Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


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 Re:Credible study? (Score 2, Insightful) 279

Your weakness makes me sick.

His weakness? What about yours? You're the one crying about man-bashing, a war against masculinity and left-marxist thinking (whatever that may be). You radiate insecurity that you try to blame on others, and apparently found it necessary to vote for racism and misogyny so you can feel important again. The sickening weakness here is yours.

Comment Re:Michael Flynn Jr believes it (Score 1) 789

You people are really getting bad. You have no respect for anyone who disagrees with you despite their status in the system that you completely base your identity on. Not to mention the ongoing total and complete lack of critical thought, rationale, and evidence in your discourse.

It is the complete lack of critical thought, rationale and evidence in Ben Carson's delusions that makes us dismiss him as an idiot. We have evidence that he is an idiot. Tons of it. How much do we need? I'm not sure what you mean by "their status in the system that you completely base your identity on", but it's certainly not mere disagreement. I even dismiss Jill Stein's (far lesser) idiocy, though she's from the exact party I would prefer to support.

I disagree with Jeb Bush and John Kasich, but I respect them as fairly sane and rational people.

Comment Re:Michael Flynn Jr believes it (Score 4, Funny) 789

Is him not being an intelligent man too complicated for you?

If he is not an intelligent man... how did he reach the top of his field as he did?

Whatever it is, he certainly put an end to using brain surgeon as a synonym for really smart.

I wonder when a former rocket scientist will run for president.

Comment Re:The value of money (Score 1) 426

Hence: tax the rich, give their money to the poor, so they can buy stuff from the rich.

This is a joke, right? If I have to give someone my money to by my product, I might as well cease making my product - assuming that I had a desire to make money off my product (or even cover the cost of making the product.)

It worked very well for Henry Ford.

Comment Re:We heared the same over and over again (Score 2) 426

The problem is the ignorance and indolence of the general population being seduced by socialism. It has never worked.

Depends on what you mean by that. The kind of wealth redistribution we have in northern Europe and in the US of the 1930s-1950s, worked quite well. Killing the free market is (usually) a terrible idea, but ensuring that people can afford to buy stuff works incredibly well.

Comment Re:We heared the same over and over again (Score 3, Insightful) 426

Exactly. The real problem is the economic system that puts all the power and profits in the hands of a rich few. We could have had that 15 hour work week if we'd divided the profits of our higher productivity in a more equal way, but we decided that taxing the rich is bad, while the rich owning all the means of production is good, so they get all the profits and they get to keep it.

Comment Re:The value of money (Score 2, Insightful) 426

Money only has value if you can exchange it for other people's work. I'm not sure if machines will accept it...

When the machines become citizens who own themselves and the fruits of their labor, we're in deep trouble. Until then, the machines belong to someone who gets to enjoy the fruits of the machines' labor. When all the machines are in the hands of the rich, while the poor are unemployed, nobody will have money to buy the products of the machines. Hence: tax the rich, give their money to the poor, so they can buy stuff from the rich. Or make the machines common property somehow.

Comment Outsourcing has been tried, and it failed (Score 1) 587

Outsourcing to India and elsewhere was really popular a couple of years ago, but I notice a lot of companies have been insourcing their software development recently. Software itself is not bound by location, but working together on complex software is easier when you sit close together than when half of the team is on the other side of the globe. You introduce a lot of communication overhead into your process. When it's developed in-house, you've got more control over the details, the planning and the quality. People on the other side of the world may be cheaper by the hour, but ultimately, you don't need hours, you need software that solves your problem.

Comment Re:Well, and it was a pig (Score 1) 279

Never took off? I thought it had hundreds of millions of users. In what world is that not taking off?

Where people actually *use* it.

Wait, so because people actually use it, it's not taking off?

Sure, it has millions of users, precisely because google tied it to it's various services.

If I recall, it had 700 million users before Google started tying it to all sorts of services. Though I agree Google does a good job at muddling the real numbers.

But do people actually post on it?

Absolutely. A lot. Every single day. Google+ has become more important than my mailreader.

Do people actually open it and use it to keep in touch with friends and family?

What? Fuck no. I use it to come into contact with complete strangers who share my interests and passions. I keep in touch with friends and family by visiting them.

No, and by your own admission, they couldn't because it gets "pretty heavy" when you keep it open.

Kill the tab and reopen it. It's not that hard. It's just that when chrome starts to seize up, I start to hunt through my tabs to kill any old Google+ tabs I still have open. It loads so much content that it can't possibly be lightweight (though I admit I've never actually measured it).

Fanboy's aside, g+ isn't used

That's the popular talking point by the media and people who don't use it. Seriously, with all the many times that Google+ has been declared dead or a ghost town, you'd almost think somebody is paying to generate bad press.

The reality is that tons of people use it very actively every single day.

and at least part of that blame has to be on the interface.

Perhaps. But then how do you explain the success of Facebook? That interface is far worse.

Comment Re:Well, and it was a pig (Score 1) 279

Some great reasons as to why G+ never took off,

Never took off? I thought it had hundreds of millions of users. In what world is that not taking off?

Go open it up and time how long the damn thing takes to load up.

I've never really had a problem with it. It's not instantaneous, but it's a big thing and gets all the content asynchronously. I don't find it annoyingly slow to start up, and it's pretty fast once it has started up. The only thing is that it gets pretty heavy if you keep it open.

Comment Re:Failure? It's still there. (Score 1) 279

Like it, hate it, or be indifferent to it - your choice. But don't lie about it and claim that it is a total failure at this point. It does still exist, and people still post to it. Just because people don't jump to it with updates every femtosecond on which coffee shop has the best bathroom or other such useless bullshit doesn't mean it has failed.

Quite the contrary, in fact. That people don't post such meaningless garbage is one of the main reasons behind the high quality of content on Google+.

unfortunately you'll need to buy sourceforge in the same offer which is worth vastly more.

Is it still? I thought the new owners were eagerly working on ruining it.

Slashdot Top Deals

Yes, we will be going to OSI, Mars, and Pluto, but not necessarily in that order. -- Jeffrey Honig