>"Roku Owners: Comcast Is About To Sell You Cable TV Without the Cable Box"
Who cares? Who exactly wants to be FORCED to watch commercials now? I know I don't. That is what "streaming cable" means.
DVR on cable or OTA- fine Netflix model- fine Amazon pay-per-show model- fine Network passes of uninterrupted shows- fine. Streaming cable channels? Why?????
Trump and his wonderful deregulations just announced today that Cable providers don't need to do this. I have to wonder if Comcast was aware of this before their announcement?
OMG, give me a break. The weak FCC has been allowing cable companies to screw consumers for decades....and through both ENTIRE Obama administrations. So let's not pretend there is some new anti-consumer "thing" happening, or that it is something Republican, or something Trump, because it really isn't.
Cable companies have been encrypting stations with proprietary methods and should not. They then used SDV and locked everyone out of participating except TiVo (pretty much). And even TiVo has a nightmare trying to get things working with cable companies because the cable companies MAKE it a nightmare... they are the only token hold-on. Hidden fees, rental boxes for people who don't even have boxes, cable cards that never work or mysteriously need repairing at random times, over and over again, tuning adapters that freak out nearly EVERY DAY. There have already been several attempts by the FCC to coordinate "open" hardware- and they all failed. I have seen it all. THIS IS NOT NEW.
>"Excel is unique and there's not really a replacement for it."
And, yet, for what perhaps 90% of people use spreadsheets for, the alternatives work just fine (depends of type of user and industry, of course). I know, because I have 150 business users that use LibreOffice and zero using MS-Office. Maybe a few times a year we face an issue, and it is not because LO lacks some feature of MS-Office or Excel, but because some Excel spreadsheet we were sent is using some obscure macros, or an MS-Word document had horribly poor formatting. And then, it just requires someone to work on it a bit to fix it.
>"The "legal limit" is a good marker of whether or not you'll be charged with drunk driving."
That is very true. But the better goal would be to have meaningful and fair methods to prevent driving by the actually incapacitated, not just those who have an arbitrary amount of one substance in their body at that moment.
>"It doesn't 'tell you you are drunk', it merely detects the presence of alcohol on your breath. You'd need an actual breathalyzer to determine if you're above the legal limit or not."
Yep. And the "legal limit" really isn't a good marker of how much someone is impaired either, because it can vary greatly from person to person. If one tested reaction time and/or other RESULTS/OUTCOMES oriented factors, it would be far better (and it would account for all chemical and fatigue impairments, not just alcohol).
I have been doing this for 28 years. I am not just making up stuff to post on Slashdot. Yes, we have had a few failures, but in the vast majority, it has worked for us. But like I said, searching to fill a position is a LOT of work (far more than it should be).
>""on the fourth attempt the hackers had no chance because the computers had been replaced and the latest security standards integrated, and some networks had been decoupled." The 111-year-old hotel is now planning to remove all their electronic locks, "
Yeesh. If you decide to not go back to physical keys, at least consider these next time:
1) Don't connect your door/key system to the Internet, at all. 2) Isolate the machine on your network to just the needed functionality. 3) Isolate the machine physically- nobody but specialized staff should have physical access. 4) Restrict root/admin access to the machine. 5) If possible, get a system not run by any MS-Windows machines. 6) Make, test, and retain good, redundant, and incremental backups. 7) Perhaps hire or contract with I.T. staff that can set up and maintain your systems properly.
Computer systems are not like ice makers or or other appliances at a hotel. They need to be designed, setup, and maintained properly to work well. And, unfortunately, they are rarely a one-time expense. This, more than anything, is what gets companies into trouble. These types of failures being reported are more about management failure than failures of technology.
I didn't make the policy about not listing what we are willing to pay. I just have to work within the framework given to me. I understand why we don't, but I don't always agree with it. There is a delicate balance, one that seems to pretty rare.
As for only hiring losers, that generally doesn't happen. Actually, we have a team of good people who not only succeed, but end up staying.
>" From the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution: No person shall... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law..."
I don't think that applies to non-citizens. I am not saying it shouldn't, I am just pointing out that the standards of protections for citizens vs. aliens have not and do not have to be equal.
>"let him unilaterally decide whatever he wants. I don't remember the United States being a monarchy. At what point does Congress tell him he's not a king?"
Perhaps never... they didn't tell Obama that, did they? This is nothing new.
Please review the history of this country since 9/11. Trump is an extension of what has been happening all along. The terrorists won a long time ago when the American people decided to choose the illusion of safety over security. It wasn't Trump who passed the so-called "Patriot Act", it was a bipartisan Congress, along with all the other Constitution-eroding legislation. And just as many rights and privacies have been stripped from citizens under Obama as any other President during the era.
The problem we have is not something invented by Trump. These problems are not likely not going to get any better under him, but let's not pretend that there is suddenly some new threat, because it is not new.
Wow, you are a piece of work. You know almost nothing about me, our company, our situation, and yet can label me as not understanding, then an "asswipe", then an "asshole" then someone that needs humility.
This isn't kumbaya or church. It is a business trying to hire someone that best fits the job and will stay a reasonable amount of time (1-2 years depending on the position) to recoup the training and adjustment time. We don't "owe" applicants anything nor have a responsibility to employ the world (nor is the "econ" that bad here).
Apparently you have never managed people, much less a department or a facility, or you would understand what turnover does to small business/ departments with highly skilled jobs. Especially true when the department is understaffed, underappreciated, underpaid, and it can take months to find the right person. So get off your high horse.
If they don't answer the question in the application, or cover letter, or resume then we call and ask. If they still don't answer, the application is tossed.
And yes, if we can pay 40 and they list 60, there is no acceptable negotiation. Rarely am I allowed to increase the amount, it is fixed. And if they would accept much less than what they asked, something is wrong and they would not be happy and would not stay. It would just waste everyone's time.
>"If your history showed that you made significantly more than the job you are applying for, the employer may be hesitant to make an offer because they will expect you to keep looking and leave again shortly."
Yep, this is 100% true. When I am hiring, if I see a previous salary too high but they are willing to accept less, then this signals they are not going to stay. They are probably just settling until they can find someplace else. We don't have the time to deal with that, turnover absolutely kills small companies. Worse, it could mean they were fired, not "laid off" (most people lie and say they are "laid off" or "resigned" when they were actually fired).
>"All I know is that lying about these things will really rub people the wrong way."
Agreed. Either tell the truth, or leave it blank. We ask candidates for history because we want to know if we can afford the person. We throw out LOTS of candidates because they don't say what they are looking for and list previous salaries that are too high.
What I want is seemingly what a lot of people want:
1) Smaller phone: nope 2) SD storage: nope 3) Wireless charging: nope 4) SD card: nope 5) Larger battery instead of thinner phone: nope 6) Lower price: nope 7) Nexus with no bloatware or lockdown: nope 8) Removable battery: nope
Will the Pixel 2 fix any of that?
But what generally keeps coming out is just larger yet thinner, resolutions ever increasing past what any human can ever see, cameras with more and more resolution that isn't really needed, less serviceable, never enough battery life, never enough storage, more locked down than ever stuff with features added many don't want or care about, but removing features that are useful.... with a huge price tag to boot.
Pixel? Pass. Nexus 6P? Pass. Nexus 5X? Pass. Nexus 6? Pass. Still clinging to my Nexus 5 and hoping....
>"Google plans to roll out a change in Chrome Stable soon that will have the browser throttle timers in background tabs to improve battery life and browsing performance."
It also kills remote access and thin clients. I have been screaming about this for years. And it shouldn't just be for background tabs, it should be for foreground ones too... if you are idle or the window doesn't have focus, there should be a way to throttle the hell out of the thing! Timers, animation, mouse polling, useless refreshing, so many things are conspiring to suck systems dry. Please, Mozilla, Firefox needs this too, ASAP!
At work we use thin clients and a single site we must use just revamped their site and now is consuming about 1000% more CPU than it used to... and it does it all day long, continuously. Yes, it is bad programming, but it is not like we end-users have much of any control over it. We need options to control this on the CLIENT SIDE. I ask users now to PLEASE close that tab/site when not using it, but many have to use it all day long or just don't care.... it ultimately affects us all.
>"On his first full day as Federal Communications Commission Chairman, Republican Ajit Pai yesterday spoke to FCC staff and said one of his top priorities will be bringing broadband to all Americans. [...] regardless of race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, or anything else. "
OK, so waiting for the media (and some Slashdotters) to start twisting around what was said. How DARE a Republican, much less a new Trump appointment, say something like that! Certainly it must be a misquote, a conspiracy, or have evil motives...
>"With a $100m budget, it has begun the search for technology companies that could provide biometric systems, such as facial, iris and fingerprint recognition."
The gov should not have fingerprint registration data (which will be horribly abused). Facial and iris are not good choices either...
There is only one safe and practical biometric I know of- deep vein palm scan. That registration data cannot be readily abused. It can't be latently collected like DNA, fingerprints, and face recognition can. You have to know you are registering/enrolling when it happens. You don't leave evidence of it all over the place. When you go to use it, you know you are using it every time. And on top of all that, it is accurate, fast, reliable, unchanging, live-sensing, and cheap. If you must participate in a biometric, this is the one you should insist on using.
Stand up for your rights, people... and the rights of your children. Once you give fingerprint or DNA data to the government (or big business), it will NEVER be erased or restricted, regardless of claims or laws- it will go into huge databases and shared between all agencies and used however they want for as long as they want. Even worse, with every crime investigation, you will be searched without probable cause.
>"If it wasn't clear, I was saying motion interpolation is a failure. "
Ah, I thought you mean the opposite. Sorry. And yes, I was referring to 4K in the living room. Sounds like we are a lot alike as far as tastes in TV tech...
And yes, curved TV's was/is, hands-down, the biggest scam of all. All it does is create a crapload of MOVING reflections (yep, they move dramatically with even the slightest head motion). It is really horrible! It would only serve a use for something like a computer monitor, where you are sitting much closer to it.
>"If you're talking about land size. Canada is the world's largest democracy. (unless you consider Russia democratic- then it is)."
Perhaps you should talk about reasonably HABITABLE land size. Probably 2/3rds or more of Canada are areas where people would not want to settle/live. Same thing with Russia.
I mean, sure, we would have to throw out Alaska, but Canada would have to throw out all the NorthWest Territories, Yukon, Nunavut, and a good portion of the tops of most of the lower provinces. Look at a graphical population density map and a huge percent (almost all) of Canada's population is all just above the border of the USA.
Slashdot Mirror
>"Roku Owners: Comcast Is About To Sell You Cable TV Without the Cable Box"
Who cares? Who exactly wants to be FORCED to watch commercials now? I know I don't. That is what "streaming cable" means.
DVR on cable or OTA- fine
Netflix model- fine
Amazon pay-per-show model- fine
Network passes of uninterrupted shows- fine.
Streaming cable channels? Why?????
Trump and his wonderful deregulations just announced today that Cable providers don't need to do this. I have to wonder if Comcast was aware of this before their announcement?
OMG, give me a break. The weak FCC has been allowing cable companies to screw consumers for decades... .and through both ENTIRE Obama administrations. So let's not pretend there is some new anti-consumer "thing" happening, or that it is something Republican, or something Trump, because it really isn't.
Cable companies have been encrypting stations with proprietary methods and should not. They then used SDV and locked everyone out of participating except TiVo (pretty much). And even TiVo has a nightmare trying to get things working with cable companies because the cable companies MAKE it a nightmare... they are the only token hold-on. Hidden fees, rental boxes for people who don't even have boxes, cable cards that never work or mysteriously need repairing at random times, over and over again, tuning adapters that freak out nearly EVERY DAY. There have already been several attempts by the FCC to coordinate "open" hardware- and they all failed. I have seen it all. THIS IS NOT NEW.
We can be pretty sure (99%?) that their system (at the hotel) was running MS-Windows.
>"Excel is unique and there's not really a replacement for it."
And, yet, for what perhaps 90% of people use spreadsheets for, the alternatives work just fine (depends of type of user and industry, of course). I know, because I have 150 business users that use LibreOffice and zero using MS-Office. Maybe a few times a year we face an issue, and it is not because LO lacks some feature of MS-Office or Excel, but because some Excel spreadsheet we were sent is using some obscure macros, or an MS-Word document had horribly poor formatting. And then, it just requires someone to work on it a bit to fix it.
>"The "legal limit" is a good marker of whether or not you'll be charged with drunk driving."
That is very true. But the better goal would be to have meaningful and fair methods to prevent driving by the actually incapacitated, not just those who have an arbitrary amount of one substance in their body at that moment.
>"It doesn't 'tell you you are drunk', it merely detects the presence of alcohol on your breath. You'd need an actual breathalyzer to determine if you're above the legal limit or not."
Yep. And the "legal limit" really isn't a good marker of how much someone is impaired either, because it can vary greatly from person to person. If one tested reaction time and/or other RESULTS/OUTCOMES oriented factors, it would be far better (and it would account for all chemical and fatigue impairments, not just alcohol).
Not yet.
I have been doing this for 28 years. I am not just making up stuff to post on Slashdot. Yes, we have had a few failures, but in the vast majority, it has worked for us. But like I said, searching to fill a position is a LOT of work (far more than it should be).
>""on the fourth attempt the hackers had no chance because the computers had been replaced and the latest security standards integrated, and some networks had been decoupled." The 111-year-old hotel is now planning to remove all their electronic locks, "
Yeesh. If you decide to not go back to physical keys, at least consider these next time:
1) Don't connect your door/key system to the Internet, at all.
2) Isolate the machine on your network to just the needed functionality.
3) Isolate the machine physically- nobody but specialized staff should have physical access.
4) Restrict root/admin access to the machine.
5) If possible, get a system not run by any MS-Windows machines.
6) Make, test, and retain good, redundant, and incremental backups.
7) Perhaps hire or contract with I.T. staff that can set up and maintain your systems properly.
Computer systems are not like ice makers or or other appliances at a hotel. They need to be designed, setup, and maintained properly to work well. And, unfortunately, they are rarely a one-time expense. This, more than anything, is what gets companies into trouble. These types of failures being reported are more about management failure than failures of technology.
I didn't make the policy about not listing what we are willing to pay. I just have to work within the framework given to me. I understand why we don't, but I don't always agree with it. There is a delicate balance, one that seems to pretty rare.
As for only hiring losers, that generally doesn't happen. Actually, we have a team of good people who not only succeed, but end up staying.
>" From the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution: No person shall ... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law ..."
I don't think that applies to non-citizens. I am not saying it shouldn't, I am just pointing out that the standards of protections for citizens vs. aliens have not and do not have to be equal.
>"let him unilaterally decide whatever he wants. I don't remember the United States being a monarchy. At what point does Congress tell him he's not a king?"
Perhaps never... they didn't tell Obama that, did they? This is nothing new.
>"in this new scaremongering era of Trump."
Riiiiight.
Please review the history of this country since 9/11. Trump is an extension of what has been happening all along. The terrorists won a long time ago when the American people decided to choose the illusion of safety over security. It wasn't Trump who passed the so-called "Patriot Act", it was a bipartisan Congress, along with all the other Constitution-eroding legislation. And just as many rights and privacies have been stripped from citizens under Obama as any other President during the era.
The problem we have is not something invented by Trump. These problems are not likely not going to get any better under him, but let's not pretend that there is suddenly some new threat, because it is not new.
Wow, you are a piece of work. You know almost nothing about me, our company, our situation, and yet can label me as not understanding, then an "asswipe", then an "asshole" then someone that needs humility.
This isn't kumbaya or church. It is a business trying to hire someone that best fits the job and will stay a reasonable amount of time (1-2 years depending on the position) to recoup the training and adjustment time. We don't "owe" applicants anything nor have a responsibility to employ the world (nor is the "econ" that bad here).
Apparently you have never managed people, much less a department or a facility, or you would understand what turnover does to small business/ departments with highly skilled jobs. Especially true when the department is understaffed, underappreciated, underpaid, and it can take months to find the right person. So get off your high horse.
If they don't answer the question in the application, or cover letter, or resume then we call and ask. If they still don't answer, the application is tossed.
And yes, if we can pay 40 and they list 60, there is no acceptable negotiation. Rarely am I allowed to increase the amount, it is fixed. And if they would accept much less than what they asked, something is wrong and they would not be happy and would not stay. It would just waste everyone's time.
>"If your history showed that you made significantly more than the job you are applying for, the employer may be hesitant to make an offer because they will expect you to keep looking and leave again shortly."
Yep, this is 100% true. When I am hiring, if I see a previous salary too high but they are willing to accept less, then this signals they are not going to stay. They are probably just settling until they can find someplace else. We don't have the time to deal with that, turnover absolutely kills small companies. Worse, it could mean they were fired, not "laid off" (most people lie and say they are "laid off" or "resigned" when they were actually fired).
>"All I know is that lying about these things will really rub people the wrong way."
Agreed. Either tell the truth, or leave it blank. We ask candidates for history because we want to know if we can afford the person. We throw out LOTS of candidates because they don't say what they are looking for and list previous salaries that are too high.
I am told that Verizon still loads bloatware on it
What I want is seemingly what a lot of people want:
1) Smaller phone: nope
2) SD storage: nope
3) Wireless charging: nope
4) SD card: nope
5) Larger battery instead of thinner phone: nope
6) Lower price: nope
7) Nexus with no bloatware or lockdown: nope
8) Removable battery: nope
Will the Pixel 2 fix any of that?
But what generally keeps coming out is just larger yet thinner, resolutions ever increasing past what any human can ever see, cameras with more and more resolution that isn't really needed, less serviceable, never enough battery life, never enough storage, more locked down than ever stuff with features added many don't want or care about, but removing features that are useful.... with a huge price tag to boot.
Pixel? Pass. Nexus 6P? Pass. Nexus 5X? Pass. Nexus 6? Pass. Still clinging to my Nexus 5 and hoping....
>"Google plans to roll out a change in Chrome Stable soon that will have the browser throttle timers in background tabs to improve battery life and browsing performance."
It also kills remote access and thin clients. I have been screaming about this for years. And it shouldn't just be for background tabs, it should be for foreground ones too... if you are idle or the window doesn't have focus, there should be a way to throttle the hell out of the thing! Timers, animation, mouse polling, useless refreshing, so many things are conspiring to suck systems dry. Please, Mozilla, Firefox needs this too, ASAP!
At work we use thin clients and a single site we must use just revamped their site and now is consuming about 1000% more CPU than it used to... and it does it all day long, continuously. Yes, it is bad programming, but it is not like we end-users have much of any control over it. We need options to control this on the CLIENT SIDE. I ask users now to PLEASE close that tab/site when not using it, but many have to use it all day long or just don't care.... it ultimately affects us all.
>"On his first full day as Federal Communications Commission Chairman, Republican Ajit Pai yesterday spoke to FCC staff and said one of his top priorities will be bringing broadband to all Americans. [...] regardless of race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, or anything else. "
OK, so waiting for the media (and some Slashdotters) to start twisting around what was said. How DARE a Republican, much less a new Trump appointment, say something like that! Certainly it must be a misquote, a conspiracy, or have evil motives...
>"With a $100m budget, it has begun the search for technology companies that could provide biometric systems, such as facial, iris and fingerprint recognition."
The gov should not have fingerprint registration data (which will be horribly abused). Facial and iris are not good choices either...
There is only one safe and practical biometric I know of- deep vein palm scan. That registration data cannot be readily abused. It can't be latently collected like DNA, fingerprints, and face recognition can. You have to know you are registering/enrolling when it happens. You don't leave evidence of it all over the place. When you go to use it, you know you are using it every time. And on top of all that, it is accurate, fast, reliable, unchanging, live-sensing, and cheap. If you must participate in a biometric, this is the one you should insist on using.
Example: http://www.m2sys.com/palm-vein...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Stand up for your rights, people... and the rights of your children. Once you give fingerprint or DNA data to the government (or big business), it will NEVER be erased or restricted, regardless of claims or laws- it will go into huge databases and shared between all agencies and used however they want for as long as they want. Even worse, with every crime investigation, you will be searched without probable cause.
>"Like this brain-scanning gadget for dogs, which promised to translate their barks into human language."
It would be better if the device could convert barking desire into silence, or maybe reduce the volume by 75%.
>"If it wasn't clear, I was saying motion interpolation is a failure. "
Ah, I thought you mean the opposite. Sorry. And yes, I was referring to 4K in the living room. Sounds like we are a lot alike as far as tastes in TV tech...
And yes, curved TV's was/is, hands-down, the biggest scam of all. All it does is create a crapload of MOVING reflections (yep, they move dramatically with even the slightest head motion). It is really horrible! It would only serve a use for something like a computer monitor, where you are sitting much closer to it.
>"If you're talking about land size. Canada is the world's largest democracy. (unless you consider Russia democratic- then it is)."
Perhaps you should talk about reasonably HABITABLE land size. Probably 2/3rds or more of Canada are areas where people would not want to settle/live. Same thing with Russia.
I mean, sure, we would have to throw out Alaska, but Canada would have to throw out all the NorthWest Territories, Yukon, Nunavut, and a good portion of the tops of most of the lower provinces. Look at a graphical population density map and a huge percent (almost all) of Canada's population is all just above the border of the USA.