Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!



Google Hangouts Gets Google Voice Integration And Free VoIP Calls

beakerMeep Re:Hangouts is, in turn, part of plus, right? (160 comments)

Sorry, I may have spoken too soon there. Certain features of hangouts look like they still require plus, if you are not on an Apps (business) account. But they seem to have almost completely phased this out. In general they seem to have halted the major push for plus. I'd like to think they fired* the head of plus partly because of the failure of the push and the backlash of the real name, and youtube stuff...but I don't know why he "left" ( ). Anyways, here's what i could find on how to use hangouts:

Here's how to use it without plus:

5 days ago

Silicon Valley Fights Order To Pay Bigger Settlement In Tech Talent Hiring Case

beakerMeep Re:Unseal the documentation too (200 comments)

Obviously this isnt suffrage or civil rights, but it's an important piece of information when building a socioeconomic model of how American capitalism functions. These are the real "rational" actors in the market and we need all this information. Letting lawsuits like this settle behind closed doors for relatively small amounts of money and heavily redacted documents only serves to further obscure the truth. It doesn't take millions marching on Washington to for the truth to have value. Rather, without the truth, who will ever protest?

I understand where you are coming from but I think your line of thought here does the discussion a disservice. It's never futile to work for informing the public even just a little bit more. But it's time to stop "expecting" these lawsuits to produce crappy results -- it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.

As I mentioned in my OP: one of the class advocates for the plaintiff did not accept the settlement that the lawyers on both sides had worked out. And instead of giving in to fatalism that "this is just the way these lawsuits go", he instead wrote a letter to Lucy Koh, the judge, asking her to throw out the settlement. And now she has done just that!

This quote is cheesy but good:

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has.

(Incidentally I can't imagine you actually think Snowden had no lasting effect on the world).

about a week ago

Silicon Valley Fights Order To Pay Bigger Settlement In Tech Talent Hiring Case

beakerMeep Re:Unseal the documentation too (200 comments)

I don't think apathy needs an advocate. There really is no sense in loudly proclaiming defeatism. Sure, some people don't care, but the defendants would not have worked so hard to keep documents sealed if *nobody* cared. This case is being widely covered by the media:

Financial Times:

And over 186 more articles just from the past few days

So I don't know about what you said right there. I don't believe that "no one cares".

/there is always some subset of people who claim no one cares about any given news story.

about a week ago

Silicon Valley Fights Order To Pay Bigger Settlement In Tech Talent Hiring Case

beakerMeep Re:Punitive Damages? (200 comments)

You dont need to wonder, you need to read:

Some estimates put it as high as $9 billion.

This wasn't just about cold calling. The chilling effects were far more reaching. It's just that the documented evidence only referred specifically to cold calling, so that is what can be proved. In reality this was much more of a "gentleman's agreement" and it had the effect of driving down wages at dozens of large companies possibly affecting ~1 million workers. If you think it stopped with just poaching and had no other effect, you are being naive. Google actually had to raise some salaries due to Facebook not participating.

Here are just some of the companies involved:
  Apple, Inc
  Comcast Corporation
  IBM Corporation (Junior hires okay—also applies to subsidiaries)
  Intel Corporation
  AOL, Inc.
  Clear Channel Communications, Inc.
  Dell, Inc.
  Earthlink, Inc
  Virgin Media, Inc. (Formerly NTL, Inc.)

about two weeks ago

"Net Neutrality" Coiner Tim Wu Is Running For Lt. Governor of New York

beakerMeep Dogma... (40 comments)

Yeah, Tea Party is too specific to an existing dogma. But, there are quite a few liberals who skew closer to Noam Chomsky's brand. I think a number of liberals take anti-establishment seriously and believe that libertarianism has some insightful observations on how things work ( e.g. regulatory capture). But a number of liberals have different solutions. Very different from Chomsky's "Anarchist Social Libertarianism" (or whatever he calls it). And especially different from the pro big business of "libertarian" politicians.

There is room to agree on populism.
There is room to agree on that things are broken.
There is room to agree things need to change.

But what we need is to stop fighting on abstract idealistic polarized solutions.

It's time to start thinking beyond these extreme dogmatic and impractical abstract ideas of how to run things. We dont want oppressive big brother government, and we dont want out-of-control, laissez-faire, libertarian capitalism.

about two weeks ago

Silicon Valley Fights Order To Pay Bigger Settlement In Tech Talent Hiring Case

beakerMeep Unseal the documentation too (200 comments)

The thing we really need here is public justice. If the world does not know how these ultra rich are conspiring against them, then there is no justice. They need to unseal all of the evidence, no exceptions.

Also I think it's important to note one of the plaintiffs (Michael Devine) who pushed the judge into ruling against this, the lawyers wanted to walk away with their check.

From a May 2014 CNET article

Plaintiff fights Apple, Google settlement in wage-fixing suit

A programmer who is part of the class action lawsuit against several tech giants says $324 million isn't enough.

"As an analogy," Devine wrote to Koh, according to the Times, "if a shoplifter is caught on video stealing a $400 iPad from the Apple Store, would a fair and just resolution be for the shoplifter to pay Apple $40, keep the iPad, and walk away with no record or admission of wrongdoing? Of course not."

Had the case gone to trial as planned at the end of May, court filings indicate, the tech employees would have sought $3 billion. Lucasfilm, Pixar, and Intuit agreed to settle last year for a combined $20 million, covering 8 percent of the employees named in the suit.

about two weeks ago

Android Text Messages Intermittently Going Astray

beakerMeep Re:Medium is appropriate... (325 comments)

Apparently Google agrees with you as well as it seems they changed the priority to Critical in the past few hours.

more than 3 years ago

ITC Investigates Xbox 360 After Motorola Complaint

beakerMeep Re:Patent Chess (71 comments)

Microsoft: Pawn takes Pawn
Motorola: Hey that's illegal
Apple: it's called en passant...
Oracle: You sunk my battleship!

more than 3 years ago

CIA Launches WTF To Investigate Wikileaks

beakerMeep Re:Really? People are surprised? (402 comments)

Not surprised, but did they aid in obtaining them? I got the impression they aided in publishing, but that Manning obtained them all on his own.

more than 3 years ago

Google TV Suffers Setback

beakerMeep Re:Geeky devices (202 comments)

When all the major networks ban a TV product I would think an anti-competitive FTC investigation should be something worth looking into. Basically they banned a browser with a specific user agent string based on the company that provides the device. Can you imagine if all the networks decided to ban Dell computers but not HP?

more than 3 years ago

Obama FCC Caves On Net Neutrality

beakerMeep Re:I earned it (853 comments)

Your hubris is epic. They haven't decided anything yet. You're basically saying that FCC setting out regulations (which are toothless) may possibly be bad in the future. So tell us, oh great predictor of future bad regulations, what's going to happen? I don't suppose you actually have the ability to lay out specifics of what you're even talking about, do you?

I wish I could tell you what I think you've actually earned the right to but I'm going to leave that part out for civility's sake.

more than 3 years ago

Obama FCC Caves On Net Neutrality

beakerMeep Re:What a suprise (853 comments)

What the current congress feels about the matter is a bit irrelevant since the powers the FCC have are derived from the Telecommunications act of 1996. The Federal Court said they didn't have the legal framework to regulate under Title I. However, seeing as they do have the legal framework to regulate telecommunications under title II, and other titles, it's still possible they do from a legal sense if they were to reclassify.

Basically the court didn't simply say "u dunt haz authority on internets." Rather, it was a legal technicality that was the inevitable result of reclassifying telcos and cable internet under title I as information services so as to "deregulate" them. This actually helped strengthen the monopolies of the telcos to be on par with cable monopolies.

And the court was wrong to decide the way it did. Did you know that Comcast had previously gotten it's way out of a class action lawsuit from its users by saying the FCC did have the authority? Then only to turn around and argue in that case the FCC didn't have the authority?

Regardless, if you honestly think it's unreasonable for the regulatory body for telcos and cable companies should not regulate internet services (which they bundle with video and phone) from those same companies, then I don't know what to tell you.

Of course it matters what representatives and courts say and do, but I feel the majority of them as so far in the wrong as to be mind boggling. This is clearly what the FCC was created for. You can argue that regulation isn't needed, and that's a valid opinion, but to say that the FCC has no business regulating communications services because of imprecise legal language is just sad diversionary bs.

more than 3 years ago

Why Android Is the New Windows

beakerMeep I'm also an Android developer and I don't (424 comments)

I'm also an Android developer and I don't share those concerns. There have been some frustrations, yes, but there are usually decent workarounds for a lot of things. As an example: Bluetooth support wasn't really solid until 2.0, yet there are excellent backport open-source libraries that make it easy to provide that support to 1.5 and 1.6 devices.

I completely disagree about reflection as well. Using reflection you can degrade gracefully for platforms that dont support what you're doing. Reflection is not ugly at all, it actually quite an elegant deign pattern imho.

If you're ending up with 6 layouts for each screen you're doing something wrong and perhaps overreaching in your support for older devices or your layout is overly complicated. It's unreasonable to think the latest Mass Effect game would run on a tiny 320x240 screen. And while that's hyperbole, yes, the point is made.

Just to be clear though, I don't find you concerns invalid, However I don't think this is unique to Android.

Granted there is still much work Google and the manufacturers could do to streamline all of this. But any software development platform, any OS, has some level of variation for what is supported. OSX, Linux, iOS, WebOS, Windows, Windows Mobile, Windows Phone 7, Symbian, HTML5/JS/CSS, Blackberry OS. Really the only platforms that don't, are the video game consoles. But now even that's starting to happen there too with external storage and peripherals.

more than 3 years ago

Obama FCC Caves On Net Neutrality

beakerMeep Re:What a suprise (853 comments)

Yes why in the world would the Federal Communications Commission, that normally regulates Telcos and Cable companies, think it has authority to regulate a new communication and information service they provide over the same wires and spectrum with some of the same types of content as cable and telephones.

Golly gee, that's just crazy talk!


more than 3 years ago

Obama FCC Caves On Net Neutrality

beakerMeep Re:You are an idiot and a tool (853 comments)

Your sir are rude, and your circular logic is flawed. You don't want regulation and the FCC decided to let the market decide -- and you call that a failure, blaming people who are pro regulation? Seriously, what's wrong with you?

more than 3 years ago

Obama FCC Caves On Net Neutrality

beakerMeep Re:What a suprise (853 comments)

How is toothless regulation a problem for the anti-regulation crowd? Or were you just pining for a chance to call someone a statist?

Most of those who are pro Net Neutrality wanted real regulation, not toothless fluff to cater to the anti-regulation, pro-business crowd. If anything it's your pocliy positions that got us this. Toothless regulation is pretty much the same as no regulation in my mind.

more than 3 years ago

Obama FCC Caves On Net Neutrality

beakerMeep Re:What a suprise (853 comments)

No, it really just needs to be something in the middle. ISPs should not be able to discriminate based on endpoint or traffic type or protocol with the exception of E-911 and a few other specific and sensible exceptions. Spam and DDoS filtering, QoS for traffic types like VOIP that doesnt discriminate based on end point, or company. It's not really that hard. While a simple "everything should be equal based on X" rule wont work, it's equally absurd to think the law must be so complex as to impossible to craft. This fatalism from some ./ posters (not you) about the technical and legal wording being impossible is nonsense and not helpful. There is easily a middle ground here, and yes it requires some technical specifics, but it's NOT impossible

more than 3 years ago

Obama FCC Caves On Net Neutrality

beakerMeep Re:Is it really so outrageous? (853 comments)

The problem is telcos are not producing content. Any plan that lets them set up as being able to charge based on the quality of content that they DONT produce, is tantamount to blessing rent seeking. They dont just hurt consumers, they hurt the whole ecosystem.

more than 3 years ago

Obama FCC Caves On Net Neutrality

beakerMeep Re:Backlash (853 comments)

You mean regulate, right? There used to be a regulation the required telcos to sell their lines at wholesale to competitors but they removed that regulation so that telcos were as unregulated as cable companies (with regards to internet service).

The local monopolies these ISPs enjoy are not a regulation but rather a grant/partnership of various cities/towns/etc to the cable/telco operator as well as some natural monopolies due to the giants being the only ones with infrastructure. The kind of competition you are promoting is exactly what we need, but don't kid yourself that there are federal regulations that are creating these local monopolies.

more than 3 years ago



beakerMeep beakerMeep writes  |  more than 7 years ago

beakerMeep (716990) writes "David Marcus, a user on Kuro5hin, recently put together an excellent piece on the perils and faults behind the workings of From the article: 'As I write, the top story on Digg is "Transparency in Social News", a newspaper-as-blog item that the Digg community have used as a little self-congratulatory pat on the back. I understand why Digg's users feel like they deserve to toast themselves now and then — after all, they've made the place one of the Web's Top 100 sites, and they've made Digg, Inc. upwards of $200 million.' Incidentally, as I submit this story to Slashdot, Digg has appears to have removed the story from the list of upcoming stories."


beakerMeep has no journal entries.

Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>