Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
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:liar (Score 2) 564

Were you sleeping during the campaign? He kept denying any link between Russia and the hacking of the democratic party. He acted like a douche with the Manning thing (offering to turn himself in - read my other comment on this thread). He's clearly ok with Putin pulling the strings, and with Trump's strings being pulled. Putin, Trump and Assange now live in a make believe world where truth has no meaning. A world of their own doing. Watch a documentary called HyperNormalization. What happened this week with this is just the latest chapter, and it could very well be in the documentary, if they concluded a bit later.

Comment Re:liar (Score 1) 564

I can almost bet this is how it all happened: Assange hears the rumour that Obama is about to 'pardon' Manning (which makes sense, since that's his line of work, and something like this goes through a few desks before it happens), and quickly puts together that "I'll turn myself in if what I heard is already happening does indeed happen". The White House, which was working on it before Assange ever made the statement, goes through with it (the announcement, that is), and adds up that the event is in no way related to Assanges claim. Some press will mention the 2 events together, and a hint of correlation stinks the whole process. That's all it takes now, thanks to Trump. He then uses the date of release as an excuse to weasel out, but the press release, or whatever it was, where that was announced is carefully crafter to ad weight to the correlation theory between Assange's offer and the announcement of the impending release. It makes me sick, but at least it clears any doubt about Assange beng a duch. It's too bad, I had great consideration for the guy. Not after his part in the Hillary email thing during the campaign, though. And certainly not now, after this.

Comment Re:Yes! (Score 1) 412

I'm European. What Hillary did, with the emails thing, seems like an honest mistake by someone who's not very computer savvy. But all it revealed was that she's a workaholic and a different kind of nerd, a government nerd. She, for all her shortcomings, seems like a balanced and serious person, who can learn a lesson. And so did the secret services, once they understood what led her to do it.It saddens me that the intelligence community worried more about the risks she took than about the fact that Russia was involved in 'exposing' them. The FBI should be looking into it. Instead, they find more emails and, instead of taking one afternoon going through them (that's how long Edward Snowden reckoned it would take, although there were thousands of them), they announce it, like 'omg, she did it again, we found the other half of it', giving Trump a few days, at the final stretch, to narrow his gap. Then, of course, when the FBI director says nothing important was found, Trump just runs with that too with 'no way you could go through all those email in just a couple of days!' And people buy into that too, since they, like Trump, think that someone has to read every single email, one by one, in order for something to be found. This after months of Trump on the TV, 24/7, saying Hillary is a criminal. Republicans were basically brain washed (if that's even possible without a brain) into picturing Hillary, with a ski mask on, laughing like a Batman villain and saying: I'm so naughty! She was being practical and mistakeingly cut a few corners. No real harm was done, fortunately. She got it. Unlike Trump, she can learn. Time to move on and maybe figure out who exposed it and why. Who knows, maybe the people responsible have ties to the OTHER guy! Which was confirmed by themselves, both sides, AFTER the ellection.

Comment Re:The way to do it (Score 2) 222

I've been using a service called MBnet in portugal. It basically generates a virtual CC number you can use (once or up to a limit amount you pick) like it was a VISA CC number. It's perfect. I haven't used my credit card number directly online since Paypal came up, and I have used paypal only on very special occasions, 3 or 4 times in may more years, since I use MBnet. The advantage of MBnet is that I don't have to worry about paying the credit card expenses to avoid interest rates. It allows me to use the CC like a debit card, online, without ever owing anything.

Comment Re: Bullshit (Score 1) 190

I'm portuguese. We also make the gender quite clear in every sentence. I don't need subtitles to watch movies/series/etc, but it's amusing to see how sometimes the people doing the subtitles struggle to handle and go 'round certain sentences when they can contain plot information that would be revealed by a proper translation.

For instance: 'the doctor is coming'. We use 'doutor' (male) and 'doutora' (female). So the minute we hear that sentence, we'll know the gender of the doctor. If that information is relevant to that scene, or the plot as a whole, we really don't have a way to make it sound neutral.

As for animals, we use the male form when not being specific, but we do have different names for most species, though not all. Whale, for instance, is a female word ('baleia'), that has no male version. In cases like that, where it's not clear, the article before the word clears any doubt. Sometimes it doesn't (whale, again), but for most we do have both genders, like cat (gato/gata) and dog (cão/cadela). When it's not possible, we just mention whether it's male or female, like you would in english.

Stuff like that makes learning foreign languages tough. If we want to impersonate an english speaker trying his hand at portuguese, we'll switch a few of the gender specific words and it'll immediately sound authentic, since those are the most common mistakes.

Comment Re:From Theri Privacy Policy (Score 1) 52

All the US government has to do to sort this whole encryption thing is to get ahead of the game. Use a company like this as a front, develop a trully 'safe' system (it can very well be 'unbreakable' as they'll have a backdoor) and problem solved. It becomes popular, it's free or dirt cheap, everyone uses it and they're set. It's something like having the KGB be your phone operator.

Comment Re:Well then... (Score 1) 125

Find an HD version on youtube. Download it instead of streaming it. It takes about the same time to download as it would take to stream but, when you do get to watch it, it won't freeze randomly. Same thing with Vimeo (which seems a bit slower around here). Then either delete it or keep it for personal viewing. As for how to download it, well, there are ways. But the point is, you don't have to look for alternative sources, just figure out how to make the most out of the obvious ones, since they're not working as they're supposed too in your case.

Comment Re:O RLY? (Score 1) 310

The point is that since there's so much we still don't know about the moon, it makes sense to make it a priority before considering Mars. The fact that going back to the moon can also be helpful in doing the Mars thing, just adds to it. One step at a time. We haven't been to the moon for so long, everything has to be developed again, so start there. It should be a no brainer. I'm all for going to Mars, but I also wished the going back to the moon thing was done a couple of decades ago. Then going straight to Mars would make more sense.

Slashdot Top Deals

We don't know who it was that discovered water, but we're pretty sure that it wasn't a fish. -- Marshall McLuhan