Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



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

Comment Re:About as useful as touch screens for amputees (Score 1) 160

So?

Oh no, a system makes an improvement, but not a perfect, 100 percent improvement, so what, lets throw out the improvement it *does* make?

It's not an improvement across the board. It's likely not an improvement at all, if you are listening to elevator music to make you calm enough to drive in the first place, and suddenly there's a startling "BRAAAAAAAAAAAAATTTTTTT!" that could just as easily come out of the ambulances horn, but didn't, it came out of your radio.

Also: call me back when it can turn an off radio to on, or force your stereo away from whatever you're listening to, over to the FM band so the ambulance can scream at you more than the flashing lights, siren, and horn are already screaming at you.

Also also: so I assume the computer in self driving cars will now listen to NPR most of the time so that the FM radio will alert the car's driver -- a computer that apparently likes "Lake Woebegone Tales" -- will "hear" the ambulance.

Comment Re:Mac OS based espionage malware (Score 4, Insightful) 59

It doesn't. Someone has to authorize it with the admin password.

Is this based on anything, or are you just guessing?

The article makes it clear that in order to extract and run the malware, you have to extract and install other malware named "Java".

This "Java" is apparently malware developed by a large database company in order to install security holes in otherwise secure computers, and is so named to trick tired programmers into believing that they are installing coffee.

Comment About as useful as touch screens for amputees (Score 1) 160

As of 2004, there were ~530,000 deaf and hard-of-hearing people in Sweden (Encyclopedia of Deafness and Hearing Disorders, p.197.)

So basically 5% of the population isn't going to hear the radio announcements, even if they have their radio on. Which they probably don't, or it's tuned to Sirius Satellite or plugged into their iPod/iPhone.

About as useful as touch screens for amputees whose prosthetic hands can't capacitively couple with trackpads or iPhones...

Movies

Netflix is 'Killing' DVD Sales, Research Finds (torrentfreak.com) 301

Netflix has become the go-to destination for many movie and TV fans. The service is bringing in billions for copyright holders, but it also has a downside. New research shows that the availability of content on Netflix can severely hurt physical disc sales, which traditionally have been the industry's largest revenue source. From a report: A new study published by researchers from Hong Kong universities provides some empirical evidence on this issue. Through a natural experiment, they looked at the interplay between Netflix availability and DVD sales in the United States. The experiment took place when the Epix entertainment network, which distributes movies and TV-shows from major studios including Paramount and Lionsgate, left Netflix for Hulu in 2015. Since Hulu has a much smaller market share, these videos no longer reached a large part of the audience. At least not by default. The researchers used difference to examine the effect on DVD sales, while controlling for various other variables. The results, published in a paper this week, show that DVD sales increased significantly after the content was taken off Netflix, almost by a quarter. "Our difference-in-difference analyses show that the decline in the streaming availability of Epix's content leads to a 24.7% increase in their DVD sales in the three months after the event," the paper reads.

Comment Re:Whoah there (Score 1) 22

Your fake concern is fake noted. That said, the pudge of old would have been able to convey that with one simple sentence and a shrug. This may be relevant to your interests.

Now, in the interest of avoiding your pedantic tendencies as much as possible, I feel we'll have to define "broadly reported unsourced attacks" before I get started.

For example, I doubt you'd approve of me using a site like Newsmax.com, despite its age and traffic. Which is fine, as they don't actually produce much content anyway. Slightly more problematic are Breitbart and The Daily Caller. For both I'd suggest a cutoff date of 2012 (anything before that being invalid as they were both much smaller then than they are now.) National Review Online should be fine, methinks.

Moving on to talk radio, I would doubt you'd have a problem with sourcing anything from the big three: Limbaugh, Hannity and Beck. To make things easier, I won't bother with any of the others, no matter how popular. (They all have shit timeslots in my market anyway, so I don't really get much of a chance to listen to them unless they're filling in for one of the big boys.)

And, of course, the vast "liberal media" is just fine for plundering, right?

Comment Re:Whoah there (Score 1) 22

But in saying it this way, you're attempting to imply you can provide evidence. And I am simply pointing out that there is no reason to even consider that this is a possibility. Don't tell me you will do it later, because that's irrelevant. It's no different than saying nothing at all, or even saying "I have no evidence" or "I cannot provide evidence." They are all exactly equivalent in the end, except that the other methods do not have the implication that you might actually provide the evidence, despite you not giving us a reason to believe that, so it smacks of dishonesty.

Just say nothing at all, unless you have something to contribute. You'll be better off.

Comment Re:It's the media's fault (Score 1) 22

If not for you, then it's not difficult for anybody.

I make no claims about what is not hard for others. I do assert that most people do not do it, regardless of how hard it is.

In this case blaming the media is just doing the democrats' dirty work ...

Yawn. I am uninterested of your characterizations. Either actually make an argument against what I wrote, or do not. So far, you have not.

We all have the same power to turn our backs. You're not that special.

You are not, in any way, arguing against what I wrote.

In theory humans can make the choice.

Of course they can. So? Again: this, in no way whatsoever, implies that the media is not to blame. It just means that we have the power to ignore their bad behavior. But it's still their bad behavior. They are still to blame for it. Obviously.

Comment Re:Whoah there (Score 1) 22

Incorrect. Page views and the like are cash money.

I meant -- obviously -- there is no journalistic or democratic reason to do it. Everything has a reason.

I don't know of any broadly reported unsourced attacks on Hillary Clinton.

Of course not, you don't read the NYT.

So you have no examples, then. Good to know.

Slashdot Top Deals

Real programs don't eat cache.

Working...