Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


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

Comment Some Clinton-bashers are beyond reason (Score -1) 445


For some people (e.g. partisans) no fact, outcome, or thought is acceptable that doesn't trash Clinton.

There's no room for the outcome of an FBI investigation that concludes the technician in question was engaged in legitimate work.

There's no room for the fact that of all emails that passed through Mrs. Clinton's email server only a minority seem to have been classified as the time they were sent. See e.g.

The FBI called the setup "extremely careless" but noted "Comey said the Justice Department shouldnâ(TM)t prosecute Clinton because there isnâ(TM)t enough evidence that she intentionally mishandled classified information. FBI investigators didnâ(TM)t find vast quantities of exposed classified material, and they also did not turn up evidence that Clinton intended to be disloyal to the United States or that she intended to obstruct justice."

Well ... no such nuance will ever be accepted in a political contest. That tells me how to interpret the snide and insinuating remarks by AC.

I don't blame the Trump campaign (and Fox News) for bashing away at this single point ... but let's at least see it for what it is: political ammunition for someone who doesn't have all that much leverage aside from insinuations and mud-slinging.

Mrs. Clinton is as competent as Dick Cheney. If we can put up with him, we can put up with Mrs. Clinton.

Mr. Trump however is another kettle of fish altogether. Intellectually he's in the same league as Sarah Palin. And he's the kind of guy you cannot tell that a stove is hot. He has to put his finger on it before he believes it. That's fine for a businessman, but it's a terrible liability in a prospective president because in international politics you don't often get a second chance, so you'd best be extremely careful and self-controlled.

As I see it, that rules out Mr. Trump no mater who he's running against.

Comment Re:Questions to Hillary's fans (Score 2) 294


Anyone interested in answers or policies has made up his mind long ago.

The ones such debates are aimed at are those who don't have a clue about or care a fig for policy issues but will go with whoever comes off as the most dominant, competent, knowledgeable, self-assured.

One quote from a voter inanother presidential election years ago sticks in my mind: "I just turn off the sound and watch their body language".

That's a big part of what this debate is all about, Ok? And both candidates know it.

In the mean time, while confidently spouting nonsense does not damage a candidate (well, one candidate at least) obvious waffling, stuttering, embarrassment at being caught out in contradictions does.

So no candidate will ever cooperate with him or herself being painted into a corner. Confidently brushing off a question is just one of the skills a candidate must have. So, regardless of whether a candidate knows anything worth telling about a question, they must be able to brush it off if it makes them look stupid (for not knowing anything about it) or forces them to say something that makes them look unpopular or less than likable..

Sorry, but that's how the game works. Like it or not, that's how we (collectively) set it up.

Comment Goal-focused CEO (Score 1) 124

There's absolutely nothing "bad" about a CEO putting the interests of a company first. I think we can all agree about that.

If blame is to be dispensed, we can blame this CEO for doing a poor job of keeping the high-profile CIO under control and for being insufficiently aggressive and proactive on the publicity angle.

With hindsight she might have been better advised to leverage the good reputation of the CIO by stroking him into sponsoring an "innovative and systemic approach" towards security.

For example convince him to commission an AI system to look after security against modest cost. That would have staved off disaster on the PR front for the time being, it might have kept the reputable CIO in place, and it would have prevented any really disruptive measures.

That would have been the American Way ... because who knows ... maybe some nerd would have come up with an effective AI system. That would have been a great cost-saving, a potential new profit centre and a PR bonanza.

Comment off YouTube...? (Score 1) 308

Well, when I was 16-24yrs, I was into and enjoyed high fidelity friends all did as well.

Er, not unless your parents and friends' parents were very well off, or all of them were in the military and bought their equipment duty-free in Asia you didn't. Before digital, in America a high fidelity stereo (let alone quadraphonic system) would cost your a couple grand.

I used to have an audiophile-quality system I bought stationed in Thailand, but it was stolen in a burglary. I have a pair of JBLs now, three way with twelve inch woofers. I miss my old stereo.

But I rip from YouTube occasionally, and rip from KSHE every Sunday night when they play six full albums. With Windows all it takes is Audacity and a setting in mmsys.cpl to capture a signal sent to your sound card, you don't need those goofs' web site.

I make CDs from KSHE's albums for the car, and they sound as good as factory CDs -- in the car. Their difference in quality in the house with the JBLs is marginal. It's a LOT better sound than a cassette recorded at home.

If you're in St. Louis (I'm not) you can plug your digital FM radio's "out" jacks into your computer's input jacks and you actually will have CD quality music.

The labels are fighting a losing cause.

Comment So - $100/yr for... (Score 3, Interesting) 165

...something I could do at home with a low-end shoebox computer (or better yet, an old cast-off box with a little SSD and a big platter drive stuffed into it) that would be incredibly cheaper over time, electricity included.

And wait - who said I had to have the damned thing on 24/7 at home? I boot it when I turn the TV on - takes less time to start up than the TV does these days thanks to SSD *shrug*.

Seriously - if I subscribed to this service, I'd be damned embarrassed to say that I did and claim that I'm a geek at the same time...

Comment Re:How many of those... (Score 1) 153



At the rate things are going, W10 will become the most successful and rapid malware spread since the old "I love you" email virus of 1999...

(no really, I'm fully willing to wager that, say, at least 50% of the installs were pushed onto an ignorant public who would not have otherwise bothered, 10-20% more were shoved onto machines whose owner consciously wanted no such thing, maybe 10-20% from people who actually wanted the thing, and the rest just showed up on new computers.)

Comment Re:And Yawn! (Score 1) 17

I have to give a big so what. I know we suppose to hate Microsoft and I have no love for Azure. But so what, it is Adobe who will need to deal with the consequences more than the users of the services.


Besides, maybe with a little luck, MSFT will nickel-and-dime Adobe hard-core along the way, and they become victims of the same rental scheme they've inflicted on their own customer base. Couldn't happen to a more deserving company, really.

Slashdot Top Deals

Almost anything derogatory you could say about today's software design would be accurate. -- K.E. Iverson