Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Yes (Score 2, Insightful) 176

Why link together disbelief in evolution with disbelief in climate alarmism?

They are polar opposites, evolution is clearly a reaonable theory only opposed by those who would rather believe in some superstition.
Climate alarmism is a theory from the 1990s and very early 2000s that fewer and fewer people believe in and generally is only supposed by people after tax or research grants these days,

Comment Re:NOW they develop this... (Score 1) 236

I broke my arm and dislocated my elbow in november. Looks like I'll make a complete recovery but it's quite painful and annoying.

However the break isn't the problem, the plate and screws fix that. The problem is the dislocated elbow and the tissue damage and damage to tendons, muscles etc. That's what it takes time to recover from and I doubt that this will help with that part...

Still sounds cool though !

Comment Oh not this again (Score 0, Troll) 877

You know what, nobody believes this any more.
it's like soviet tractor statistics. For the 100th year in a row tractor production increased!

You know what? 25 years ago we were being told that the earth would be becoming uninhabitable, and rising seas would drown everyone.
Guess what? None of that has happened.

I fully expect that in another 10 years I'll be sitting here being told the same, and it still being no different from it is now. Oh, except taxes and freedom will be taken away because of it. And in 20 years from now to be told the same, again with no obvious difference.

Sorry doom-mongers. You had your chance, and you blew it. Nobody believed you any more.

Comment Utter utter rubbish (Score -1, Troll) 554

Luckily few people without some kind of vested interest in this believes a word of this any more.
Frankly you'd have to be a special kind of stupid to after so many years and no evidence whatsoever.

I fully expect to be sitting here in my house in the year 2030 shivering in the snow being told that it's the 50th consecutive hottest year on record
(And that's why we have to pay more tax again....)

Sorry but no... Just no

Comment Quite happy with this (Score 1) 439

There are a a LOT of very good "indie" games out there from small studios.
A lot of these games are far more imaginative that those from the large companies, but perhaps are not better games overall because the tiny companies don't have the resources to make the art great and to finely polish the gameplay.
And they have no budget for marketing so few people get to hear about them.

As EA seem to have decided to abandon a large section of the market, hopefully a little more attention will be focussed on the smaller games, and they'll get a little extra sales allowing them to polish their games a bit more and produce great games :)

Don't get me wrong,I dont think EA are stupid to do this either, there is nothing wrong with looking at your sales and market and costs and working out in which areas you think you can do best for your company.
If they think they can make good online games that people will want to buy, then everyone is a winner!

But I think it's also good for the rest of the industry too, and games in general :)

Comment Three things killed it (Score 1) 327

This was a few months ago so perhaps things changed - 1) It was slow and buggy and crashed a lot. It didn't work on internet explorer. 2) You couldn't use it for your ordinary email. It tried to replace it rather then extend it. 3) It was horribly confusing. It tried to do too many things but it wasn't obvious how to do any of them! But the idea was great. Hopefully something will spring up from it's ashes.

Comment I don't agree (Score 1) 231

I don't agree with the premise at all. It's just that it only recently become possible to make screens that were good enough, and mobile CPUs that were fast enough, and memory that was small and cheap enough to push mobile devices into a large consumer market. Now that it's possible to make these new things that work reasonable well in way they didn't just 5 years ago, of course lots of different companies are going to be experimenting to see what they do better than anyone else. That will likely continue for 5-10 year in exactly the same way as it did with large computers until it gets to the point where any device is "good enough" and innovation will move on to a different aspect of technology.

Comment Re:ha (Score 1) 232

It's not the cost, it that nobody *wants* to do video calls. Nobody wants to tidy their room, comb their hair, change their clothes etc. before making or receiving a call but people would feel they had to. Most people I know in the UK have had video calling on their phones for the past few year. Maybe not most, but many. And everyone I know tried it *once* to see if worked and went huh that's good... and then never did it again. We're supposed to believe it's new and exciting because it's on an iphone but in fact it's a feature that most other phones had for years and is actually disappearing from phones now because nobody wants it

Comment It might work... (Score 1) 454

I'm less sceptical than the vast majority of posters here about this. First of all there is nothing evil about them choosing not to give their product away for free. Many of the posters here seem to think that because they want paying for their work that they are evil in some way! And I imagine they've thought this through... Sure, if they simply stick up the same news that's available anywhere else and try to charge for it then this will certainly fail. But hopefully they have enough sense not to do that. Imagine instead though that at the bottom of each major article in the print newspaper they have a code, something like "See code 123XYZ" online for more information on this subject. That if you for example read an article about the situation in korea, that it links to a page with the history and analysis of the situation there by proper writers. And to links to all the previous articles, not just automated keyword links but a proper index written by an actual journalist. It could be pushed quite heavily in the print newspaper, and could have deals where paper subscribers get online subscriptions free for 3 months then reduced price. The point is to integrate the two parts so that the print part is lighter and easier to read but "hyperlinks" to a much deeper version online, and the expectation would be that you would subscribe to *both* generally. The problem with "free" news sites is they are very superficial. Because that matches their readership. They just want to know the news and move on. Pages of analysis of the news and the history written up properly will only appeal to a tiny minority of their readers, but on a subscription site it's likely that people have subscribed exactly for more in depth coverage than they could find in a printed paper, or on a random free news site. People on slashdot complain about news coverage being superficial but this could bring together enough people who are willing pay a little for deeper coverage. If that's profitable then it will happen... I certainly think this could work for them. At present the online part probably makes little money from advertising, has significant production costs, and steals people who would other wise have paid for a print version. If they do this right they they will spend a bit more money on it, but have a much better combined offering where the print and online versions don't compete with each other in the same way. But they'll probably just put the paper version online with a few extra bits, and hope people send them money...

Slashdot Top Deals

Evolution is a million line computer program falling into place by accident.