Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



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

Comment Other way around (Score 1) 182

Battery cases prove SOME people like fatter phones, but they are a minority. They don't sell hundreds of millions of battery cases.

The great thing about battery cases is that the people that don't mind a bulky phone have a solution, and the people who DON'T want bulk have a choice too. If phone makers make bulkier phones that's great for the people that want them, but you can't buy a case to make a phone thinner.

Comment Re:Fear is a good thing for business (Score 1) 186

"While many wealthy people worked hard or smart for their wealth. And many poor are there due to slacking off and bad life decisions."

You are referring to decent people who made a fortune legitimately - which is wonderful.

Unfortunately most of the wealthy elite did not get there by working hard - they got there by profiting from the misery and misfortune of others and engaging in criminal activities.

Most poor people aren't poor due to bad decisions. They are poor because they are exploited by the wealthy and live in a system where the average person - absent some stroke of luck - can at best have a moderate income if he/she works hard their entire life.

How many millionaires do you know that made their fortune by working 40+ hours a week and saving every penny? Probably none.

Certainly not the Bush's, Clinton's, Desmaris', Bronfman's, Johnson's, Buffets, Rockefellers, Rothschilds, etc.

Poor people are meant to stay poor; rich are meant to stay rich.

That is the will of our overlords - not the average joe.

How is it that someone working in a sweatshop is exploiting them? Sure, the factory owner could pay them western wages, but why? The minute they do someone else will build a factory and undercut their prices by lowering wages. If the wage or working conditions are too bad, people won't work there. The reason they work there isn't because someone is forcing them, it's because they chose to work in the sweatshop because it was better than not working in the sweatshop.

Same is true of child labor. The choice isn't school or sweatshop. If the sweatshop didn't exist, the children will have to turn to prostitution or worse. If parents had it as an option of course they'd chose the send their kids to school over sending them to the factory.

It's a hard concept to understand, having been born into a world of high productivity and plenty, but once you realize that the peasants of the world have to make very hard choices, all of which are distasteful for you or me, you start to see the world a little differently.

Comment Re:GAO is right (Score 1) 233

The top registrars get together and decide to start their own name server. They give some payments to a few of the top ISPs, and it's basically a done deal.

Let's look at it with a concrete example, of a site that Russia actually tried to block: recently, Russia decided to block pornhub. If it got removed from the top registrar, then everyone who wants to visit pornhub will be upset, and look for alternatives.

Comment GAO is right (Score 2, Insightful) 233

The GAO is probably right, it doesn't require an act of congress, but the lawsuit only has to delay it long enough for Trump to become president. If Hillary becomes president, then it's pointless.

It could cause problems if domain names are influence-able by governments hostile to free speech, but If it gets too annoying, we'll all just switch to another name server. They can't keep the speech itself down, only certain domain names. My point is, that in the worst case, it's not the end of the world, and the Google index is much, much more important.

Comment Re:Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss? (Score 5, Interesting) 228

I'm surprised Comcast hasnt gone after Netflix already.

They have, and been caught. The whole Net Neutrality thing was over this very concept. The example was that the location of the Peering nodes were deliberately not upgraded an thus Netflix traffic was impacted. Netflix went so far as to say that they would pay for all the equipment needed at all of the peering locations, and even install CDN points INSIDE Comcast's network to help prevent the congestion problems for Comcast's Netflix customers. Comcast said no thanks.

Comcast has a vested interest in both Broadcast and Cable TV, and Netflix has a direct impact on both. Comcast is not going to help Netflix even if Netflix does all the work.

However, since this is all being done on the Network side, it is hidden (obfuscated) to the customer. All they know is Netflix streaming "sucks" a lot of the time, while Comcast streaming almost never does. The customer doesn't see it as a Comcast problem, they see it as a Netflix Problem.

Slashdot Top Deals

Little known fact about Middle Earth: The Hobbits had a very sophisticated computer network! It was a Tolkien Ring...

Working...