Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


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

Comment Re:More channel choice is needed (Score 1) 193

I get charged a $10 broadcast programming fee for channels I can get with an antenna...and I can't opt out. I can't say "just give me everything but the broadcast channels" and lose them. Nope, just $10 for something I can get for free.

I get that this is because the broadcast channels charge cable companies for carriage, but let me opt out.

Comment Re:Ooh boy (Score 1) 612

Fucking pathetic. To anyone who still doesn't realize that Trump and Hillary have the exact same MO down to the micron, explain this.

I think in terms of their lying there's a difference in degree. Clinton has said what she said. Trump would claim that he had never used email. Or that email doesn't actually exist. And no one would actually call him on it.

Comment Re:fucken neocommuncists (Score 1) 428

The moralizing aside, the people are pissed because the free market made them pay more than they wanted. The free market is great when it makes folks winners, but when it makes them a loser, they start talking about how unfair it is.

Either capitalism is fair or it isn't. You don't get to pick and choose when it is based on if it helps or hinders you.

Comment Re:Give me local news and I'll cancel (Score 1) 92

Have you tried a big honkin' ass antenna mounted on a tower? Just a suggestion.

I can get most of the football games I want over an antenna, all the soccer, and then there's just the problem of hockey. I'm thinking of going to SlingTV for that. I just received one of those flat "Leaf" type antennas today and try that out for a few months. If not that, I might have to try to be handy and put something better up in the attic.

Comment Re:Another way to look at this is.. (Score 1) 400

I think that you're right. However, I think instead of embracing automation and increased productivity along with a UBI, we'll get reactionary politicians that try to legislate a return to the good old days by banning the automation of certain jobs.

It will certainly be an interesting time to be alive.

Comment Re:Not going to happen (Score 1) 387

If you're asking because you actually want an answer, you've kind of already answered it yourself. Clinton losing her mind and deciding to nuke Canada would be exactly that -- a serious mental lapse. With Trump that's the default state.

I'm not saying Hillary Clinton is great, but things will at least get worse at a lower rate of speed than under Trump (outside of the "blow it all up" scenario). For the record I'm undecided between Gary Johnson and Jill Stein.

Comment Re:Not going to happen (Score 2) 387

If you think Trump might be good, I don't know what to tell you. The best case scenario in a Trump presidency is that he basically blows it all up and we have to start over. The worst case scenario is that his buddy Putin spurns him and he decides to launch nukes in retaliation. This is the first election where I'm actually fearful for the country if a major party candidate would win the election.

I had some unflattering things to say about George Bush, but Trump is orders of magnitude more dangerous than he ever was. The guy is a pure loose cannon.

Comment Re:At&t doesn't even try to pretend it isnt ex (Score 5, Insightful) 160

This will be a continuing problem so long as the people who own the infrastructure also sell services over it.

They almost got this right with the ILEC/CLEC split with DSL. The only problem is that they let the ILEC sell services over the infrastructure they owned.

Don't let the guys who own the wires sell any services and this problem will fix itself.

Slashdot Top Deals

"The only way for a reporter to look at a politician is down." -- H.L. Mencken