Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Get HideMyAss! VPN, PC Mag's Top 10 VPNs of 2016 for 55% off for a Limited Time ×

Comment Re:Not so much bypassing regional restrictions.... (Score 2) 161

Oh I realize there are many ways around even paying for Netflix content or any content for that matter. But in this case, I am okay waiting for it. Partially because I don't really like how every company is creating its own streaming service now. I'm definitely not going to be paying $8 a month or whatever for random whatever streaming service for every show I want to watch. $8 ..well or $10 or whatever netflix is up to now, a month is what I'll pay. Not getting back into $50+ a month trap that cable got me into. And if all streaming services end up there or the amount of content on any one service amounts to paying $50+ a month for what I want access to, then I'm done with all of it!

Comment Not so much bypassing regional restrictions.... (Score 3, Interesting) 161

Not so much bypassing regional restrictions....as flipping them to the reverse of the usual. Good for Netflix and CBS coming up with a global release strategy that benefits both companies. But alas, as I'm in the U.S. I will have to wait till it comes out a year later on US Netflix. I will survive..somehow.

Comment Not the new version. (Score 1) 108

This will likely lead to me buying a first generation Xbox One finally. Nah probably not. Only got a 360 because I was buying a laptop and they told me after that I got a free xbox 360. It will likely take a similar occurrence for me to get an Xbox One...which will be difficult because I have no plans to buy another computer for a few years...

Comment Re: The Republicans want to make everyone work (Score 0) 1140

Less opportunity, more opportunity. Fucking opportunity is opportunity. No, it may not be the same exact opportunity, but not everyone gets to go to Ivy League schools. Everyone has a chance to, if that's what they choose to drive towards. Parents make decisions that affect their children. Children can make decisions that lift them up above where they came from. Some parents choose to sacrifice their own opportunities to try to ensure their children have more than they did. Some parents make terrible decisions that make their childrens' lives harder. But we all are born with the same things available in life. Some people have to work harder to get to those things, that's just a fact. There is never going to be an "equal" playing field as you describe, except that we all get one life and decide what we do from there. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are constantly infringed upon by these government programs that presume to know how to mete out fairness and justice better than without it. As soon as you take someone from one person against their will and give it to another, you are infringing on that person's inalienable rights. Doesn't matter how altruistic you want to make it sound. There is a limited amount of stuff regardless of what stuff may be, and that means some people will get that stuff and some people won't. There is one POTUS job at a time. That means 350 million other people don't get to be that. Setting aside the age and other requirements, every one of those 350 million people had the opportunity to be president. But someone else won out. Opportunity is about having the option to try. Some opportunities have a very low chance of success regardless of who you are or what income level you were born into. Equal Opportunity is not about everyone having the option to try. You are not legally restricted from running for president because you went to a public school in a poor neighborhood. But if you decide to let that guide you into a career at McDonald's then you're ;probably giving up your opportunity to be POTUS. UBI ain't gonna get you into Yale. Hard work is going to. And someone who gets to Yale with hard work versus someone whose parents could afford to send them to every university at once is probably going to be better off. Does that mean since the hard worker now has a better opportunity for a job that the trust fund kid should get some sort of government assistance to help offset his laziness brought on by affluenza? No, he chooses what to do with the opportunity. Some choices you make, some your parents make, some your parents parents make. What you do with opportunity is up to you.

Comment Ask Slashdot (Score 1) 465

I'm sure the submitter is surprised that the answer to the impromptu ask slashdot tail on the story got such a wonderful response. But regardless, how did this story warrant posting on Slashdot? Dennis Cooper can go figure out with Google why they removed it. If he finds out it is for some newsworthy reason, go right ahead and have some random article written about it. There is literally nothing of value in this story. It doesn't expose some major concern with Google's services. It doesn't highlight an abuse of government power. It's one guy with some content that he didn't backup and has MAYBE lost for good.

Comment I can understand... (Score 2) 72

While Netflix left me wanting when they originally split streaming off as a separate service, I canceled the DVD portion in favor of keeping the on-demand streaming. They don't have EVERYTHING in their catalog, but compared to Hulu and Amazon Prime I am more likely to find what I want to watch in Netflix. That is true both for original content and regular content. Hulu I got solely to get 11.22.63 since I liked the book. After that I didn't have a reason to keep it based on the few shows I had a vague interest in. Amazon Prime I kept primarily because of its connection to Prime Shipping, but I have watched Prime few enough times that I'm ready to cancel it next month. Maybe it's just because I'm so accustomed to Netflix, but I feel I can find something to watch on Netflix that I will enjoy nearly 100% of the time. And with Prime and others I just don't have that hit rate. Could even be that Netflix UI is just better for me that the others.

Comment Re:So is it good or bad for privacy? (Score 3, Informative) 19

It allows a data transfer between the US and EU that wasn't going to be allowed before. From that perspective some group of people's privacy has been eroded. The provisions that have been finally approved make the way that data transfer is handled supposedly safer and therefore less likely to have that group of people's private data exposed to people who aren't supposed to get the data as part of the data transfer. Net result is affected group's privacy has been lessened.

Slashdot Top Deals

IOT trap -- core dumped