Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


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

Comment Re:"Register your crimes! It's the law!" (Score 4, Interesting) 254

A security guy (admittedly someone random on the internet) mentioned the relative ease with which criminals can make their own communications and storage apps (or have them made). Apps which due to their custom nature render trying to strongarm the (now sidelined) 'big guys' into weakening their encryption completely useless.

In fact, the possibilities for any serious criminal network to create their own secure communications channels and data storage are so mindbogglingly vast that the only criminals the current situation is 'letting [...] conduct their business' are pretty obviously small time or just stupid drug dealers. Hardly the type of criminals envisioned when urged to give up the basic human right of privacy.

Comment Re:A Good Thing? (Score 1) 304

I agree that the second part of that (fictitious) reply was not very constructive. It is something I would think as such but generally utter in a paraphrased manner.

Do note however that in this hypothetical (but common) situation, the first real aggression comes from the "oh, shut up"-part. People feel personally insulted when you criticize something they like, in this case (the quality of) a movie. Even though I would not be insulting them personally, they would experience it as such and proceed to attack me ("you're a killjoy", "shut up", "just enjoy the movie") for voicing my opinion.

I find the latter objectionable.

Comment Re:A Good Thing? (Score 1) 304

A good blockbuster action flick doesn't need a great story

The quality of a story is not a binary thing. A story is not either great or shit. Action movies indeed do not need a great, thought-provoking story, but if the story is inconsistent or full of plot holes it is shit and should be allowed to be called out as such.
People get their panties in a bunch when you dare call movies they liked shit and start attacking you for being a killjoy and start throwing all kinds of straw men at you. Instead, they should just accept that they like shitty low-quality things from time to time, which is fine (and which in areas such as food doesn't seem to spark the same aggression towards critics).

Some of us just need to veg out from time to time with a few rattles and shiny things, plot holes and character development be damned.

There is this concept called 'the suspension of disbelief'. A story with fewer plot holes makes 'vegging out' much, much easier, because there is less disbelief to suspend.

I will even take "Battleship" over yet another god-damned superhero reboot.

The sentiment in the latter I agree with. But you should understand that in a way, you are partly responsible for those. The 'vegging out'-crowd is (still) not only rewarding but being very defensive of ever crappier movies with lots of rattles and shiny things in them. That (lack of) selection pressure is evolving the blockbusters in a certain way.

Comment Re:A Good Thing? (Score 5, Insightful) 304

It really doesn't help that any time you criticize the story, you are so often met with the following classic comment: "Oh, shut up, it's just a movie. I enjoyed it."
No, that movie had a shit story which was riddled with plot holes, both of which you failed to become aware of because the filmmakers were shaking rattles and dangling shiny things in front of you.

Obligatory Harry Plinkett review and filmmaking 101 class:

Comment Re:What I would buy (Score 1) 78

I had it for approximately 24 hours

You're an idiot if you think that is enough to properly gauge battery life. The battery sensors are not even calibrated at that point.

There are hundreds of screenshots by people easily lasting 3 days with their privs (and that is my personal experience as well). Screen on-time is less and varies, obviously, but it is perfectly reasonable compared to the competition.

Comment Re:Okay, seriously Britain (Score 1) 262

So maybe premature, rather than completely daft.

Considering the subject of who is to be held liable for when an autonomous car causes a crash is an oft recurring subject here on Slashdot and partly autonomous cars are already in use today, I'd say that it's not premature at all.

Everybody is kneejerking about the 'persons' and 'rights and obligations' part, but from what I can find the term 'person' refers to the concept of a 'legal person' or 'legal entity'. Considering nobody is losing their shit about companies being regarded as 'legal entities' and having rights and obligations, I'd urge everybody to put their anti-EU and anti-regulation crap back up where it came from.

Slashdot Top Deals

"How many teamsters does it take to screw in a light bulb?" "FIFTEEN!! YOU GOT A PROBLEM WITH THAT?"