Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
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:Can't see the forest for all the trees (Score 1) 385

Batman vs Superman was an okay one time movie, not worth the popcorn and soda that a theater experience requires, but watchable one time movie, just to see WonderWoman and Aquaman.

Certain actors shouldn't fill certain roles. It would have been much better to find an unknown to play Batman than put Ben Affleck in that role. He doesn't have the ability to pull it off. Being behind the mask, requires greater acting ability than normal, because you have to convey more with movement. It doesn't work for Ben as Batman. Though He works in "The Accountant" because his acting ability is fairly wooden, like the character, it works.

Henry Cavill sort of works for Superman, mainly because he "looks" the part.

Comment Re:Poor business (Score 4, Insightful) 385

One guys "crap" is another guys entertainment.

The problem is that any given reviewer wont "mesh" with what *YOU* like. Or what *I* like. In the dark ages (before www), I used to religiously read two or three movie reviewers in my area. After 5 or 6 reviews the lights clicked. If X liked a given movie it would be likely that I WOULDN'T like it. If Y liked a movie, then it was pretty good odds that I would enjoy it. It was a bit more complicated than that but that's the gist. I learned what THEIR criteria was pretty quick.

Occasionally, I'd see a crappy movie my "rules" would indicate I would enjoy it or vise versa but it was otherwise pretty accurate.

Good example of an exception -- Back to the Beach (1980s reunion movie). I did *NOT* want to see that film. Some friends and I went to see the latest Bond film (can't recall what it was) but it was sold out. They decided to see this and I didn't drive. Everything told me that this movie would be crap. I'm embarrassed to say I enjoyed it. The opening on the airliner set the tone and it was just fun to watch. My "rules" told me to avoid this film like the plague.

Comment Re:Conversely... (Score 1) 242

If the situation is exactly the same up to the point of your two options, then there is a "Self digging shovel" available at some level in both situations. In situation #2, it isn't for sale, and unless you can conclusively promise shovel in one year, for only $5,000 then option 1 is still the only valid consideration. Further, if option 2 says there are no patents (assuming that is the change) then I can build a shelf digging shovel today for whatever price, and as long as the value I get out of it is better than before, I'll get my $20,000 shovel either way.

1) 20000 for shovel get 30000 use from shovel in year one. Year two is how much (no answer in option 1) is it free, or nearly free? Does it cost 20K / year forever (unlikely) or what. Incomplete information leads to bad decisions.

2) Can't buy Self Digging shovel (unknown reason). Promise that they will be available in a year for $5000 (if you believe vaporware promises)

all the unknown variables make your assumptions useless, which is why I chose (and still choose) option 1. Based on the INFORMATION I have, it is the only real choice.

Comment Re:Conversely... (Score 1) 242

Heck, you can still charge the same amount as a well-written patent, but can crank it out in an afternoon!

Legal profession robots coming soon for this reason alone. Yes, good lawyers will always be needed, but most "lawyering" today is boilerplate legal forms and processes that can be replicated by a series of questions that pick which process one needs. We can get rid of most lawyers and and streamline the legal processes.

Comment Re:Conversely... (Score 1) 242

In that world, do you think we'd successfully get rid of patents? Also, have you given thought to the implications of getting rid of patents?

No. And Yes.

We'll never because its in the Constitution, and that is next to impossible to change. And I have, and it is liberating of enterprise. I prefer "trade secrets" to Patents for protection anyway.

Comment Re:This is why i didn't buy day 1 (Score 1) 89

Back in the day, we rarely had these problems with first day console released hardware. And when we had them, it was using bleeding edge technology (original Gameboy LCD screen recall). Where the hard break from this trend ended and began was after the 5th generation and beginning of the 6th generation consoles. It continues to this day. Software follows a similar pattern, but more egregious with the advent of the Internet; with the idea it can be patched later with quick delivery. In fact, auto-update is now expected in apps. But there's no excuse for sloppy electronic engineering and manufacturing; not in the year 2017 FFS!!!

Comment Re:Conversely... (Score 4, Insightful) 242

They are written vague on purpose, because to be specific, would allow others to build upon your patent, and patent their improvements, locking you into a stale old way of building said invention, never able to improve it.

As a libertarian, I am all for the repealing of most patents, and the shortening of the term of protection. As it stands now, patents do not protect anyone from anything for very long. If something is popular, and patented, it will be cloned and ripped off anyway.

Patent abuse is like anything else the government does, it doesn't help many people, and hurts more people than it helps.

Comment Re: That's their job (Score 1) 448

Basically my reasoning is nothing like your emotional projection says it is. My reasoning is: "Taxes are regressive, all of them. The rich can avoid them, the poor doesn't pay them, and the middle class is stuck paying them". I personally don't pay any more taxes than I have to, to avoid going to jail. I expect everyone to do exactly the same thing.

This case (Apple/NZ Taxes) kind of proves the first two of the chain in reasoning. I expect a witty expletive riddled retort to follow.

Comment Re: This is extortion (Score 1) 227

The CIA presumably got the hacks from Russians, so that they would want the Russians to take the fall.

The CIA is actually working with affected companies, and they really can't disclose the vulnerabilities to the public, because they already know about them.

The CIA would love to undermine the public trust in WikiLeaks, so blaming the Kremlin for everything is logical (cold war mistrust)

The CIA would love to be able to shift the focus off their hacking skills and put it on the Kremlin.

OR Perhaps both the Kremlin and the CIA are both pissed at the other exposing them and are using public press to wage a war for the minds of citizens of the world. Meanwhile, I'm pissed that nobody seems to give a shit about doing the right thing, except it appears ... WikiLeaks.

Comment Re: This is extortion (Score 1) 227

you made a vague accusation that the Kremlin is influencing WikiLeaks. Do you have any evidence?

This is the second time I've seen this accusation, and the first time the guy offered no evidence, just that he "was Russian, and knows things". My guess, is that this is all part of the vague "Russians Hacked the US elections" thing, that was exposed as being based on vague accusations ... from the beginning.

It is actually more likely that it was Seth Rich that gave WikiLeaks at least part of the treasure used to upset the election. And having "Password" as your password ... revealed in a Phishing attack is evidence that said person shouldn't be anywhere near sensitive/secret information.

So far, vague allegations are all that is needed to upset people with Trump. The fact that he is playing the game back is popcorn worthy material. Nobody gives a shit when the Press lies with its unsubstantiated allegations, but when Trump does it, all hell breaks loose and his is "unhinged"!

Comment Re:Yeah, the bubble will pop long before that (Score 1, Flamebait) 374

but in America the special snowflakes can't possibly be judged academically

Because systemic "Racism", "Sexism", "Genderism", "Homophobia", "Transphobia" ... basically anyone that is not a white male has "societal discrimination" in their favor, so we must accommodate.

Slashdot Top Deals

Neutrinos are into physicists.

Working...