Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:No money for you, dissident! (Score 1) 76

It won't affect Jihadists. That's for sure. They'll simply create new accounts, inform their fellows about it and continue to spread their bullshit.

Well, it probably would affect them, it just won't stop them completely. Whack-a-mole isn't ideal, but it's better than ignoring the problem. There's an analogy in computer security.

The much bigger effect will be on channels that offer controversial opinions.

Indeed, I see a real risk of misguided leftists ('SJWs') wanting YouTube to ban, say, Sam Harris, for saying mean things about Islam.

Comment Re:No money for you, dissident! (Score 1) 76

Sure, it's not opinion, but YouTube isn't the government, even if they're the big player. The government has an obligation not to ban videos merely for being offensive, but Google doesn't have a moral obligation to host them.

It isn't oppression when Slashdot refuses to publish fashion news, and it wouldn't be oppression for YouTube to ban jihadism advocacy.

Comment Re:No money for you, dissident! (Score 1) 76

I agree there's a certain risk here, yes, and it's regrettable that YouTube dominates the way it does.

An example I'm familiar with is Jim Sterling's 'Jimquisition' series, which constantly faces YouTube-specific bullshit (generally but not always in the form of ungrounded accusations of copyright-infringement). Despite that this nonsense threatens his very career, he sticks with YouTube, not, say, Vimeo.

I still don't see that there's anything malicious at play here though. It's completely reasonable that advertisers don't want to be associated with insane bigotry, and it's completely reasonable that Google take steps to accommodate this.

Comment Re:No money for you, dissident! (Score 1) 76

I could well foresee that we'll soon see the same happening to anything that a loud and vocal group considers "bad speech".

It's market forces at play here (companies don't want to be associated with hate-filled YouTube rants), not government intervention. I'm not too worried.

Well, the British government did get involved, but only in the same capacity as the affected companies: as a paying advertiser.

Comment Re: Really, Microsoft? (Score 1) 320

But, windows dev is the easiest dev. By far hands down. With OS X or Linux, I don't even know where to begin and think it would be.

How about some specifics? Windows has UWP, WPF, and WinForms. Linux has Qt and Gtk. Or JavaFX if you're into that kind of thing, or various others. Which toolkits specifically do you mean?

It profitable enough to care. Especially for Linux.

Well sure, Linux desktop apps are a much narrower market than Windows.

Not the terrible integrated stuff. Ubuntu, which is hugely popular as the windows alternatives is ---- like windows and Mac.

What's your point? Ubuntu has a 'store' which is web-searchable. It had one long before Windows did. Not that either are authoritative anyway.

Comment Re:Really, Microsoft? (Score 1) 320

Didn't they do it in part already, when going from XP to 7 and then again 7 to 8?

Not really, no. You can still play really old games and run really old business applications in Windows 10.

About the phones thing: it's at times like this I wish the web-as-the-ultimate-platform pipe-dream were a reality.

Slashdot Top Deals

No amount of careful planning will ever replace dumb luck.