Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:So fun fact about Netflix films (Score 1) 24

Actually it implies that this is even a new "problem". Look at the forbes top 100 richest people. How many Rockafellers, DuPonts, Crockers, Morgans, etc. are still billionaires? Answer: practically none. For instance the best numbers I am aware of are for the DuPont family. The DuPont family wealth is approximately $18 billion, but due to inheritance and dispersion over 100 years worth of DuPonts, that wealth is now spread over more than 3500 individuals.
Wealth is always created in a concentrated manner, but over generations, it disperses anti-logarithmically back to the mean. We actually have laws that protect this and ensure a rich robber-barron of any given generation cannot exert inter-generational control of their wealth. Incidentally, that's what the failure so-called "late-stage" capitalism describes. In the past it was robber-barons. It's not new, it's working as designed.
The only place where wealth is concentrated, and remains so is a government.

Comment Does anyone remember (Score 1) 12

~15-20 years ago Miguel de Icaza ranting about how terrible Open Source is? RMS even called him a traitor.
Why? Miguel constantly pushed Mono and lambasted everyone who disagreed with him or even refused to use C#. When that didnâ(TM)t work he ran off to the safety of Microsoft.

Comment Re:I have an idea (Score 2, Insightful) 85

You, and people like you are unbelievably dangerous. When you constantly use the word NAZI to pejoratively describe everything you don't like because you cannot form a cogent and coherent argument, you devalue the word NAZI and the real horrible things that real NAZIs did. If literally everyone is a NAZI then when real NAZIs do real NAZI things, how will anyone tell the difference? Learn to have an argument or stay off the internet.

You are embarrassing.

Comment Re: I hope Expressif responds by suing these failu (Score 1) 129

That was the point of his comment. These claims are obviously untrue and constitute libel. I would also suggest they have a negligence claim as well. IANAL but these theories are why I suggested that they should litigate these scumbags into the ground.

Comment I hope Expressif responds by suing these failures (Score 1) 129

1. If this did 1/1000th of what they say, irresponsibly disclosing it during a talk at a conference is reprehensible.
2. After looking at it, it doesn't do 1/1000th of what they say, so they're either liars, or in marketing. Either way they should be used as ballast on the next Starship launch.
3. If this is this amazing, where's the CVE?
4. Who's independently confirmed this?
5. Who cares?
6. I hope Expressif responds with an IBM of lawyers. These people disgust me.

Yes, an IBM is a quantity of lawyers roughly equating to the number of entire lawyers that will fit in a courtroom. 1 billion devices? Sounds like $1,000,000,000 worth of lawsuit these scumbags should be paying out.

Comment hear me out (Score 1) 172

What if, and hear me out, you start by showing the third episode so no one knows what's going on. In fact, start with a bar fight where it isn't even clear who the main characters are. Then show the rest of the first half of the season, then the pilot so that we get the backstory.
NO, THATS NOT IT! Then cancel it immediately! You have to cancel the entire show at that point even though people now understand what's going on.

Comment Re:weird hill to die on (Score 0) 76

It's not vague at all. They're doubling down because they want the license... In theory any code you edit on github, any video you upload to youtube you've given a perpetual license to Mozilla to do ANYTHING IT WANTS WITH IT. They say it's not for AI, but they wouldn't collect it if they weren't using it for something that benefits them.

Comment Wait, what? (Score 3, Informative) 76

Obligatory IANAL, but I did just finish working with my attorneys on our new privacy policy, so this is fresh in mind.

"Mozilla explained it used specific legal terms -- "nonexclusive," "royalty-free," and "worldwide" -- because Firefox is free, available globally, and allows users to maintain control of their own data."

This, children, is what we call lying. It is where you say a thing that isn't true.

nonexclusive = use and sharing of data is not limited to Mozilla
royalty-free = the user who owns/generates the data doesn't get paid (The intellectual property owner)
worldwide = we can send your data anywhere and into any regulatory regime and you can't do anything about it.

I don't know or care if Mozilla is using this for AI, but technically speaking, if you use Firefox to upload content you created to YouTube, Mozilla has a non-exclusive, royalty-free, worldwide license to do anything they want to with your intellectual property.

Keep in mind Mozilla is a CORPORATION. They may or may not do any given thing, but they retain these rights and licenses meaning that if EvilCorp buys Mozilla at the impending bankruptcy, your personal licenses to everything you do or transmit in Mozilla goes with it.

Comment Regulatory Environment (Score 2, Insightful) 137

What is holding the UK back is quite simply the insane size of their government, the insane quantity of their regulations, and the pain of dealing with their "devolved" government at every level. In the UK businesses are entirely subservient to their government, especially local councils.

If the UK ever wants to grow again they must embark upon the second phase of what Brexit was supposed to allow them to do, as this is the path they chose. The path of aggressively deregulation of their economic system, and the implementation of a true free market economy.

Slashdot Top Deals

C++ is the best example of second-system effect since OS/360.

Working...