Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



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

Comment Re: macs are for gays (Score 1) 268

This is the real tragedy actually. There is no market for a "manufacturer of quality PCs". Unless your name is Apple, you are slave to the magical pricepoints that the consumers care about and that's all there is to it. If you can't match them, you go out of business. Large vendors do have good individual product lines, yes, but nobody could actually survive on making and selling those alone.

Comment Re: In other words (Score 1) 188

Sure, and that 56% accounts for 30% of device revenue, 20% of app sales, and only 10% of devices with the newest OS installed.

You're looking at this ass backwards. The huge profit margin and the planned obsolescence that is at the core of Apple business model is the exact reason why they are losing their grip on the market.

Sounds like somebody needs a reality check. Planned obsolescence? I can only dream Android manufacturers were as good as Apple at this planned obsolescence thing, considering no Android vendor comes even close to supporting their hardware for so long.

Comment Re: There is a legitimate dispute (Score 0) 534

Sadly, you are very wrong. One of the biggest problems ot the scientific fields of today is precisely that debunking existing theories achieves literally nothing for the people doing the debunking.

Scientist careers today live and die by citations - how often their published work is cited by others. The problem is that published works that debunk an existing theory get cited several orders of magnitute LESS than the work they are trying to debunk. Worse yet, among people who actually read the "works of disproval", the majority only slightly change their opinion of the work being criticized.

So no, in the current environment it is highly improfitable and illogical for a scientist to engage in anything but original work (or work that at least looks original).

Comment Re: basically doing the same as china? (Score 3, Insightful) 415

Therein lies the biggest problem with current US free speech legislation. When a bunch of private entities like Google and Facebook hold a near-monopoly on the flow of information, who gives two shits about whether the goverment can censor you? It's the near-monopoly private entities I am most concerned about.

Comment Re:Show of hands (Score 2) 262

I'm curious how this will butt heads with the First Amendment in the United States as this will inevitably be a system that will censor information that is embarrassing or uncomfortable to the chosen few who will decide what is "extremist".

This won't butt heads with the First Amendment in the slightest, because the limitations it applies only applies to government entities, not private ones. You have no right to free speech on somebody else's private platform. They decide the rules and you are free to not use their service.

Comment Ridiculous stats (Score 1) 533

When you make it so that after somebody has spent a year looking for a job (might be 6 months now, actually) and then give up is no longer considered unemployed (you need to be both in the labor market AND unemployed AND actively looking for a job to qualify as officially "unemployed"), your unemployment statustics become utterly meaningless. Now if you look at the "labor market participation rate", which is at it's lowest point in many decades (if not ever), an entirely different picture presents itself...

Slashdot Top Deals

MSDOS is not dead, it just smells that way. -- Henry Spencer

Working...