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 Cui Bono? (Score 1, Insightful) 141

There's lots of senseless finger-pointing going around. Anonymous doesn't get anything by shutting down Netflix (Americans aren't going to pressure the State Dept. over it to restore Julian's internet). So, who benefits by shutting down Twitter while Wikileaks is rolling out anti-Clinton hits and the Twitterverse is trying to work out what the leaks mean? North Korea? Only if they're doing it for the lulz. Or promises of favorable treatment under a Clinton administration.

Comment Re: Wikileaks is a toxic organisation. (Score 1) 312

"I don't care if the information about Hillary's lies are part of some Russian plot or not. If the truth is "destabilizing" well then fuck stability. Hillary admitting to having "public" and "private" positions is a piece of information that I, as a citizen, want to have."

Sure, but here's the question you need to ask yourself, given that, are you willing to completely and utterly disregard it when choosing a political candidate to back, given that you have absolutely no idea whether Trump shares the exact same trait due to a lack of similar leaks on his side of the spectrum?

Therein lies the problem, if you're only receiving one side of facts, and are deciding based on only a half-truth, then you're no better off than if someone had just outright lied to you. You're still exactly as likely to make an incorrect choice when you have half the information, as when you have all the information - Wikileaks is influencing the election with half-truths.

The English legal system originally changed it's court vow from "I promise to tell the truth, and nothing but the truth" to "I promise to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth" precisely because after a few shoddy court cases where the guilty went free it was realised that half-truths can be as misleading as outright lies.

So sure, transparency is great, but unless you're willing to completely disregard everything from transparency leaks that only tell half the story when forming an actual opinion and making a decision then there's a good chance you're actually making yourself more stupid by making decisions based upon those half-truths because you're letting them influence you into making decisions that do not benefit either your personal self-interest, or any hint of altruism you may have. For something like an election there is simply absolutely no benefit in making a decision based on transparency of one candidate over another with no transparency, and that works both ways - you may now believe you know, you have evidence that Hillary is corrupt, but what you don't know is whether Donald is even more corrupt, and that is a problem - you still have the exact same 50-50 chance of guessing which one is more corrupt that you had before you had any of that leaked information.

Comment Re: Wikileaks is a toxic organisation. (Score 1) 312

You say that, but in the UK when libel laws last changed, there were actually papers sat on both sides of the argument. Typically the division was the red tops that libel and ruin people's lives on one side being pissed they wont get away with it anymore, and those who publish factual, well sourced information and that have some actual journalistic integrity and hence no threat of losing a libel suit anyway.

So yeah, even with stuff like that it makes no sense that absolutely every media outlet would oppose someone over it. Some are happy to see the sleezy lie-rags pulled into line and forced to compete on the same level by having to do real actual journalism rather than pedalling outright lies to make sales.

Comment Re:in other news (Score 2, Insightful) 80

And I don't have to buy them from Tesla â" there are plenty of other sellers out there.

Yeah, but if you have a Tesla roof, Powerwall, and Model 3, then it'll handle the credits for you among the reverse net metering, the panel, and your charge-ups at the SuperChargers.

If you put ten Teslets in at home yesterday, you can take ten Teslets out at the SuperCharger today.

Solar City, on its own, had to make up all of the finance costs from net-metering only. As part of Tesla, they can give you flexibility on how to handle the charges. If you consume way more than your production in your cars, and go past the finance costs for your roof, then they can charge that difference to your credit card. But before that, it's much more economically efficient to keep all the charges in-system.

If you have a non-integrated stack then you can do all the same things, but it's necessarily going to cost more because of transaction costs.

Comment Re:I'm glad somebody is on the case (Score 1) 190

amazon does not care; each thing that gets sold, they collect a fee.

just like ebay. there is no caring there.

I do like amazon, but I'm aware that they are a whore.

when a company like amazon allows sellers to sell 'wireless anti-static wrist straps' - and after being informed (by me and many others who know this area) that this is IMPOSSIBLE and a hoax-item, they still allow sellers from china to sell this bullshit.

there is a good amazon and a bad amazon and they are both under the site. it really makes buying there, harder than it has to be.

amazon cares about its rep and goes 110% for its customers when you call in, but the fact that they let any 'yahoo' (lol) sell shit - that's really such a bad move on their part, it erodes their rep and for some reason, they don't seem to care about that aspect.

Slashdot Top Deals

It is impossible to enjoy idling thoroughly unless one has plenty of work to do. -- Jerome Klapka Jerome