Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



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

Comment Offline content (Score 4, Interesting) 29

Offline content doesn't have an expiration. Playing it does. So if you download in the US, then store it for 12 months to play elsewhere, it'll eventually refuse to play. But it's still there, unless you delete it. You just connect, open Netflix, go to your downloads, and click on it, and it'll play locally, after a quick check to the servers that it would be playable if you were to stream it.

Actually quite reasonable of a restriction. I've found stuff lasts about 2 weeks, but not everything expired at the same time, so that may not be a firm number (or I could have started looking at a time in the middle of an expiration period).

So if you are not trying to game the system, you can download at home, play on the bus (while connected via 3G) and 100% of playback will be from local, and nothing will ever expire. Also, if you open netlfix daily at home, but play offline at work, you shouldn't see a problem. So the "expiration" is over-stated in an attempt to generate clickbait to get people angry over the limitations that seem quite reasonable.

Comment Re: So what can I, as a 30 YRO male, do? (Score 1) 157

"Healthy young child goes to doctor, gets pumped with massive shot of many vaccines, doesn't feel good and changes - AUTISM. Many such cases!"

He's clearly come out anti-vax. Probably more to pander to the idiots, than for any personal belief, as his kids were vaccinated, but he's supported anti-vax.

Comment Re:Pretend this is slashdot (Score 1) 157

Just because you have to buy private for-profit insurance doesn't mean that a for-profit hospital will set up in your town. The "solution" is to cut costs by eliminating the profit motive in insurance and carers. Just that should eliminate 30-50% of healthcare costs (10%-15% profit, and the 10%-20% of a company dedicated to increasing profit but unrelated to services, times two middlemen). Having basic insurance doesn't guarantee access to health care. That was proposed, and shot down by the Republicans who would rather the poor just crawl under a rock and die.

Comment Re:Pretend this is slashdot (Score 1) 157

The current status in the US should assume that 100% of adults have herpes (passes by mouth, and is asymptomatic in most cases), HPV, and Toxoplasmosis. To assume otherwise is silly. There has not been a study into the rates of those in adults, corrected (or correlated with) demographics. It's not high on the list to narrow down the level of "common" diseases to who is more likely to have it, and how they get it. Treating it in 100% of the population would be the goal, due to the level of infection.

Comment Re:Privacy? What privacy? (Score 1) 75

terrorists and other criminals faking their identities will be more easily detected.

Objection. Assuming facts not already in evidence.

They already check to see who you are when you enter or leave the country and you are required to show ID. You have no privacy now.

That assumes the border database is inaccessible to all other governments and government organizations. Again, something that hasn't been shown to be true.

Most likely, the database will be open to all law enforcement, and if so, the privacy of someone not at the border would be reduced by this system.

Comment Re:Basic income (Score 1) 684

Hilariously, said candidate wants France to imitate the US, in pursuing oversea citizens - if US people live in a country where they didn't pay as much as they would pay in the US, you get them to pay what's missing to the US treasury. That would apply to French overseas citizens paying what they didn't pay to the French treasury.

Currently the US is the only country that taxes non-resident citizens (or at least was, last I read up on the subject). The Fair Tax, and many others are replacements would eliminate that.

Yet I'm *relieved* that Trump won and not the other option. It was that bad, Cthulhu would have been the lesser evil.

I blame the Democrats. They should have run Sanders (or Michelle Obama, if they really wanted a female). But they decided they'd rather nominate Hillary and lose the election than nominate anyone else. Hillary *caused* Trump. Hillary was a plant by Trump to get Trump elected. He's been friends with the Clintons for decades, and encouraged Hillary previously. It was all to get elected against her. She was in the race before he was. If she didn't run, he would have waited 4 more years for her to run. It was all a long-con by Trump, and Hillary was the idiot patsy. If she stepped down when the polls showed her losing, Bernie would have won.

The two most hated candidates in history ran against each other.

Comment Re:America! (Score 1) 684

Nothing new. I'm not pro-union. I'm anti-evil. Like the "subprime" crisis caused by rich white bankers, and blamed on poor blacks, I call out inappropriate re-assignment of blame. That some see that as filing me in a particular party or ideology (incorrectly), that doesn't mean I'm a member of those groups.

Comment Vocab Debates, El Yawno. [Re: Nefarious uses? (Score 1) 97

Unless the polls were hacked, then the election wasn't hacked.

That's a matter of interpretation of words. English is ambiguous, it has nowhere near the precision of say a programming language. I tried to keep it short rather than more accurate but fastidious and verbose because most readers in this context like it that way (for good or bad).

If a country exposes internal documents from one party but NOT the other party, and creates mass fake news stories in order to influence voter decisions, that is arguably still "hacking the election". If I wanted to say hacking the voting machines, I would have said hacking the voting machines. "Election" is a more general word/concept than "

I did not objectively say it wrong.

Comment "Unemployment rate" isn't simple (Score 1) 357

I personally remember when government data back early in the Reagan presidency went from reporting nearly 15% unemployment nationwide to well under 6% by redefining what "unemployed" meant. So . . . has government data ever been trustworthy, and is it still so?

This is a tricky topic with no easy answers or fixes.

The US government actually publishes several different metrics on unemployment. They don't make any ONE of them "official".

There has been one that has been by convention used as the unemployment rate by most of the press. But any politician or pundit can and often do cherry-pick which metric they want to use to spin things their way.

There are many gray areas to measuring. For example, there many people who would enter the work-force if offered enough, but otherwise are not actively seeking. "Domestic spouses" often fall into this category. They may be perfectly happy being a domestic spouse, BUT would probably take a job if it paid well enough. Same with retirees. That's why "actively seeking" if often a component of preferred metrics. However, some are down and out and have given up actively seeking. The reasons and motivations for not actively seeking vary greatly and have no clear cut-off points.

Compare it to trying to measure who is the best basketball player. Points-per-game is often used, but leaves out a lot of other details, such as passing ability, defense, rebounds, turnovers, shooting percentages, etc.

Shooting percentage is a fairly nice metric, but it often skips out the fact the best shooter is often given the ball when the play-clock is running down and they have to take desperate, well-defended shots because the defense knows they have to shoot very soon (as opposed defending against passing or driving toward the hoop, since there's no time for those). That's likely to lower their shooting percentage. We can perhaps compensate by splitting shooting percentage into those made with more than say 6 seconds to go and those made with less than 6. But as you see, it's difficult to find a single simple metric. Composite metrics can be formed, but few will agree on how to weigh and construct the various sub-metrics that go into such.

Slashdot Top Deals

I THINK THEY SHOULD CONTINUE the policy of not giving a Nobel Prize for paneling. -- Jack Handley, The New Mexican, 1988.

Working...