Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



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

Comment Re:Make the banks take the risk when an driver hit (Score 1) 138

Wow, you're really a loon if you think that's a winning strategy: have Hillary pick a Republican running mate? That might pick up some R voters who don't like Trump, but it'll also cause tons of D voters (including everyone who considers themselves a progressive) to sit out the race or vote third-party. This strategy actually would have been great for getting the Green Party a lot more votes than they got with her crappy pick of Kaine.

Sanders *was* a qualified Democrat. He ran as one, and that's all you have to do. But I guess I shouldn't be surprised that the Democrat Party faithful think that only long-time Party members should be allowed to play in their party. No wonder they have such a hard time getting progressives to turn out to vote for them, by pushing partisan politics over ideals and doing the right thing. Honestly, if there's any good to come out of this crazy election, it'll be the utter destruction of the Democratic Party. At least the Republicans are somewhat honest about their intentions and who they work for.

And Trump absolutely *is* unpopular. Countless polls have proven this. Just because people voted for him doesn't mean they actually liked him, same as Hillary.

Comment Re:So what. (Score 1) 291

Many younger individuals can't seem to get the concept that paying over and over for "borrowing" something is a bad deal.

We're talking about movies here, not music. I don't know about you, but there aren't very many movies I really care to watch over and over again. This is the whole reason that video rental stores (like the ill-fated Blockbuster) were such a success as soon as VCRs became commonplace; most of us just want to pay a fee and watch a movie *once*, and that's it. Once in a while we'll see a movie that's so great we might want to watch it multiple times (like Aliens from 1986), but that's rare, and even there it's not like I want to watch it that often.

Music is entirely different, and I agree with you on that: I really don't understand the current phenomenon where so many people want to pay for streaming music access, and my best guess is that it's mostly people who don't care that much about music and just want some crappy filler playing in the background all the time. Personally I have very specific music I want to listen to, so I keep it in Ogg form on all my devices (phone, laptop, car) and play from my library constantly. But I listen to music a fair amount: pretty much any time I'm in the car, for instance, plus frequently when I'm using my computer at home, plus frequently when I'm at work (with headphones). I don't watch movies that often, and it just isn't very often that I re-watch a movie.

Oh, and what if you wish to watch something that's older than last year? (Oblivion, Edge of Tomorrow, Pacific Rim) or even within the last year (Star Wars 7) These are all available to me, to watch any time.

Right, and how much did all those cost you? How many dozens of movies do you have to make a decent collection so you aren't watching the same 3 movies over and over? The total cost there is significant. With Netflix, you pay a cheap monthly fee (less than $10) and can watch all you want at any time, out of a truly enormous catalog. If you really like a particular movie a lot and want the higher quality (and lack of worries about problems with access) that a physical disc offers, you can certainly buy that too; it's not either-or.

Comment Re:So what. (Score 1) 291

Exactly. Download it on BT, and now you have a reasonable-size file that you can just play in any decent media player at your convenience. No messing around with stupid easily-scratched optical discs, no messing around with your Blu-Ray player needing a firmware update because of some encryption keys on the disc, no messing around with slow internet connections and streaming problems (esp. with FF/REW), it "just works". The main problem with the BT stuff is that a lot of it is transcoded to smaller resolutions or bitrates to save space, so it won't have the ultimate quality of a true Blu-Ray. But it's still a lot better than DVD quality usually, thanks to much more modern codecs. The h265 stuff is great.

Comment Re:Make the banks take the risk when an driver hit (Score 1) 138

No, that's not an open question at all. Sanders would have won, easily.

Hillary wasn't that far behind Trump, she won the popular vote, but she screwed up (among other ways) by not campaigning in key states like PA that the DNC thought were "safe". Bernie was always much better about campaigning in places like that. Hillary's campaign was totally full of hubris; they really thought they couldn't possibly lose, especially to Trump. Her campaign was also full of condescension, esp. to the Bernie voters, and of course to anyone on the right. A lot of Trump voters were just sick of mainstream, incumbent politicians and voted for him out of spite for that and her. Many would have actually voted for Bernie. Bernie brought a lot of enthusiasm from the under-30 crowd. Obama himself won largely because he got young people to get out and vote. Hillary didn't: young people didn't like her, and her campaign didn't care much to court them either. It didn't help that she and her followers specifically told the Bernie crowd that "we don't need you". It also didn't help that she and the DNC were seen by the Bernie voters as having knifed his campaign in the back with dirty tricks, as shown in the leaked Podesta emails.

Hillary lost an election to the 2nd-most unpopular candidate in history. That's because she was the most unpopular candidate ever. There's really no way Bernie could have done worse. People actually *liked* Bernie, he had the support of the youth, and he wasn't hamstruck by scandal after scandal. The only arguments against Bernie were from Hillary supporters inventing nonsense to try to back their queen (like, "the Republicans would have found dirt on him too!" Except that they didn't.).

Just look at the election numbers. There were millions more votes in the 2008 election than in November's, even though the population is a little bigger now. Lots of people simply sat at home. Obama was famous and acknowledged for getting a lot of people out to vote, particularly younger people who are infamous for not turning out to vote; Bernie had the same effect, but Hillary had the opposite effect. Assume that Bernie would get those several million people out to vote unlike Hillary, add in all of Hillary's voters (because they sure as hell aren't going to vote for Trump, and they're generally older so they're more reliable about both turning out and voting along party lines even if they aren't enthused about the candidate), plus definitely more swing voters since he didn't have Hillary's baggage, and it's quite clear that Bernie would have won.

It's just too bad the DNC and their lapdogs in the media will never admit to itself that this is the case, and Trump being president is really all their fault for doing everything they could to keep Bernie from winning their nomination. (Remember the day when Washington Post published almost 20 hit pieces on Bernie in a single day?)

Comment Re:Security. (Score 1) 261

For the ICMP thing, I can't imagine how going along with that order from a high-up manager would be "criminally negligent". In fact (I am not a networking engineer BTW), according to my quick research on stackoverflow, networks absolutely *can* work with ICMP blocked, just not well, and it makes it hard to debug some things. A lot of corporate networks seem to be partly broken anyway, and corporate computers running McAfee software are broken but sorta-working too, so running a network this way wouldn't be the end of the world.

Now I should hope that it didn't seem that I was advocating being actually *criminally negligent* in going along with managers' orders. That's an entirely different level. Going along with the company shooting itself in the foot (after documenting it well so you can CYA when the SHTF, and after raising an initial objection but caving after management insists) is entirely different from going along with orders to do something outright criminal. I only advocate not going to heroic lengths to help the company avoid shooting itself in the foot when its own high-up management is insisting on it, because most likely it's just going to result in your termination. If they're ordering you to do criminal things, you need to go to the police or other government authorities, and simultaneously start looking for a new job.

Comment Re: so what? (Score 1) 101

States' rights? I guess you don't care about cities' rights. The NC law was passed specifically because of an anti-discriminatory law passed in an NC city, to override that law. It's no different than the Federal government passing a law to override a state law.

But I guess you don't care about cities' rights.

Comment Re: so what? (Score 1) 101

You're a moron. The electorate in Charlotte didn't ask for a law that overrode their own city law, and was aimed specifically at that. Apparently, conservative morons like you are all for Big Centralized Government when it means they get hateful morality laws passed. On top of that, the voters of NC apparently *didn't* want this law because they immediately voted McCrory out of office as a result of the flap.

Comment Re:In this economy? (Score 4, Insightful) 564

I disagree about the physical clutter bit; I actually like having the real CDs for my music. I buy stuff on CD, then rip it to Ogg to be used on my various devices. However, there's some giant differences from cassettes:

1) CDs actually have excellent sound quality, better even than the MP3 digital downloads sold at places like Amazon.
2) CDs don't degrade when you play them.
3) CDs come with booklets that frequently have the lyrics, artwork, etc. Of course, cassettes do too, but theirs suck because the format is different. CD booklets are a nice format that's about 1/4 the size of an old LP booklet, and has a nice square aspect ratio. Cassette inserts have a terrible aspect ratio and (at least back in the 80s/90s when I used to see stuff sold both ways and was able to compare) is usually missing a lot of stuff compared to the CD version.

But you're absolutely right that there's no rational reason to use cassettes. There's absolutely nothing better about them compared to other formats. They're awful; the size is terrible, the sound quality is terrible (it was terrible even when they were current; I remember well the tape hiss problem), they wear out, you can't skip tracks, you have to rewind them, etc. This truly is a case of simple retro hipsterism, nothing more.

Comment Re: No headphone jack ... (Score 1) 205

and user replaceable batteries (justified by water resistance features very few people demanded, though I'm one of theach few who actually needed it).

This is flat wrong.

1) User-replaceable batteries do not make it impossible to make a phone water resistant. My Samsung Galaxy S5 is proof of this.

2) LOTS of people demanded this; so many, in fact, that Apple was finally forced to give in and make their latest iPhones water-resistant.

The only reasons to eliminate user-replaceable batteries are to save cost, and maybe to profit from expensive battery-replacement services.

Some design choices anymore are due to technological progress, most these days are to make more money. This is due to a consumer market that seems to adopt almost anything thrown at them.

This is mostly true, but Apple's adoption of water-resistance in their iPhones does show that consumers still exercise some power. Apple could easily have continued to tell their cultist customers that they don't need that feature, but since it was being offered in several other high-end phones for several years, they could only get away with that for so long.

Comment Re:Make the banks take the risk when an driver hit (Score 1) 138

What part of my statement implied I thought Trump was going to do any better?

You didn't, but you implied that the people could vote for someone who would do better.

My assertion is that they can't. The system is too broken for that to happen. It simply isn't feasible to get someone who will do better, with the way our election systems work.

they'll base their entire vote based if there's an R or a D at the end of the name.

And they have to, because of first-past-the-post voting. It's simply mathematically impossible to have anything besides two dominant parties with such a voting system, so we're stuck with it until we somehow manage to get the Rs and Ds to pass a constitutional amendment reducing their power by changing the voting system to something else.

Comment Re:The dangers... (Score 1) 135

And we have NO WAY to change that trajectory anyhow.

Sure we do, or at least we would if we invested some resources into the project. If we spotted city-killers like this far out enough (with enough warning time), it's entirely possible to change their trajectory through various means: solar sails, painting them white, strapping a rocket engine to the side, etc. But we need to know about it well, well in advance so we can accurately predict whether it's a threat, and then work on modifying its trajectory over the course of years to reduce that threat. That can't be done if we're too stupid to invest some resources into looking for these NEOs and also developing measures to redirect them safely. But if we as a species are so dumb we'd rather invest all our resources into making nuclear weapons to bully each other with instead of making ways to protect ourselves from cosmic threats to our species, then maybe we deserve to get wiped out by an asteroid like the dinosaurs.

Comment Re:Minor damage (Score 1) 135

Pedantic note: The bomb dropped on Hiroshima wasn't "nuclear", it was "atomic". "Nuclear" (in the context of bombs) is short for "thermonuclear", which is a type of bomb that uses nuclear fusion to achieve most of its yield. They accomplish this using a smaller fission bomb to set off the fusion part of the bomb. "Atomic" bombs are fission-only devices with generally much smaller yields.

Comment Re:Make the banks take the risk when an driver hit (Score 0) 138

If you would like to see the DoJ throw more CEOs in prison for wrong doing of their companies, demand it of your elected officials and vote them out if the refuse.

The DoJ under Obama hasn't been very strong on this, and people have now voted for Trump. If you think Trump's DoJ is going to do any better, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.

Comment Re:Finally! (Score 1) 399

No, it doesn't, that's just you trying to push an agenda. The debate here is who's a worse CEO. "Worse" isn't defined here, but I'm assuming that "incompetence" is the measure of "worse", and by that measure Carly is the worst of the lot. Fraudsters aren't incompetent (unless they incompetently perpetrate their fraud of course).

And if you're trying to argue ethicality, I fail to see how Fiorina or Mayer are any more ethical than Theranos. They're all morally bankrupt people. People who become CEOs generally are.

Slashdot Top Deals

Sometimes, too long is too long. - Joe Crowe

Working...