Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


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

Comment I doubt Hollywood has an age discrimination issue (Score 4, Insightful) 317

It seems unlikely to me that Hollywood has an age discrimination issue. It seems much more likely that Hollywood has a looks discrimination policy, and merely hiding the numeric age of an actor or actress isn't going to resolve this.

If an actor doesn't look the age for a part, they're not going to get the role. Trying to hide their "real" age won't help with that. Nothing short of completely changing Hollywood culture - and, really, American culture - to not be so youth-focused will change that. And that's not an easy task, and certainly not something this law will help with.

This is clearly a "this is something, so we're doing something about the problem!" law. It won't help in any way, but at least it's a bullet point on some lawmaker's resume!

Comment Re:Bold experiment (Score 1) 29

Twitter was a bold as an experiment for democratic debate

I disagree. Twitter was originally intended as a "micro-blogging" platform that ran over SMS with a web interface. The 140 character limit is from that, and it's the reason Twitter usernames are limited to 15 characters. (The remaining five characters in a 160-character tweet are for "command" codes. The SMS interface still exists.)

It rapidly grew to something that no longer fits that, but it was never an "experiment for democratic debate," it was if anything an experiment in running a social network over SMS. Public forums and public blogging platforms existed well before Twitter did.

But for posting selfies, spamming, professional self-promotion and reinforcing your own world view, yeah, it's great, and it's true of Facebook, Instagram, everything else.

While true, it's also useful for one other thing: posting notifications. Most of what I use Twitter for are getting notifications about various things. Twitter has essentially become a "push RSS" service where instead of polling an RSS feed, you get push notifications as updates as posted. It's useful in a very specific set of circumstances.

It's that last thing that would make me miss Twitter were it to go away. 99.9% of Twitter? Burn it with fire. But using it as a free notification platform with an SMS-fallback? That's incredibly useful.

Comment Re:WebExtensions API (Score 2) 208

I see no real down side.


"Hey, you know that one differentiating feature we had between ourselves and Chrome, the extensions that are available for Firefox that just aren't really possible in the Chrome extension model? Let's get rid of those."
"So we'll just basically be a crappy version of Chrome that uses more memory, is less stable, and is slower?"
"Sounds like a great idea! Let's do that!"

The only reason anyone is still using Firefox instead of Chrome is to get access to Firefox extensions. Once Firefox makes their extensions be Chrome extensions, there will no longer be any compelling reason to keep using Firefox.

The only one I can think of is "at least Google won't be spying on you" but with Firefox you're still being spied on because they still want to do ads when you open new tabs and as you enter URLs in the "Awesome Bar." (No, really, that's what Mozilla calls what you'd think is the URL field. It's the "Awesome Bar.")

Comment Re:iPhone 7 = the new pet rock (Score 1) 324

Apple doesn't have to do any of that because it ships you the binaries specific for your phone only.

Actually they do have to do it. Starting in iOS 9 I think, developers compile to bytecode and then Apple compiles to the native code on their own cloud servers.

So the difference between Android and iOS is that Android compiles the code on your device (because of the wide variety of devices) while Apple compiles it in the cloud because of the very small number of devices they support.

Of course this means that when you update iOS, you have to re-get all your apps from the cloud. Hope you don't have a metered data plan!

Comment Re:iPhone 7 = the new pet rock (Score 1) 324

PS: because of the way Android runs, apps written back for Android 2.0 still work. Do apps written for the 3GS still run without issue? Or does the author have to recompile first?

Depends. Sometimes they do. Generally they do not. Apple tends to not really care about backwards compatibility, so it's a complete crapshoot. I remember that a 2-factor authentication app had to warn people about upgrading to iOS 9.3 because it would break the authenticator requiring a complete reinstall of the app.

Anyway, it doesn't matter: Apple is going to remove access to apps that old entirely.

Comment Re:Still most downloaded app (Score 1) 194

It's impossible to hold gyms for more than a few hours, and even if you did, there is no point to.

Actually there is. You know the currency you have to pay real money to get? Apparently you get it if you can hold on to a gym for more than 20 hours. I've never been in a place where gym churn is slow enough for that to happen, so I can't verify it.

But that's why the bot-swarms bother with gyms - to farm those "coins" from them.

Comment Re: Elect Trump for Honest Government (Score 3, Insightful) 528

One of the most convincing arguments that I've heard this election is that congress won't allow Trump to do anything, but the same cannot be said of Clinton.

This right here is what has convinced me that I'd rather see Trump in the White House than Hillary. If Trump wins the presidency, we might actually see Congress rein in executive power! If Hillary wins, forget it, we all lose.

Of course, I live in a state that's so blue that my vote is entirely meaningless (for any office, anywhere), so I'm going to be voting third party as well. Might finally get them enough votes to at the very least be allowed in a national debate.

Comment Re:Oh really? (Score 4, Interesting) 158

I'm expecting No Man's Sky to be kinda like Elite: Dangerous, lots of potential falls flat on it's face with execution. If it manages to pull a Minecraft I'll be pleasantly surprised, No Man's Sky is the biggest indie title to launch this month though.

It won't. The reviews are coming in and they're brutal: it's interesting for the novelty factor at first, but quickly becomes tedious and boring. The "procedurally generated planets" boils down to "picks a few random colors and resources." Even people who enjoyed it can't recommend it to other players because it's yet another one of those games that mistakes "hours of content" for "depth." Because if you had fun doing a task once, clearly you'll have 100 times as fun doing it 100 times. That's how fun works, right?

Which is a problem I've seen a lot in games recently: the apparent assumption that the solution to a lack of gameplay is to just repeat the same gameplay many times, as if that will make up for a lack of content.

I guess they really don't make them like they used to, when it was OK for a game to be short as long as it was fun to play.

Comment Re:Wah! (Score 4, Informative) 407

Yeah, no.

Red Letter Media posted a fairly extensive review that goes over all the flaws the movie has (and there are a ton of them - bad pacing, poor editing, bad action sequences, just poorly thought out plotting, poorly done cameos - I can't even remember them all).

Their review - despite being very well sourced as to exactly why they're saying what they're saying - got tarred as being "misogynist."

Have you tried explaining how the Ghostbusters movie sucks online? Almost instantly you'll get a post explaining how actually the movie is great and you just hate female main characters.

Apparently if you think the movie sucks, you hate female leads and are going to be Responsible for Hollywood Not Casting Female Leads in the future because you hate women.

And not because the movie is bad.

Yes, I've literally seen that argument, I am not making it up.

And I actually liked the new Ghostbusters characters, over all. The movie is still bad, but it's not because the leads were women.

Comment Re:I'd be sympathetic to Rotten Tomatoes but... (Score 2) 407

Yeah, when I watched Ghostbusters 2016 on opening weekend, I saw it in a packed theater and ... nah, just kidding.

The theater was practically deserted. I think there were maybe 20 people there all told? And this was the opening weekend.

When I went to the same theater to see Deadpool on like week three in the middle of the afternoon, the theater was literally sold out. And that's an R-rated film and it was the afternoon showing. So it's not just an unpopular theater - the new Ghostbusters film just did that poorly.

Comment Re:I'd be sympathetic to Rotten Tomatoes but... (Score 1) 407

It was terrible and highly sexist. A sex object male secretary and "safety switches are for boys."

"That's the joke." The joke is that he's supposed to be a gender-swapped version of the traditional movie female role. Which would make more sense if Janine fit that role, which she - well, didn't. Which is why he also takes on Dana's roll of "the possessed friend" later in the movie, because Dana does better fit the joke they're trying to make.

Except they forget to play up the "friendship" angle and it comes off as the Girl Ghostbusters hating him but keeping him around for literally no reason. (They don't even seem to like him as "eye candy" after the initial interview. Like, the idea is apparently supposed to be that he's kept around because they like looking at him but then they never really show that and you're left to deduce that.)

If it had been a great movie maybe those things would be less glaring but it was a terrible movie, it wasn't funny, no suspense, no action, nothing redeeming at all.

It's not that bad. What it ends up being is a great example of studios trying to produce a "safe" movie while at the same time being "edgy." You end up with a movie that's clearly been handed a checklist by the studio and rapidly interrupts itself to let you know what it's doing.


It is a bad movie. But it's not "fun" bad. It's just bland bad. And it's annoyingly bad because there are good ideas to be found in it, but they just aren't ever allowed to breathe.

Comment Re:I'd be sympathetic to Rotten Tomatoes but... (Score 2) 407

Why is this modded down? The AC is right:

To be "certified fresh" it has to have a rating of 75% or better.

75% is Rotten Tomatoes' "cut-off" for "Certified Fresh." In order to receive the badge, after a certain number of reviews are received, the movie has to have a rating of 75% or better. Ghostbusters 2016 got close (73%), but it didn't quite hit that.

Yet it got to be "certified fresh" anyway for ... some reason. (Hm, wonder what that might be.) Despite not meeting the criteria required for that badge.

Comment Re: Windows 10, Windows 10, Windows 10! (Score 1) 503

Right-click an empty spot on the toolbar and select Customize, then select Title Bar.

Nope: even with that selected, Firefox manages to ignore the "use accent color" settings and continues the "white with black text/white with gray text" focus/unfocus behavior you get without the "use accent color on title bars" setting set.

Firefox ignoring that setting is a known bug that won't be fixed because they consider it working properly.

Comment Re:Windows 10, Windows 10, Windows 10! (Score 1) 503

An AC mentioned this not being the case for them, and it's because of a setting that had its default changed at some point.

To find it, right click on the desktop and choose "Personalize." (Or open Settings, which is not the Control Panel, and choose "Personalization." Do not search for "Personalization" in the Start menu because that will find you the Control Panel's version of "Personalization" and not the Settings version which what you want. Windows 10, everyone.)

Anyway, choose Colors. If you opened the Control Panel version anyway, then click on Color and it will open the Settings app to Personalization, Colors for you. Because Windows 10.

In that screen, scroll down below all the accent colors, and find "Show color on Start, taskbar, action center, and title bar." Turn it on.

From now on, focused windows will use your "accent color" and unfocused windows will remain gray.

Except for Firefox, because Firefox ignores this setting. Also the Settings app itself, because I guess Metro - er, ... whatever they're calling it now apps ignore it as well.

But it will make the majority of windows more noticeably focused.

Slashdot Top Deals

"The Avis WIZARD decides if you get to drive a car. Your head won't touch the pillow of a Sheraton unless their computer says it's okay." -- Arthur Miller