Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


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 Re: Competition (Score 1) 185

I don't know what you mean by removing the thermal compound and not using any. The purpose of thermal compound is to fill the voids between the heat sink and the CPU and allow heat to freely flow from the CPU. To that end, you need to use enough compound to fill the voids between the CPU and the heat sink, but as little as possible to accomplish that goal.

In order to do that effectively, one must always remove old compound and apply a small amount of new compound. It doesn't take much. The goal is to have it spread across the whole surface of the CPU (you should see a little around the CPU's heat plate edges, but not any more than that). I usually apply a very thin "X" of new compound with a bit more in the middle, then install the heat sink and inspect the edges. If I don't see compound around most of the heat plate, I will remove the heat sink, clean everything and try again using a bit more. Always clean and start fresh or you are likely to trap air bubbles.

If you are cracking chips or bending pins, you must have put thermal compound between the motherboard and the CPU, it doesn't belong there..... The only time I've seen thermal paste used on a connector was in a military aircraft in a vain attempt at keeping moisture out of a connector that was subject directly to bleed air cooling. It sort of works for that, but it was a total mess to clean up and we bent a lot of pins trying to replace cards. Don't do that...

Comment Re:Competition (Score 1) 185

Ryzen seems to be quite competitive as it stands looking at the glossy PR ads. The question is really about durability. AMD has a history of running things a bit hot and not achieving the same reliability as Intel. However, given that they are using a clean sheet design in a chip that is based on 14 nm process, there is the possibility of making some pretty good performance gains by going to a smaller process.

Comment Re:Micro Center! (Score 2) 185

Way to plug my favorite store!

It does seems as though this chain has really exploded in the last several years. I seem to recall there only being a handful of them. Now there are over 2 dozen nationwide.

Kind of surprising that a brick-and-mortar store is expanding operations in this day and age. Especially with the old-school commission-based sales floor model.

I have one within driving distance. GREAT store for picking up clearance items at about %20 off the going retail on stuff. I've purchased 2 mother boards and CPU's there along with a couple of video cards, mostly on clearance there in the last year. Usually you can haggle a bit on the clearance prices if the item has been sitting there awhile. In fact, on big ticket items you can usually haggle a little on non-clearance items if you try and have similar prices online.

Watch their "price match" though. I hear the policy varies from store to store.

Comment Re:Being able to sell food deals with ticket price (Score 1) 246

Well, that's how they make their money at theaters... Or did you think the box office was where they made the profit? For most first run movies, the box office is a pittance until you get into the third week. How many movies pack houses that long?

Think about what they sell at the concession stand. EVERYTHING they sell is cheap, nearly zero food cost with the containers being worth more than the food. Popcorn, Soda, candy? Likely the highest food cost thing they sell is nachos and hot dogs, but it's still under 5%. Their biggest cost is labor (and that fancy building with the uncomfortable seats).

Submission + - Why Don't Mobile OSs offer a Kill Code? 1

gordo3000 writes: Given all the recent headlines about border patrol getting up close and personal with phones, I've been wondering why phone manufacturers don't offer a second emergency pin that you can enter and it wipes all private information on the phone?

In theory, it should be pretty easy to just input a different pin (or unlock pattern) that opens up a factory reset screen on the phone and in the background begins deleting all personal information. I'd expect that same code could also lock out the USB port until it is finished deleting the data, to help prevent many of the tools they now have to copy out everything on your phone.

This nicely prevents you from having to back up and wipe your phone before every trip but leaves you with a safety measure if you get harassed at the border.

So slashdot, what say you?

Comment Re:Why stop at $50? (Score 1) 246

HDMI capture card. Watermark is useless when payment was with a disposable/stolen card.

The guys who do these rips and releases have been doing it with other streaming services for years.

So who broke into HDMI? I thought they guarded the keys to the kingdom pretty well and unless you happened on some stolen keys your player wasn't going to talk to your display/Capture card for love or money. If you did find some stolen keys, all they have to do is invalidate them and sooner or later your capture card will go on the blink as your devices get new keys. You can bet the content owners would do their best to make sure all your HDMI devices got updated before they let you play anything.

Watermarking IS useful even if a burner credit card is used because like it or not, the IP you are is going to be pretty obvious, even if you go though a proxy, and the player software they are likely going to use is going to have lots of access to information about you that would make it easier to find you. It might take some time to track you down, but they have the tools and are not afraid to use them.

Heck, the MPAA isn't afraid to implicate the innocent, why do you think they'd be afraid to track you down? Personally, I don't do the piracy thing and feel that those who do are being unethical. Not to mention that it's not all that much cheaper to do that stuff when all the necessary equipment and legal liability you take on is figured in. But hey, up to you.

Comment Re:Ninth Amendment (Score 1) 126

Same Sex marriage was always a right and a reality, long before the courts took up the case... What was at issue was government recognition of the union... It was about the legal institution of marriage, not the right to call yourself married, everybody had that already. You could go out and hire a hall, get a minister, send out invitations and have a wedding and nobody would stop you, nor would anybody stop you from believing your relationship was a marriage. Before the ruling, nobody's rights where infringed.

So what right was being abridged if the government didn't legally recognize what you considered a marriage? I haven't the faintest idea, but we now have invented *some* right to have your same sex union recognized by the government. Where is *THAT* in the list of things the government *must* or *should* do?

So, be precise here. If you want to claim to be married to your horse, government isn't going to stop you, you have the right to that belief. So is there now a case to create a right for this union to be recognized by the government? How about three people getting married? Four? I don't think anybody has a right to have the government legally recognize their specific definition of marriage is valid, yet that's what we have created now.

And one more thing on this specific subject. There was already a legal avenue for such relationships to have the legal status the proponents of same sex marriage claimed they lacked. It was called "Domestic Partnerships"/"Civil Unions". It afforded all the civil law protections of marriage. But even though there was really NOTHING being withheld, we went out and the courts created this new enumerated right anyway.

I personally think that the proponents of this where really after something totally different and that this really amounts to the establishment of a religious belief that takes precedence over another backed by the federal government and is such a violation of the 1st amendment establishment clause. However, I would guess you find that a stretch...

Comment I wonder what the Theater Chains think.. (Score 1) 246

My guess is that they are pitching a royal fit about this idea. They will not want to allow this, regardless of what it costs, unless the distribution companies make some kind of major concession. Theater chains fight hard to get exclusive rights to first run movies for a reason and they count on the suckers who feel they have to see the movie when it first comes out.

Distribution contracts for chains vary, but for the big movies, the distribution company gets a hefty percentage of the box office sales (as high as 100%) for first run films on opening weekend. After that, the percentage of the box office drops off as the film gets older and older. Where home viewers works for the distribution company (they get 100% of that take) it won't for the theater who losses out on concession sales and their percentage of the box office.

I wonder what the distribution companies are going to give up here? I also wonder what this actually says about the future of theaters? It is yet another nail in that long suffering industry's coffin, which started to die with the introduction of the VCR and video rental shops.

Think of it, now YOU can run a small theater business in your own home for $50 per showing.... If you have a small 12 seat media room, you can charge $20/seat, throw in $10 worth of drinks and popcorn and clear $170/showing. Two showings a night, two days a week and that's $680/week for 8 hours work. You'd only need to fill three seats to break even. Not bad money...

Comment Re:Dinner and an Other Movie for less. (Score 0) 246

I can take my sweetie to a nice dinner and released movie for less than $50.

Dang man.. She's a cheap date and you must live in the middle of nowhere.. Hang on to that one.

I'd be into the better half of $100 to do dinner and a move for two round these parts.

Oh wait... You haven't done this in awhile have you? How long has it been? 2 Decades or so?

Comment Re:Why stop at $50? (Score 1) 246

Really? With a 4K TV and matching material, just move closer to the screen and volia! You have a larger screen... Well Up to a point you do. I mean having a large screen that's 200' away from you is kind of like having a somewhat big one 100' away. 60" at 5 feet is pretty darn big, when you consider how much of your visual field it covers.

Personally, the real reason is to get both the screen size, brightness and SOUND QUALITY. Although, all these can be approximated at home for less than you think if you don't mind getting close to the TV. It's also a lot more comfortable on my couch and the concession stand is MUCH cheaper.

Comment Re:Why stop at $50? (Score 1) 246

One person will pay it, so they can be the first to upload a torrent to The Pirate Bay

And you don't figure that they won't water mark YOUR copy of the movie so they will know exactly who did this and come after you?

(Or, in reality, you don't think they will protect the content by using encryption, custom player software and other DRM techniques to make it necessary for you to break into the HDMI signals directly to capture the video? Or are you planning to record it using your video camera pointed at the TV?)

Comment Re:Ninth Amendment (Score 1) 126

Oh boy.. Really? Like originalists don't know that. We fully understand that the constitution is intended to limit government, not enumerate all our human rights.

What I think is sadly forgotten is that the bill of rights sets out a framework of what government must NOT do, what they cannot regulate. Specifically what the federal government cannot do. The rest was left to the states and the people. So, for instance, Same Sex marriage. How's that a federally protected right from the constitution? Access to abortion on demand? Health Care? or more recently, the right of non-citizens to enter this country (as the 9th circuit just decided). How is ANY of that the purview of the federal courts? It's not. It's not part of the enumerated powers of the federal government, yet here we are where the federal courts have decided all those are rights. While on the other hand, the 2nd amendment gets infringed by background checks, licensing, and other restrictions at the federal, state and local levels without so much as a passing "we might be infringing" coming from the same judges who have invented all these new rights out of thin air.

Then you impugn the likes of Scalia because he didn't see the courts as the right place for all this creation of new rights nobody ever imagined where necessary to write down?

Slashdot Top Deals

%DCL-MEM-BAD, bad memory VMS-F-PDGERS, pudding between the ears