Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. ×

Comment Travel mode, AKA... (Score 1) 137

My phone has a global "travel mode", AKA "Airplane mode."

IOW, I just disconnect when traveling. Also when sleeping. And working.

The Internet in all its various forms and guises serves me. Not the other way around. If it's not that way for you, you need to stop selling death-sticks, go home, and rethink your life. Go on. Go.

Comment Idiocracy doubles down (Score 1) 102

You've really missed the point.

No, I really have not.

You are after complexity of the OS so that you can do complicated things with the OS.

I just want bloody subfolders and the ability to get at the filesystem. I don't care if I have to turn it on specially. I don't care if your snowflake pilots can't see it. I just want it to really work without having to root the bloody phone.

You think you're arguing for sophistication and intellect

Good grief, no. I'm arguing for pre-1990 levels, almost prehistoric levels by computing standards, of organizing capacity. There's nothing wrong with most user's intellects -- other than the intellects behind the reasoning that says "one level is all you get", now those intellects are simply downright crippled.

Your use cases differ wildly from most of the billions of the users of iOS devices in where you feel the need for complexity.

Yeah, my use case incorporates the concept of organization far beyond what these crippled devices allow, and yes, I readily admit this is beyond most phone-only users comprehension at the moment (although not if they have ever used a desktop or laptop computer), but just as you said, they (you mentioned pilots, I'd add four-year-olds) could cope with it if it was there. I don't even think they they should have to; I just think I should be able to.

The idea that everyone must suffer because pilots - or whomever - want simple is nothing less than anathema to me. I despise it, and I despise its proponents, and I find their reasoning (which is being far too generous) to be unworthy of serious consideration.

Filesystems promote organization. Single level folders went out of use in the 1980's, and the reason they did is because they are insufficient to organize any amount of data beyond a cupful. And no, "search" is not a valid replacement, before anyone tries to jump into that moldy old corner. The very fact that my home screen overflows onto additional pages and I am unable to properly, reasonably, organize my apps and data is a huge red flag that the system itself is deficient. Multiple cores, GHz+ clock speeds, gigs of ram and storage... and I can't have bleeding subfolders? Jesus. Hosiphat. Christ.

And the Long-Dong-Silver sized irony here is that if you DO dig into the actual systems underneath the sadly flattened icons to see how the phone actually works, what will you find? YOU. WILL. FIND. SUBFOLDERS.

There's simply no adequate justification for the intentional, irreversible crippling that's been done to end-user level of these devices. None.

Comment Re:Fake science/sloppy science (Score 1) 281

You have that wrong, I think. Sure, the Scientific Method is not about building a consensus, however, the Advancement of Science (as in expanding our understanding of the universe), has to be about consensus. Without consensus on what is true (or likely to be true), Science would perennially be stuck at what a single scientist could accomplish in one lifetime. At some point, you have to accept that other scientists have already researched and discovered things. At that point, the scientific consensus will help you find areas for your own research that haven't already been exhaustively studied.

Of course, there is nothing stopping someone for challenging the consensus on any scientific topic, but if you do want to challenge the consensus, then you better have a good alternate theory and the evidence to back it up.

Comment Re: s/drug trials/climate change/g (Score 3, Informative) 281

Record high temps, record low temps. record rain, record drought.

That's actually what you'd expect with a chaotic system built of multiple random variables. It would be unnatural for weather to always be the same.

Actually it's not. It's a simple fact that in a stable system, as time goes on, there are fewer and fewer "record" events because each new record needs to be more extreme than all previously recorded events. Over time, record-breaking events decline significantly. So, an increase in record events is, by itself, evidence that the system is undergoing change.

Comment Idiocracy (Score 2) 102

the vast majority of the tablet/phone purchasing world has no clue what you mean by that statement. They. Don't. Care.

That's exactly right. And because these devices are designed down to the level of the ignorant, rather than uplifting them, they don't have to learn. And those of us who could use these devices to a much greater extent remain reined in by this pandering to market. Subfolders are too complicated, the apologists tell us. There's no saving people too stupid to learn what a subfolder is/does. But those who are simply ignorant can learn in seconds. The insistence that this is "too much" is utterly pitiful to hear.

In the end, dumbing everything down is the surest way to the market consisting of the broadest portion of the Gaussian, and therefore, their money. That's why this is happening.

Time to watch the intro to Idiocracy again to remind ourselves why pandering to the lowest common denominator is a really, really bad idea.

Comment Re:Umm (Score 1) 388

I think you're a purveyor of bullshit all around, but this one part I thought was worthy of further discussion:

Had a genuinely (non-insane, non-neocon) qualified Republican candidate run for president with a promise to enforce existing immigration laws, help create jobs for Americans first and foreigners second, and give priority to assisting Americans before outsiders, he would have won in a massive landslide reminiscent of Reagan's defeat of Mondale.

I think that scenario might actually be impossible. Republican primary voters were never going to allow a sane, sensible Republican candidate to run. Just look at the primaries, the reasonable people were among the first people eliminated. Of course, there a good chance that against a non-insane Republican candidate, Clinton might have actually won. In a large part, her loss can be tied to Trump's labelling her as "Crooked Hillary" and endless repeating that label. The negative campaigning had the desired result of depressing Democratic turnout. Furthermore, the problem is that Clinton's policies and a sane Republican's policies would have had limited differences, and Russia might have feared such a Republican candidate as much or more than Hillary, and their electoral sabotage could have been aimed at the both parties, or even just the Republicans. Frankly, I can name a single popular moderate Republican, I think (Jeb Bush?), because ideological purity tests seem to have either expelled the majority of them from candidacy or pushed them away from moderate positions to avoid challenges.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. If Obama had been a Republican President, he would have been the new Reagan. Republicans would be worshipping at his feet and praising his legacy, but because he had the wrong letter next to his name, most Republican voters despise him. So, with Obama representing so much of what the old Republican party would have stood for, and Obama being "irredeemably evil", the current Republican party keeps having to find newer, crazier issues to differentiate itself from it's mortal enemy.

Comment Re: Why not land on the moon? (Score 1) 303

ho said anything that the goal was to "impress" you or the American people? If the goal is to use the moon as a base, NASA has to re-develop the technology to get back there.

There's no economic benefit to a moon base, so it's all for show anyway.

Think back to, oh, 1600. Imagine the conversations in taprooms in England- "there's no economic benefit to a colony in North America, so it's really just for show anyway"....

Comment Operating System (Score 2) 224

The definition of an OS is that it controls all resources of a computer and shares them between the applications.

That is at best a description of some operating systems.

Some operating systems control some computer resources. Some share the resources that they control.

To quote Hamlet:

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy

Comment Re:Professional attention whore strikes again (Score 1) 920

but multiple people (not just his fans) appear to be confirming PDP's claim that the WSJ edited his videos,

First, I don't believe you or them know anything about what was actually sent to Disney. I've seen this many times before with Gamergate, for example, where people simply invented lies to sway people to their side. Lying on the internet is easy. Second it doesn't even matter if they edited the video unless what they did was truly egregious and that would be counter-productive because regardless of what the WSJ sent to Disney, Disney should have done their due diligence rather than simply trusting a video sent to them. I only guess that you are young and have little to no idea of how most businesses are run. The managers at Maker aren't going to fire a money-making celebrity simply because the WSJ told them to with a doctored video. They can watch the videos for the themselves, you know.

I grow weary of trotting out The Producers as a counterexample, but it's the most crystal clear one I've found. The parallels between it and the supposedly most offensive video ("Kill All Jews") are very strong. Both contained an over the top candy-coated celebration of a horrible idea, and then showed a reaction shot of someone(s) looking on in horror. The difference is, people think they have made some terribly clever point when they claim PewDiePie's horror was just acting. Well, let's say that's true... guess what the actors in The Producers who were playing the audience watching "Springtime for Hitler" were doing?

I think everyone is tired of you trotting out The Producers. The situations aren't really comparable, one is a comedy where two awful people are trying to be offensive by making a musical about Hitler, the other is a jackass who thinks it's edgy to pay poor people 5 dollars to do something politically incorrect. One is comedic genius, the other is tasteless attention whoring. The fact that you don't understand the difference is merely tiresome. To put it simply, PewDiePie seems to have more in common with Max Bialystock than Mel Brooks and that is not a good thing, in case you continue to misunderstand the situation.

Again, you keep pretending that PDP has lost.

I don't know why you're obsessed with winners and losers. I'm just pointing out that PewDiePie is upset because someone has revealed the things that he actually did, but in a way he doesn't like. Welcome the real world, man-boy.

Comment Re:Professional attention whore strikes again (Score 1) 920

These is a *fascinating* story to anyone who remotely cares about where the media is headed. You don't have to be a PDP fan (I'm not) to find it fascinating. There are multiple facets here, and I'm most interested in the stuff that involves the larger ecosystem. I've already linked to this a half dozen times at least, but this article [wsj.com] shows pretty clearly the WSJ's motive in all of this. (That one shouldn't be paywalled.) Don't forget, they didn't just "write an article" that started all of this. They didn't just hire three reporters to comb through his videos and edit them. They sent their edited results directly to Disney. They had an explicit agenda in getting PewDiePie's platform trimmed down a bit. Why is that? WSJ isn't a progressive-leaning paper. Well, see the above link.

The simple problem is there is no need for you to invent "an explicit agenda". It seems far more likely they were doing research for an article on YouTube "influencers" and found the anti-Semitic content. Knowing this should be a huge deal for Disney, they sent a video with the relevant clips to Disney for comment. Disney saw the clips, likely did their own quick internal investigation, and cut PewDiePie loose because they didn't like what they saw. If they had any ulterior motive, it is far more likely to concern the opportunity to hurt the profitability of a competitor or two, than to somehow gain control over what people post to YouTube.

There's a lot of other stuff you're conflating into this issue, that is interesting but not directly related to this issue. YouTube policies, leftist politics, millenial media interests can indeed by interesting stuff but you are muddying the water by trying to drag them into this issue. This is a bog-standard story someone got caught doing something bad then lashes out at the people who caught him. PDP might as well yell "I would have gotten away with it, if it weren't for those meddling [reporters]".

1. Including J.K. Rowling now.

You do realize that J. K. Rowling re-tweeted an article about how PDP and others "just joking around" about racism, is enabling racists to normalize their views, right?

Not to be prejudicial here, but from a purely statistical standpoint the chances of a Swede (someone who grew up there) having right-wing views by American standards is must be darn small.

And yet, it's actual people in the alt-right community who think that PDP might be one of them... The left seems to think he's a immature, narcissistic, asshole. Which seems to be a pretty accurate assessment to me.

Slashdot Top Deals

You have a tendency to feel you are superior to most computers.