Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


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

Comment Re: Not grid connected (Score 1) 35

So it makes sense for them to continue to generate and push the power into an overloaded grid that has no use for it, because they make money doing that.

And while wind companies are doing that, what are the coal/gas/oil plants doing? The rational move for them is to not generate once the price of electricity drops below the price of whichever fossil fuel they use, which means less CO2 is produced. It may not be an exact "every watt of wind power generated means one watt equivalent less CO2" but it's still reducing CO2 emissions.

Comment Re:nothing to do with the environment (Score 2) 35

What's happened is that Amazon has come to realize that there is little point in continually pay someone for power when you can just get your own. This is simply a cost cutting measure to grow their AWS profit margin and ensure they can compete with competitive pricing. It's also good PR which they can use as ammunition for marketing. Amazon execs don't give a fuck about the environment, it's all about the money.

Actually, I suspect they do. I know a lot of higly placed people that actually do care about it. If thy didn't, for the immense drain on profitability as claimed by some - they'd never be allowed to go this route.

What is changing, is that despite what a lot of CogDis people think, a threshhold is being crossed. CogDis people can bring out the same old memes of it won't work, it won't work economically, it won't work because the sun isn't shining or the wind doesn't blow 24/7 - but this stuff's gettin' real.

Comment Re:Not sure you have a lot of options? (Score 1) 192

Yes, a computer should be getting updates if it ever connects to a network independent of whether or not it had internet connectivity. In this case, it is the other hosts on the network that create the risk.

Sorry, I have a Windows 10 off th einternet system. Now that it works, there's no way I'm going to screw it up with Microsoft W10 updates. On the computer I used to familiarize myself with W10, it's been bitched up three times now. P A vius is a lot less damaging than missing a deadline because teh computer stops working. At this point, Microsoft is included in the malware suppliers.

Comment Re:'Batch Tuesday'? (Score 1) 192

There should be a single blog, yes. But there should also be the ability to choose which patches you want, if necessary. Say a particular graphics driver is known to kill a certain game, or a certain network update conflicts with a utility, there should be a way for advanced users do opt-out of them.

Or even better, not make updates that have to be rolled back because they fuck up machines. It must be Stockholm syndrome or something akin, that so many people are so accepting of an Operating System that regularly screws the pooch in the computers. They even seem to think that getting their computers fucked up is a mark of superiority.

Ain't no need for that friends!

Somehow or another, OSX and Linux manage to not screw up people's computers often or at all. Using all three, my Windows machines Well, I'm down to one now are the only ones that work just fine one day, then after an update do not.

full discosure, Mac Mail got a little goofy for a little while, and one update made my Mac at the time a little jittery, but it was fixed pronto, and it noever stopped working

Getting rid of the W10 Dell I was using was a huge improvement, freed up time to actually do work, not get the computer to work.

But then, Microsoft is trying to create an environment as closed as Mac,

What is this "closed environment" people speak of? I can install any program I wish on my Mac. I run Windows 7 on it. I can run Linux on it. I don't often run Linux on it because it's already running Unix. But if that's a closed system, gimme that over Windows 10 any day.

It's not about what users want anymore, just about extracting maximal dollars.

Can't argue with ya there, although some times it seems like an abusive relationship between Microsoft and their users as well.

Comment Re:lolwut? (Score 1) 61

Especially since most, though not all, of the flash-using sites have been using a flash player to display an .flv or .mp4 served over HTTP anyway, since flash's DRM was mostly too pitiful to bother with and HTTP is more likely than RTMP or similar to Just Work with the various bits and pieces of your web infrastructure.

There might be some nontrivial changes(though mostly from more exotic to less exotic, so not hugely interesting) if you were going from RTMP or a similar streaming oriented format to serving up video files over HTTP; but the 'produce own ugly and nonstandard controls; do some weaksauce obfuscation to annoy people trying to get an offline copy of the video' is not terribly exciting.

Comment Re:Does it matter? (Score 1) 251

You really are an ignorant, bigoted asshole, clearly spurting out nonsense in a bid to gain attention for your own ego purposes, hypocritically projecting on a daily basis to satiate your need to not feel that people think of you the way you are. You do this pattern of behavior every day on slashdot.

Every damn day with your hate, ignorance, and ego. No substance. No positive points save for the sycophantic mods by people that behave the same as you. I'd imagine quite easily that people out in the real world avoid you for this behavior.

Thak you. Pissing people off like you is one of my little joys in life. The more iirritate you, the more I validate myself.

Now that you are on the hook, let's roll, dear Coward. Game on?

Comment Re:And What Will Come of It? (Score 1) 85

You have a good point, but going along with the point that BrendaEM made, all we're doing with the videoing of cops, is the same thing that was originally done when making someone a cop. We look at the video as the final truth, the "displayer" of pure truth. And to that you're saying that is a measurement, and I cna't disagree completely, yet. However, this guy introduces some variables that should be taken into account before we all just move all of our faith from the police officers to video.

Comment Why redesign the wheel (Score 1) 155

AFAIK Google's isn't open source, but I don't think anyone is paying directly for it. I recently bought a $28US phone that came with the android OS. This came installed on the device (it's built into maps), and it works very very well. So I think the question is worthless to answer.

Sure, if there's an open source option, then the world can rest assured to be able to tinker with it themselves and that. And yes, Google could pull the plug on it. But for some reason, I feel that Google would just release it to the public before they'd simply toss out all that development. The task of building such a database of info, mixed with the ever-changing roadway of each country... no way anyone else, besides some huge corporate entity, could ever start from scratch. And even if they did, what would be the reasoning behind anyone using it, rather than Google's?

Comment Re:Does it matter? (Score 1) 251

does that mean that the guy (you meant "yahoo", right?) in Kentucky has the right to shoot down the flying device? As you mentioned Kentucky explicitly, I would say: YESssss!

Consumer drones have become interwoven with paranoia about weaponized military drones.

And there's a conversation that need to be had about that. Interestingly, I can get some of the folks who are paranoid about drones really really really pissed off when I combine their paranoia with what is often their main love in life. Guns.

And that is, Do we have the right to shoot down a weaponized consumer drone and deprive another American of their second amendment rights?" Do I have the right to protect my property using my second amendment rights?

And of course, the resulting anger is because I asked a really tough question. As a gun owner and drone owner, I don't have an issue with the concept of target shooting with a drone. But is sure as hell isn't simple when you are dealing with people who think in absolutes.

Comment Re:Does it matter? (Score 1) 251

And yet RobotRunAmok is correct.

No he isn't. He took one simple sarcasm, and tried to do a psyche writup on me, which was completely incorrect. Then he added declarations on me being a Hipster, and a member of the High school AV club.

I was being sarcastic, he was making incorrect declarations, possibly based on projection. Regardless, he completely ignored the salient part of my post, which makes for some interesting discussions.

Comment Re:Does it matter? (Score 1) 251

Online Forum Pro-Tip: When you write "'Murrica," you betray your classist prejudice, weaken your argument, and reveal yourself as a hipster lightweight.

Or I can be sarcastic. Sarcasm has nothing to do with hipsterism, more to dealing with people who find that using deadly force is fun.

One most interesting thing is that you manage to make some claims, about my Hipsterism and the AV club, you manage to do a whole psyche workup on me. Odd. You'd be real surprised to find out what I actually am. But I'll leave that to your febrile imagination.

Kind RobotRunAmok, when we try to determine what another person is with precious little information, and based upon an incorrect assumption in the first place, we tend to engage in projection.

And when we completely ignore the reasonable question that comes along with the sarcasm, we manage to project even more. You give me much more info about yourself than I ever gave you.

Back to the meat of my comment, completely ignored in your snarkalicious reply:

In this case, we most certainly do have a property rights issue. Do you own the airspace above your house?

This is not just a simple drone issue. If you own the property rights to the airspace, anyone entering it is trespassing. Police will need a warrant to fly over it. You will be able to claim "stand your ground" laws if a Ultralight flies over your property, and you terminate the pilot, armed or unarmed.

How much leeway is there? If you fear you are being spied on, do you have a perimeter off your property that will serve as a "grace area" if you stand your ground and shoot down a drone, that turns out to not be on your property?

Do you have the right to shoot down a drone on the drone owner's property is you fear the drone on the drone owner's property is spying on you?

Do you have the right to terminate the drone owner if oyu see he is flying his drone over your property?

And in a country where more people are willing to use firearms as a first resort, perhaps such conversations are worth having. But you just fixate on "'Murrica", and become the dude who on Netnews a few years ago that declares someone's argument null and void because of a spelling mistake. A great way to move the conversation forwards. Thanks for playing, anyhow.

Comment Re:Does it matter? (Score 1) 251

Does it matter if the drone operator was in the wrong? That does not give the hillbilly permission to shoot it. How about the next time his pickup truck exceeds the speed limit or parks illegally, we set it on fire. Is that OK?

Living in 21st century 'Murrica, other questions come to mind, If a person sees a human powered airplane or helicopter over their property, and believes the pilots are spying on his teenage daughter, does that mean that the guy in Kentucky has the right to shoot down the flying device?

Slashdot Top Deals

No man is an island if he's on at least one mailing list.