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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Winner (Score 1) 195

This isn't about the ability to play classic games. This is about the ability to easily play classic games. With a Raspberry Pi, emulators, etc., you have to do a lot more to make it work. I'm sure it can be done fairly easily, but people have to do the research, buy the components, load it all together, and troubleshoot any problems. You and I may enjoy doing that, but some people just want to plug it in and play.

Comment Re:Winner (Score 1) 195

Games are automatically saved at certain points allowing resuming after power off: Win

While I agree with the rest of your points, I have to disagree with this one. I find the all-or-nothing approach of most NES games to be preferable. Games like Super Mario Bros. got it right with the ability to have extra lives, but forcing you to start from the very beginning if you run out. The ability to keep reloading a save state until you finally get past a certain challenge spoils the achievement, IMO. By making you start from the very beginning, it also forces you to take a break from beating your head against the same wall.

Of course, this is just my opinion, and how you wish to play your games is perfectly valid.

News

How Technology Disrupted the Truth (theguardian.com) 259

A day after the Brexit, former UK Independence Party (UKIP) leader Nigel Farage admitted he had misled the public on a key issue. He admitted that UK's alleged 350M Euro weekly contribution to the EU would not be directed to the National Health Service, and that this commitment was never made official. Journalists worldwide tweeted photos of the campaign ads -- posted in conspicuous places like the sides of buses -- debunking the lie. This incident illustrates the need for more political fact-checking as a public service, to enable the voters to make more informed and rational decisions about matters affecting their daily lives. Fact-checking is supposed to be a part of the normal journalistic process. When gathering information, a journalist should verify its accuracy. The work is then vetted by an editor, a person with more professional experience who may correct or further amend some of the information. A long-form article on The Guardian today underscores the challenges publications worldwide are facing today -- most of them don't have the luxury to afford a fact-checker (let alone a team of fact-checkers), and the advent of social media and forums and our reliance (plenty of people get their news on social media now) have made it increasingly difficult to vet the accuracy of anything that is being published. From The Guardian article:When a fact begins to resemble whatever you feel is true, it becomes very difficult for anyone to tell the difference between facts that are true and "facts" that are not.Global Voices' adds:But the need for fact-checking hasn't gone away. As new technologies have spawned new forms of media which lend themselves to the spread of various kinds of disinformation, this need has in fact grown. Much of the information that's spread online, even by news outlets, is not checked, as outlets simply copy-past -- or in some instances, plagiarize -- "click-worthy" content generated by others. Politicians, especially populists prone to manipulative tactics, have embraced this new media environment by making alliances with tabloid tycoons or by becoming media owners themselves. The other issue is that many people do not care about the source of the information, and it has become increasingly hard to tell whether a news article you saw on your Facebook is credible or not. This, coupled with how social networking websites game the news feed to show you what you are likely to find interesting as opposed to giving you news from trustworthy sources, has made things even worse. As you may remember, Facebook recently noted that it is making changes to algorithms to show you updates from friends instead of news articles from publications you like. The Guardian adds:Algorithms such as the one that powers Facebook's news feed are designed to give us more of what they think we want -- which means that the version of the world we encounter every day in our own personal stream has been invisibly curated to reinforce our pre-existing beliefs. [...] In the news feed on your phone, all stories look the same -- whether they come from a credible source or not. And, increasingly, otherwise-credible sources are also publishing false, misleading, or deliberately outrageous stories.

Comment Re:Why do you need an ISP at all, then? (Score 3, Interesting) 184

I have to admit ignorance in this as well. I know of 3 things which are required to connect a home to the internet.

1. Last mile, connecting the users to the network
2. Edge interconnect, which routes traffic to/from end users and the backbone
3. Backbone, which connects all the ISPs

1 and 2 constitute what we colloquially refer to as the ISP. If 1 is a municipal fiber network, then that means an ISP is just an interconnect between the fiber network and the backbone?

Comment Re:Video is often the worst way to convey informat (Score 4, Interesting) 244

Furthermore, phone calls are closer to video than text. We had audio phone conversations before we had instant text communication in everyone's hands, and text communication caught on like wildfire as an easier, less intrusive thing to do.

I think the asynchronous nature of text is a bigger contributing factor to it's success than how unobtrusive it is. (reposted because I wasn't logged in the first time)

Comment Re:If we had flying cars... (Score 1) 951

Cars do fly. The first flying car was made 17 years after the first car. And the first space car was made 58 years after that. For whatever reason, the stewards of the English language decided to call these things aircraft and spacecraft rather than flying cars and space cars.

I'd like to bolster your argument by pointing out that the word 'car' is a shortened form of the word 'carriage.' A carriage is a device that moves something from one place to another. Therefore, an automobile, airplane, watercraft, and spacecraft are all cars.

Comment Similar problem as abortion (Score 1) 242

The ethical problem with chimeras is similar to the one with abortion. How do we define a 'person?' We have the same DNA as a lot of other life forms. As it is, we can use a pig heart as a temporary replacement for a human heart. Do we define a person based on one's ability to reproduce? A person and a sheep can't reproduce with one another, or we'd have seen plenty of chimeras already, based on the rumors I've heard about farmers in various parts of the world. However, plenty of people are unable to reproduce with certain members of the opposite sex, or at all. Does that disqualify them from being a person? The more we discover about our natural world, and the more we learn to tinker with its many mechanisms, the more we blur the line between us and everything else.

Many people claim that we are moral actors, and therefore are held to higher standards than animals. Men shouldn't kill a rival male, take his mate, and slaughter his children, but some animals do that. Men should also refrain from forcing copulation on a woman, but some animals do that. If we mix human DNA with other animals, at what point do we start expecting lions to be moral actors? At what point do we stop expecting humans to be moral actors? I don't have any answers. Clearly there are benefits to be had here, just as their are benefits to researching embryonic stem cells. At the same time, we need to consider the wider impacts this will have on our society, culture, and sense of self.

Slashdot Top Deals

If computers take over (which seems to be their natural tendency), it will serve us right. -- Alistair Cooke

Working...