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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
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:usenet trolls (Score 5, Insightful) 184

This. I know it's one we've almost certainly lost, like "hacker" meaning anything other than "cracker" or "computer criminal", but "trolling" was a fine distinction of taking a deliberately inflammatory position (whether you actually held it or not) in an attempt to goad others into taking completely unreasonably positions on the other extreme in response, and laughing at the nonsense that ensued.

Degrading and broadening it to a simple "someone who's mean on the Internet" is another little piece of our culture slipping away...

I know, kids on my lawn and all that.

Comment Flash sucked (Score 1) 221

"That's just Jobs being a prick again.

nope...wrong

Flash died because it was an inferior standard for the internet.

It was bloated, unsecure, proprietary, slow, and required too many updates.

In fact, analyzing Flash's design is a good way to learn what *not* to do at every development point.

Steve Jobs may have been a 'prick' but not when he was banning flash from his devices. It was simply good sense.

Comment it's relevant that consensus says it's garbage (Score 1) 395

One guys "crap" is another guys entertainment.

Just because taste is subjective doesn't mean we can't agree on an evaluation of a film.

Consensus says Batman V Superman was a shit film. That's a relevant fact.

Just because you are a snowflake doesn't render near-unanimous disdain isn't relevant.

Any way you define consensus, it's fairly known that the film was garbage.

I'm not saying Rotten Tomatoes is a good measure or that all critics hated BvS...that's not it at all.

I am rejecting the notion that consensus is irrelevant because everyone has a unique perspective and opinion.

Comment why? (Score 1) 266

Why do companies, particularly Google in this case, remove basic options and features in software as if it is costing them money.

Google particular seems to shut down small-mid size projects that can be incredibly useful and profitable.

Two examples:

1. Google Movie Showtimes...this was great, it was a nationwide very accurate movie showtime page that was a feature on Google...it didn't require much maintenance once it was already built. Also, they still have to have staff working on movie results...except they now use a Netflix-like side scroller that requires a user to click to get more info.

2. Google Wave...it could have been Slack. Slack is exactly Google Wave only with a polished interface. How much is Slack valued at right now again?

Comment abusable by design thanks GOP (Score 3, Informative) 181

So what are we going to do about it? Point the finger of blame? Or defend ourselves? Your choice.

Both of course.

How can you defend yourself if you don't know what is attacking you?

Proper defense necessitates "pointing the finger of blame"...aka identifying the cause of the problem.

Fortunately we already know: Pharmaceutical companies make drugs abusable on purpose and incentivize doctors to prescribe them.

Democrats have been pushing for more pharma regulations for years, Repubicans opposing them.

Republicans have fought over and over to make it easy for these abusable drugs to get FDA approval.

Oxyconin is a perfect example, read up:

"In 2006, Giuliani acted as the lead counsel and lead spokesmen for Bracewell & Giuliani client Purdue Pharma, the makers of OxyContin, during their negotiations with federal prosecutors over charges that the pharmaceutical company misled the public about OxyContin's addictive properties. The agreement reached resulted in Purdue Pharma and some of its executives paying $634.5 million in fines"

source

Comment Re:truth and lies (Score 1) 374

You don't understand the argument you are using by yourself.

"I don't believe it" is a blanket statement, and the belief of the author is the only statement made.

"I don't believe it, because ..." is a phrase giving a reason to an argument. The "I don't believe" could be cut out with no loss of content.

In this case: The job market being good is the argument, not my belief in company behaviour. As I said, if you are in IS, are willing to relocate to Germany, especially if you're a woman, contact me because I can prove you wrong right away, I have jobs to fill.

Comment Re:P-300 Waves (Score 1) 151

It's about deliberate and demonstrable intent. Furthermore, it's about intent that can be proven in a court of law. In this case, the guy not only sent the image to someone known publicly to suffer seizures of this kind, he explicitly stated it was his intent to give the guy a seizure, and thereby do harm to him.

that makes sense...

didn't know he stated that explicitly...some DA bucking for a promotion might latch onto that and make a big headline-grabbing case out of it...that explaination is rational

Comment Re:Netflix didn't "innovate" (Score 1) 213

Getting there required innovation

Yes, from engineers on a project doing regular coding work....but that's not what I'm talking about.

"innovation" is such a misused and over-broad term these days....

Netflix's concept is not "innovative" from a startup perspective.

Everyone in the world thought it would be cool to watch movies over the internet...the only problem was copyright holders.

Slashdot Top Deals

The best book on programming for the layman is "Alice in Wonderland"; but that's because it's the best book on anything for the layman.

Working...