That's the problem. Microsoft couldn't have come out with a design like that before the iPhone, because Apple and Google had to show Microsoft what a usable smartphone should actually look like. Come on guys, this is Slashdot, we've known for decades that Microsoft isn't capable of coming up with good ideas by itself, they have to copy someone else. Unfortunately for Microsoft, the market was already saturated, so even if the product was better, it never stood a chance. It's the same problem the desktop Linux people have.
The bottom line is that President Trump won the election because he was, simply, the very best candidate any party has run in decades. And he's doing a great job.
Unmanned ships carrying valuable cargo? All I can say is: ARRRRRR!
(There will be a global renaissance of piracy on the high seas! Why pirate some crappy movies or songs when you can take control of hundreds of tons of actual merchandise!)
After sufficient "donations" to various congress-critters, the Oculus Go will become mandatory for everyone. Along with a permanent wireless link to Facebook, it also attaches permanently to the skull and cannot be removed.
Isn't the whole world moving away from point releases? Perhaps the Linux kernel still needs development and stable tracks, but the whole idea of a "major release" followed by a bunch of "point releases" is an artifact of the days when software came in a box with a CD in it, or (for us old greybeards) on a magnetic tape. Rolling releases with whole numbers (like 50123 rather than 5.0.123) are where it's all going now.
"hate speech" is, without exception, an artificial construct designed to circumvent free speech. The moment someone is offended by something spoken or written, it becomes "hate speech". Well guess what folks, that's exactly what freedom of speech is intended to protect.
On a worldwide corporate network that I maintain, we set up 10.10.10.0/24 as an Anycast space so that we can have 10.10.10.10 answer as the DNS server for every location.
What our non-friends at Fecesbook are really saying here, is that they will editorialize even harder, putting banners on top of anything that doesn't agree with their own political preferences. Because we all know that "fake news" is really just a term for "anything I don't agree with."
You've described a real problem. Unfortunately you then followed it up with an uncalled-for attack on our great President. How about you leave the politics out of it and focus on the issue?
This isn't going to change anything. Facebook has already earned its reputation as a giant sucking machine that takes all of your personal data and sells it to the highest bidder. Actually they sell it to *all* bidders. Smart people are already part of the #DeleteFacebook movement. Smarter people did it a long time ago.
And don't think for a minute that Facebook data won't be used in elections again. But this time Zuckerbertler will make sure it only gets used for campaigns that align with his own political preferences.
The only reason net neutrality / non neutrality is an issue is because the 1984 divestiture of the Bell System was done incorrectly.
Rather than making it about local vs. long distance, followed by reversal of those rules based on some nonsense about unbundled elements, the only regulation that needs to be in place is this: a carrier can operate a central office and provide last mile connectivity, but cannot provide any services over those wires.
By doing this, the carriers who operate the last-mile monopoly or duopoly cannot be the same carriers who operate voice, data, or video services over those wires. At this point you end up with the same diversity of Internet providers that you currently have over "long distance carriers" (if that's still even a thing).
It's the only regulation needed, because it would eliminate the need for all of the others. You would almost immediately have aggregators who provide central office connectivity to smaller network operators. You would have large network operators going directly into the central offices to save money. And if a network operator got stupid and decided to prioritize or restrict traffic, subscribers would have dozens of other network operators to choose from.
This is the principle of placing reglations ONLY where a natural monopoly exists. When you regulate higher up the value chain, you get inefficiencies and politics and corruption and all of the other crap.
Why would Zuckerberg comply with anything other than armed officers escorting him out of the building? The entire service was built on dishonesty. Stolen from another student, built to keep tabs on coeds they wanted to bang, and slurping and exploiting data on the other two billion people who have signed up since then.
Facebook is toxic.
Facebook is a cancer on the Internet. Facebook brings out the worst in people. Facebook breaks every privacy law a million times every day. The Internet needs to rid itself of Facebook.
How many people have to die before we start to observe common sense and decide, once and for all, that putting self-driving cars on the same roads with non-self-driving cars is a bad idea? Every time we go here, someone observes that "well, we just have to make the roads more hospitable to self-driving cars; we need built in signaling, dedicated paths for them, reflective whatever on all other objects on the road..." Well yeah, we already have roads that are fully built out for a specific type of vehicle. They're called railways.
This was inevitable. Technology firms outsource their manufacturing to CheapChinese(tm) fabs like Foxconn, who then gleefully steal their customers' IP and use it in knockoff products. Now with all the money in their hands, they simply buy out the middle man. Now they *are* the companies whose IP they stole.
Belkin, Wemo, and Linksys might as well be Huawei.
This is perfect. Although I don't use FB at all (it's so toxic that I block all of their domains and networks at the firewall)... there are other sites that I'd like to be able to run "in a sandbox". Yes, I can open a Private Browsing window (or Incognito in chrome's parlance) but it's definitely time to have browser sandboxes that can isolate sites from each other. The trackers have become too powerful and we all need to start resisting them.
This doesn't matter anymore. Google are no longer the good guys who need to be defended. Now that they've abandoned "don't be evil" they're just another tech titan. Let 'em battle it out with their fellow evildoer.
Isn't it funny how the naysayers kept saying that OpenOffice/LibreOffice was a non-starter because it didn't have 100.000% compatibility with data exported from MS Office... but the very same people think Office 365 is wonderful, and its compatibility is *way* worse?
It is official; Netcraft confirms: human-driven cars are dying
One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered human-driven cars community when IDC confirmed that human-driven car market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all vehicles. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that human-driven cars have lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. Driving is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.
You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict the future. The hand writing is on the wall: Human-driven cars face a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all because human-driven cars are dying. Things are looking very bad for human-driven cars. As many of us are already aware, human-driven cars continue to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.
Cars with steering wheels are the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of their core engineerss. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time factory workers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: Human-driven cars is dying.
Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.
Ford Motor Co. leader Theo states that there are 7000 drivers of their cars. How many users of Honda cars are there? Let's see. The number of Ford versus Honda posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 Honda users. Toyota posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of Honda posts. Therefore there are about 700 people who manually drive Toyotas. A recent article put Ford at about 80 percent of the human-driven car market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 Ford drivers. This is consistent with the number of Ford Usenet posts.
Due to the troubles of Detroit, abysmal sales and so on, General Motors went out of business and was taken over by the government who sells another troubled vehicle. Now they are also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.
All major surveys show that human-driven cars have steadily declined in market share. Human-driven cars are very sick and their long term survival prospects are very dim. If human-driven cars are to survive at all it will be among automotive dilettante dabblers. Human-driven cars continue to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, Human-driven cars are dead.
Fact: Human-driven cars are dying
Slashdot Mirror
Too late. After the Goolag made clear their utter contempt for free speech, I switched back to Firefox. And I think a lot of other people did too.
That's the problem. Microsoft couldn't have come out with a design like that before the iPhone, because Apple and Google had to show Microsoft what a usable smartphone should actually look like. Come on guys, this is Slashdot, we've known for decades that Microsoft isn't capable of coming up with good ideas by itself, they have to copy someone else. Unfortunately for Microsoft, the market was already saturated, so even if the product was better, it never stood a chance. It's the same problem the desktop Linux people have.
The bottom line is that President Trump won the election because he was, simply, the very best candidate any party has run in decades. And he's doing a great job.
Unmanned ships carrying valuable cargo? All I can say is: ARRRRRR! (There will be a global renaissance of piracy on the high seas! Why pirate some crappy movies or songs when you can take control of hundreds of tons of actual merchandise!)
After sufficient "donations" to various congress-critters, the Oculus Go will become mandatory for everyone. Along with a permanent wireless link to Facebook, it also attaches permanently to the skull and cannot be removed.
So now the conditions at Amazon are getting to be like the conditions at Foxconn.
I agree with you so much that I'm amazed I didn't write that myself.
Isn't the whole world moving away from point releases? Perhaps the Linux kernel still needs development and stable tracks, but the whole idea of a "major release" followed by a bunch of "point releases" is an artifact of the days when software came in a box with a CD in it, or (for us old greybeards) on a magnetic tape. Rolling releases with whole numbers (like 50123 rather than 5.0.123) are where it's all going now.
"hate speech" is, without exception, an artificial construct designed to circumvent free speech. The moment someone is offended by something spoken or written, it becomes "hate speech". Well guess what folks, that's exactly what freedom of speech is intended to protect.
It's funny how people are concerned about their ISP snooping on them ... and then they go and visit Facebook.
On a worldwide corporate network that I maintain, we set up 10.10.10.0/24 as an Anycast space so that we can have 10.10.10.10 answer as the DNS server for every location.
What our non-friends at Fecesbook are really saying here, is that they will editorialize even harder, putting banners on top of anything that doesn't agree with their own political preferences. Because we all know that "fake news" is really just a term for "anything I don't agree with."
You've described a real problem. Unfortunately you then followed it up with an uncalled-for attack on our great President. How about you leave the politics out of it and focus on the issue?
This is nothing other than spite. It's not uncommon to register a domain in a country other than the one you live in.
How about we just stop accepting visa applicants entirely? Unless unemployment is 0% , there are Americans willing to do the jobs.
This isn't going to change anything. Facebook has already earned its reputation as a giant sucking machine that takes all of your personal data and sells it to the highest bidder. Actually they sell it to *all* bidders. Smart people are already part of the #DeleteFacebook movement. Smarter people did it a long time ago.
And don't think for a minute that Facebook data won't be used in elections again. But this time Zuckerbertler will make sure it only gets used for campaigns that align with his own political preferences.
Dear Microsoft:
Fuck you, you fucking fuckers.
Sincerely, Everyone.
The only reason net neutrality / non neutrality is an issue is because the 1984 divestiture of the Bell System was done incorrectly.
Rather than making it about local vs. long distance, followed by reversal of those rules based on some nonsense about unbundled elements, the only regulation that needs to be in place is this: a carrier can operate a central office and provide last mile connectivity, but cannot provide any services over those wires.
By doing this, the carriers who operate the last-mile monopoly or duopoly cannot be the same carriers who operate voice, data, or video services over those wires. At this point you end up with the same diversity of Internet providers that you currently have over "long distance carriers" (if that's still even a thing).
It's the only regulation needed, because it would eliminate the need for all of the others. You would almost immediately have aggregators who provide central office connectivity to smaller network operators. You would have large network operators going directly into the central offices to save money. And if a network operator got stupid and decided to prioritize or restrict traffic, subscribers would have dozens of other network operators to choose from.
This is the principle of placing reglations ONLY where a natural monopoly exists. When you regulate higher up the value chain, you get inefficiencies and politics and corruption and all of the other crap.
Why would Zuckerberg comply with anything other than armed officers escorting him out of the building? The entire service was built on dishonesty. Stolen from another student, built to keep tabs on coeds they wanted to bang, and slurping and exploiting data on the other two billion people who have signed up since then. Facebook is toxic. Facebook is a cancer on the Internet. Facebook brings out the worst in people. Facebook breaks every privacy law a million times every day. The Internet needs to rid itself of Facebook.
How many people have to die before we start to observe common sense and decide, once and for all, that putting self-driving cars on the same roads with non-self-driving cars is a bad idea? Every time we go here, someone observes that "well, we just have to make the roads more hospitable to self-driving cars; we need built in signaling, dedicated paths for them, reflective whatever on all other objects on the road..." Well yeah, we already have roads that are fully built out for a specific type of vehicle. They're called railways.
This was inevitable. Technology firms outsource their manufacturing to CheapChinese(tm) fabs like Foxconn, who then gleefully steal their customers' IP and use it in knockoff products. Now with all the money in their hands, they simply buy out the middle man. Now they *are* the companies whose IP they stole. Belkin, Wemo, and Linksys might as well be Huawei.
This is perfect. Although I don't use FB at all (it's so toxic that I block all of their domains and networks at the firewall) ... there are other sites that I'd like to be able to run "in a sandbox". Yes, I can open a Private Browsing window (or Incognito in chrome's parlance) but it's definitely time to have browser sandboxes that can isolate sites from each other. The trackers have become too powerful and we all need to start resisting them.
This doesn't matter anymore. Google are no longer the good guys who need to be defended. Now that they've abandoned "don't be evil" they're just another tech titan. Let 'em battle it out with their fellow evildoer.
Isn't it funny how the naysayers kept saying that OpenOffice/LibreOffice was a non-starter because it didn't have 100.000% compatibility with data exported from MS Office ... but the very same people think Office 365 is wonderful, and its compatibility is *way* worse?
It is official; Netcraft confirms: human-driven cars are dying One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered human-driven cars community when IDC confirmed that human-driven car market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all vehicles. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that human-driven cars have lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. Driving is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test. You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict the future. The hand writing is on the wall: Human-driven cars face a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all because human-driven cars are dying. Things are looking very bad for human-driven cars. As many of us are already aware, human-driven cars continue to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood. Cars with steering wheels are the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of their core engineerss. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time factory workers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: Human-driven cars is dying. Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers. Ford Motor Co. leader Theo states that there are 7000 drivers of their cars. How many users of Honda cars are there? Let's see. The number of Ford versus Honda posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 Honda users. Toyota posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of Honda posts. Therefore there are about 700 people who manually drive Toyotas. A recent article put Ford at about 80 percent of the human-driven car market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 Ford drivers. This is consistent with the number of Ford Usenet posts. Due to the troubles of Detroit, abysmal sales and so on, General Motors went out of business and was taken over by the government who sells another troubled vehicle. Now they are also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house. All major surveys show that human-driven cars have steadily declined in market share. Human-driven cars are very sick and their long term survival prospects are very dim. If human-driven cars are to survive at all it will be among automotive dilettante dabblers. Human-driven cars continue to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, Human-driven cars are dead. Fact: Human-driven cars are dying