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


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

Comment Re:Studying Russian (Score 1) 41

Given the flow of "Russian" related stories on slashdot, would studying Russian not now be the trending language to get a promotion in the NSA? Or at least have some skills on show to fend off been replace by a contractor?

You might have a point, if he wasn't already a contractor rather than an employee. If he was an NSA employee wanting to learn Russian and the NSA wanted him to learn Russian, the NSA would pay him to learn Russian.

Comment Re:You are wrong. Elon is right. (Score 1) 266

The problem isn't that the media wants to report the out of the ordinary, the problem is that they are conveniently leaving out facts to make it appear worse than it really is.

It reminds me of the anti-cigarette commercials there are plenty of good reasons to not smoke but they are running commercials that say there is methane in cigarettes just like poop when in actuality you would have to smoke for multiple lifetimes just to get enough methane out of a cigarette to equal the amount of methane an average person pays to have pumped into their house each month to their furnace, water heater, and stove cook with.

Yeah, that sort of things falls under "what is likely to attract consumer attention".

Comment Re:You are wrong. Elon is right. (Score 4, Insightful) 266

When I started reading this post, I thought you were being sarcastic or ironic, and I was looking forward to the punchline. Then I realized you were actually serious. The thing is, the news media report on what is unusual and what is likely to attract consumer attention, not necessarily in that order. You know: man bites dog, rather than dog bites man; it doesn't matter that dog bites man happens a lot more frequently than man bites dog. You're free to consider this deplorable, but that's the way it's always been and it's very unlikely to change.

Comment Re:"Unlimited" != unlimited (Score 1) 151

Let's get some truth in advertising please? Anything less than full bandwidth 24x7 should not be called "unlimited".

Don't be silly. 24x7 at full bandwidth is still limited, unless "full bandwidth" is infinite. And if network bandwidth were infinite, then they'd be guilty of selling you a phone that limited your usage because it couldn't exploit that infinite bandwidth. You shouldn't be satisfied until you can download the entire Internet instantaneously, endlessly; then you can turn your attention to bitching about the quality of the content.

Comment Re:Slapped down? (Score 1) 151

At $48 million they're not being slapped down. that's not even a slap on the wrist. It's more like shaking your head from across the room, then following up with a quick wink and tiny nod.

Comments along this line always make me wonder: is the set of people who believe that these companies leave no stone unturned in their evil quest to wring every possible cent from each customer, the same set of people who believe that these companies don't care about paying a $48 million fine?

Comment Re: AT&T (Score 1) 151

No, that should not cover them, as they are advertising a limit after the fact. The issue here is where they say "unlimited" which by any technically-competent person would imply you can use as much bandwidth as you can receive at any time with zero time restrictions or other restrictions.

If you advertise throttling at any point and time, you are lying about your unlimited service. Unlimited means NO LIMITS. Period. Oxford has yet to change that definition, and fuck 'legal' definitions as they are often not based upon factual information.

The ATT advertisements I've seen don't use "unlimited" or any other term that implies "no limit". What they do advertise is "no data overage fees".

Comment Re:Um, no. (Score 4, Insightful) 212

Causality breakdown detected.

It may be people spend less money on Android apps because they want to spend less money on the total package. If that were true, it would follow that they would never buy an expensive iPhone in the first place, regardless of the ecosystem or apps.

On the other hand, if they're avoiding expensive phones, they wouldn't have bought a Note 7 either.

Comment Re:Someone missed the Spirit of the Law (Score 3, Insightful) 86

This was of course not the intent of the law when it was written.

Laws are not supposed to be enforced according to someone's interpretation of their intent. If the law is not performing as intended, then it can be amended by the lawmakers.

Oh yeah -- the courts are not supposed to interpret intent either; they're supposed to make judgements according to the way laws are written. This, of course, is an area where practice often departs from theory.

Comment Re:Wait, what? (Score 1) 103

"Well, that should be effective, seeing as how Samsung has told all Note 7 users to power off their phones."

Clearly they would be going without any phone at all, left incommunicado forever.

I don't know why this even has to be explained. Samsung advised Note 7 owners to shut off their phones more than a week ago; even the supposedly good replacement ones that turned out to not be good. This was widely reported on TV, in print media, and on countless websites, and has been the subject of countless 'water cooler' discussions. Only cave-dwelling hermits could be unaware, and they probably don't have network coverage, so they can't receive the text. If they have turned off their phones, they won't receive the text. If they have returned their phones, the text message is superfluous. If they still have their defective phones and still haven't turned them off, they're likely too ignorant to heed the text message.

Comment Re: Londonistan (Score 1) 76

yeah, because london is such a cheap place to live in, you have to be extra wealthy to be able to afford an iphone. maybe you're also living in a reality distortion field, only of the "i'm such a poor victim, why do you call me racist scum"-variety?

Right. Maybe the statistics are racist as well. 12.4% of London residents are Muslim, with some areas at nearly 50%. 28% of London residents live in poverty.

Comment Re:i wondering (Score 1) 103

Sure, they've been banned in baggage as well - but will that actually stop people from dropping them in there and hoping to get away with it?

Not all of them, I'd bet.

What are suggesting? Guns aren't allowed in carry-on, but people still put guns in carry-on. Things that are illegal are against the law, but some people still break the law.

Slashdot Top Deals

To iterate is human, to recurse, divine. -- Robert Heller