Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


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

Comment Re:"Windows 10 will be your platform for gaming gl (Score 1) 90

Indeed. Frankly, Windows 10 will not be my platform for anything. I have already made my decision; I will continue to use my Win7 systems until I can no longer keep them secure, and then I will switch to either Linux (if it is finally a viable platform for me by that point, which it isn't yet) or to Mac.

Comment Re:Also, is it a la carte? (Score 1) 121

Except that ESPN is the main suck on the wallets of people who aren't watching it. Half the country couldn't care less about the sports they show, but ESPN has been very aggressive in ensuring that they're tied into bundles which don't let you avoid them without avoiding pretty much everything. If you're an ESPN viewer, you'll probably pay more overall a la carte because your bill isn't being subsidized by me. But if I take the literally two or three stations I actually want (AMC, BBC America and *perhaps* NBC Sports (although I only watch it for F1 racing, which has declined in quality so badly in the last decade that I might actually skip it), I'll almost certainly be saving money over what I have to pay to get those same channels now. And even if I don't, I'll be comfortable in the knowledge that more of my money will be going to those channels, and hopefully being used to create more of their content. And then there's the channels *nobody* actually wants to watch, but which sit and waste bandwidth that could've been used for more HD channels without needing to jack up the BS "HD content delivery fees" from the likes of Comcast. Jewelry TV, QVC, the religious channels etc. will have to pay *me* to be in my household, and that's the way it should be.

Comment Also, is it a la carte? (Score 2) 121

Again, if not it's worthless. I'm tired of paying for stations and content that I would never in a million years want to watch. If one penny of my money goes to Bravo, for instance, there is no amount of value you could add elsewhere which would persuade me to help pay for their "reality"-TV drivel.

Comment Re: Go to hell Elon (Score 1) 270

Except that accidents per vehicle mile traveled is an extremely misleading statistic, because for MuskWagons it only includes almost brand-new, high-end vehicles owned exclusively by rich people who can afford to have them religiously maintained and who probably either have better driving skills due to a higher education level, or who have somebody driving on their behalf who was likely selected for their above-average driving skills. Whereas by contrast, for the other vehicles assessed you're including low-end mass-market vehicles driven by the great unwashed, barely maintained if at all, and quite possible multiple decades old. A fair comparison would be to equate MuskWagons with brand-new standard cards in the same price bracket, and manufactured within the same range as Teslas have been. And I'd wager if you do so, the MuskWagon's supposed advantage would be largely -- perhaps even entirely -- negated. Which is precisely why Musk makes such a completely nonsensical comparison in the first place: It fits his desired narrative, even if it's totally misleading.

Comment Re:Now, if only... (Score 1) 103

Dramatically understating the scope of the problem does not make for "safety":

And that's just the citations I could find from a 30-second Google search that didn't even glance beyond the second page of search results. Many (perhaps even most) of those phones were not being charged at the time of the incident.

Comment This answer is total BS (Score 5, Informative) 51

If it was simply turned off as part of the upgrade process, it would have been turned back on again silently, without the user having to take action. The fact we're told we have to reenable it shows quite clearly that Yahoo disabled it to prevent folks jumping ship, and has only begrudgingly turned it back on to try and squash the bad publicity that its move generated. It's clearly hoping that most users who would otherwise have used the feature won't realize it has been turned back on.

Comment Re: Misleading headline; incentivized reviews cont (Score 1) 77

If you believe that, there's a bridge I'd like to sell you. Amazon is in the business of selling products. The more positive a review is, the more products it will sell. More than anyone, Amazon has a conflict of interest in choosing which products get reviews, and who writes those reviews.

Comment Misleading headline; incentivized reviews continue (Score 5, Interesting) 77

Amazon has not in any way, shape or form "banned incentivized reviews tied to free or discounted products". Amazon has banned such reviews being conducted by third-parties, because it wants a larger slice of the pie for itself.

Incentivized reviews tied to free or discounted products are not just allowed, but remain actively encouraged by Amazon -- it just requires the vendor to use its Vine program, giving it more control over who gets chosen, and likely some program-related fees from the vendor too.

Slashdot Top Deals

"my terminal is a lethal teaspoon." -- Patricia O Tuama