Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


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

Comment Re: Ignores the issue (Score 1) 108

Why would the Clinton campaign risk doing anything now, when they're already cruising towards a landslide victory? Trump did a fantastic job of disqualifying himself at the debates; now all they have to do is run out he clock. To try some "October surprise" at this point would gain them very little, but if it went wrong somehow it could hurt them greatly.

Comment Re:In all honesty... (Score 1) 226

They should have let him continue. It's not like he was contributing anything except masses of data for the cool-aid drinkers to misrepresent. And discrediting himself in the process. Now those cool-aid drinkers will have something unfair to point to.

On a side note, I'll point out that he's been dumping on Hillary with impunity, but as soon as he got into what the banks consider their private business someone gave Ecuador a call.

Comment Under what circumstances would a user notice? (Score 2) 155

Are there situations where a user would notice a slower flash write speed on their cell phone?

The only time I can think of where a phone would need to write massive amounts to flash is during an OS upgrade (which is hopefully a rare thing) -- even during an app install, the user is likely to be bounded by their network's download speed, not by the speed of writing to flash. Similarly, while recording live video, the phone only needs to write at the bandwidth of the video stream, no faster.

Is there some use case I'm missing?

Comment Re:hmm (Score 1) 212

Aesthetics is a legitimate thing to have a preference on; I mean, let's be honest, that's the reason behind like 80% of Apple purchases. And obviously there are other features I like better about Android, particularly native filesystem access without having to install a kludgy app, and its integration with Google services.

Comment Re:Clinton, Podesta, Putin and Trump (Score 1) 435

That bloggger didn't remember well enough. He (and you) are missing intermediate posts about it that are linked in the Year of the Lie of 2013 post -- so there's no excuse for him missing it.

From politifact in 2009:

Now, close to a year later, we finally have detailed bills to examine. They closely mirror what Obama promised during the campaign.

But the plans also introduce new ways of regulating health insurance companies that will surely change the current health care system. That could prompt employers to change their health plans, and we find Obama's statement less clear-cut now than it once seemed.
(emphasis mine)

So apparently Don Surber was a lot less honest than Politifact. That's why I never believe right-wing online nuts "fact-checking" because they always -- ALWAYS -- either intentionally or unintentionally omit something important or misinterpret what is said.

Comment Re:Clinton, Podesta, Putin and Trump (Score 0) 435

First, "honesty" is something you want in a President, but it isn't the only quality. Secondly, in this election the 3rd party candidates are terrible. Gary Johnson just seems almost as unknowledgeable as Trump, as does Jill Stein. I considered third-party candidates -- and rejected them. I think a lot of people are the same.

Comment Re:Clinton, Podesta, Putin and Trump (Score 4, Informative) 435

"Note that the liberal media and Hillary are entirely ignoring the attack, probably because they know they bear some of the blame."

That, sir, is a lie, and you are a liar.

Slashdot Top Deals

"The only way I can lose this election is if I'm caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy." -- Louisiana governor Edwin Edwards