incur royalty costs.

The comparison maybe would have been valid if they had qualified it with "For the same about of copywritten material viewed on YouTube vs played on Spotify, Spotify paid us double the royalties."

It's loosely equivalent to some Minneapolis politician complaining about how much less toll revenue they get compared to Chicago when a large number of Chicago's freeways are tollways and Minneapolis only charges for express lanes (when you're not a carpool).(I know the analogy is a bit of a stretch but it's been a long day.. gimme a break!! ;)

Comment Re: Sack of salt (Score 1) 102

You realize that most of the 240Hz TVs that were sold were designed for 3D capability? 120Hz for a mono image is a nice round number because it can support both primary content frame rates evenly. For a stereo image (how most 3D TVs work) you get half of the available frame rate per eye so to get that optimal 120Hz per eye you need a 240Hz TV.

Comment Re:Maybe we should mimic civil engineering (Score 2) 280

PS. To answer the original question: No.
In the sense of how the question was asked, I have never produced any software that I'm ashamed of what it is used *for.

BUT there is plenty of code I wrote when I was younger / less experienced that I'm kinda ashamed I wrote... I could write it SO much better today :)

Comment Re:Maybe we should mimic civil engineering (Score 1) 280

Your example isn't as far off as you think:

One of the biggest conspiracy theories around 911 (Please not getting into that argument just an example) is that the building were *designed to withstand an airliner impact and so should not have collapsed. Lawsuits after the fact take such things into consideration:
If your building is not designed to such standards and a plane flies into it it is expected to fall and liability fall almost entirely with the terrorist. (I know there are exceptions... just in a "sanish" world.) BUT if your building is designed to withstand an airline impact and the building still falls because of faulty design then chances are more likely you'll win a lawsuit against the design firm and maybe the construction firm, etc.

Here in MN we had another excellent example: The 35W bridge that collapsed. There were *tons of lawsuits after that one and culpability fell on many groups. The bridge was designed to withstand a certain amount of weight but was also many decades old. It was a poor design in-general which is called "fracture critical" where a single failure can lead to total collapse. At the time it fell there were 100s of tons worth of construction trucks all being parked on the bridge along side regular rush hour traffic (think of these trucks much like the terrorist in the first example). You also had state inspectors who had been (or maybe not so much as they should have) regularly checking the bridge to validate its safety. *ALL of these groups were found liable to some extent and had to pay out settlements.

If you sell software or a service that has a contractual promise of a certain level of security or stability and that software doesn't live up to that spec there are all sorts of lawsuits involved. If you are in a software business where lives are on the line (Health Care, Weapons / Aerospace Tech / etc) then you can be damned sure they'll be coming after you if someone's life is lost. There isn't some magical bubble that keeps us developers from liability for the tools that we produce. The IS however a more acceptable level of lack of perfection given the natore of how complex the systems we create are and, frankly, how much did you pay us to build it right.. what promises did you pay me to live up to.

Comment Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics! (Score 1) 165

"citing a poll commissioned by London & Partners, the mayor's economic promotional company"

As Slashvertisements go this one is a bit more like news BUT it's still PR. Of course the Mayoral commissioned poll is going to show whatever the Mayor needs it to show. And of course the papers are going to let the Mayor get in all of his sound bites as he scrambles to lessen the impact Brexit will have on his people (bottom line).


Comment Re:Temperature increase from what temperature? (Score 1) 258

So, on topic, it seems to me that the great improvement here isn't necessarily the reheating but the fact they do so on vaporized milk (dispersed/whatever preemptively blocking pedant reason why what they are doing is different from actual "vaporization")

My question: Have they tried doing this during the initial round of pasteurization to see if the resulting once-baked milk is significantly 'cleaner' and possibly closer in taste/nutritional value to unpasteurized milk? The science makes a lot of sense to me as your heating will be more effective with more exposed surface area but I'm not clear on why this needs to be a secondary process instead of a modification of the primary process.. ?

Comment Re:Really? (Score 1) 265

Personally I'm making the assumption that our genetic ancestors survived by eating all of the species who didn't. Even a meat eating dinosaur would need a LOT of meat at its disposal BUT a small mammal can live for a long time on the meat of a single massive dino. The conditions post-impact might even be just about perfect to naturally preserve them.. ?

Get out the smoker, honey! We're making dino-jerky!!!

Comment Re:As long as it's for the right reason (Score 3, Informative) 482

I'm extremely conflicted on this issue. I strive to not be a hypocrite as much as possible so in this try to constrain my activities to a set of rules that I would be comfortable with everyone else following. SO here's where I'm at:

I go to a LOT of concerts. I believe the vast majority of people don't understand the depth of this statement. 5-7 nights a week. 250-300 days out of the year I'm seeing live music. There are many different kinds of shows and each one has slightly different rules. Clubs are very different from Theaters are very different from Stadiums are very different from Festivals. You really need to respect the environment you're in. I really hate how a lot of people use their phones during a show BUT at the same time my favorite hobby, aside from seeing the music in the first place, is capturing it for the many many people who live vicariously through my concert experiences. This is not vanity. I get thanks on the daily from people who don't have the time or money to go see what I do and truly appreciate the photos and videos I capture and share. SO, I need to find a balance between getting that done and not being "that guy" at a show either. Here are the rules I try to follow:

1) Turn off your flash. *Period. Cell phone flashes suck. You will get better photos with the light that is being provided by the stage light engineer. The *only time you need your phone flash is if you are taking pictures of your friends in the audience and then only if they are in the dark (see #2). Your friends look cooler if you take a photo away from the stage so they are illuminated by the stage lighting anyway.
2) I don't take selfies or group shots during shows: This is not only obnoxious for the flash that is often used (necessary or no) but also for the "sorry we're going to expand and shove you all out of the way so we can get an unobstructed shot". I'm not going to say I've never been in such a shot nor taken one but I avoid it to the max because I hate it when it happens.
3) Keep video to a minimum: I love having videos but hate taking them and it's really hard not to be "that guy" while doing so. Aside from the above *never use flash while recording because goddammit why are you blinding me for that long! but also: a) Video is better horizontal than vertical. b) try to not hold the phone blocking everyone else's view. This is prime if you can be close enough that you can hold your phone over someone's shoulder so only you and maybe the couple people immediately behind you can see it. c) Phone video only looks good when you hold the phone extremely still. If you can't do this then don't record video. d) (Personally) since I want this to be worthwhile to the general public I always record a entire song. I don't want to watch some crappy minute long shaky video of whatever so if I'm going to go through the hassle and aggravation of recording one then its going to be steady, quiet and a complete song. I also shoot for no more than 1 video per show or set if any.
4) Do your work quick and go away. Block people's view for as little time as possible and put your phone away. I've had shows where I took literally hundreds of photos and the people around me were like "dude I rarely saw your phone in the air". Look for a good shot, get your settings configured when the phone is out of view, pop it up and take a few quick shots (this is faster when the flash is off and any HDR is off as well!) and put the phone away. ALSO you're not going to capture the whole show. Don't try. Take a bunch of (near most) songs off and just enjoy them. I've been behind people who were shooting constantly and it's annoying.
5) Don't do a bunch of other stuff with your phone. If it's a really major show I might do a single FB update with a photo but else my phone is in my pocket unless it's being a camera or watch. *exception: for really large shows (festivals / stadiums) people may need to find where I am / vice versa so texting is a necessary evil sometimes BUT I'm not sitting there chatting about other crap. Purely logistical stuff.
6) ALL of this only works well if you're close to the stage. At a stadium or other large venue show there are great wide-angle shots to get and honestly you're not blocking most people's view so shoot away BUT I'm always close to the stage and if I can't get close enough for my phone pics to look great then I'm just not taking them. Cell phones do NOT look good if you use your zoom (unless you have one of the *extremely rare phones that has an optical zoom on it) so if you have to zoom then you're too far away. Just don't take the picture.

There are some smaller shows where friends of mine in the bands I'm seeing will ask me to record certain songs for their purposes and I'll push these rules a bit for a business job. Specifically more video and both videos and photos almost always look better when recorded from high at a down angle. I'll still try to put myself in-front of a pole or out of the way so I'm not wrecking anyone's view more than necessary but if the band wants a video then, sorry-not-sorry, I'm putting their desires above yours for a bit.

FYI I've been at a few shows lately where phones or at least the use of them was banned. Dave Chappelle had the secure phone sacks. I avoided using one but still kept my phone away for all but a very secretive single "I was here" shot. Amon Tobin and Puscifer had lots of security making sure your phone never came out.. mine stayed in its pocket. The late, great Prince was absolutely vicious about no phones at his events. You had to leave them in your car and any, even slight, violation resulted in ejection so not worth it. In-general always respect the artist. It's their art to let you, or not, record/capture.

Comment Re:Honestly (Score 1) 97

Not surprised at all since I helped build the system.

DoS has been matching Passport and Visa photos for a long long time. The only news here is that the FBI, only somewhat recently, added Face and Iris to their NGIS Fingerprint system. The fact they can search all 3 databases from one source was a fairly easy piece of middleware since all the databases are running the same Biometric software.

The world rotates based on a careful balance of the illusion of security and the illusion of privacy... people still enjoy their delusions tho.

PS. DNS-and-BIND apparently read a completely different post than yours. Reactionary response to something I'm pretty sure you didn't say..

Slashdot Top Deals

Egotist: A person of low taste, more interested in himself than in me. -- Ambrose Bierce