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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Make an already terrible experience even worse. (Score 1) 166

Yep. It made a difference when a 30" television was considered "large", but I can get an 85" Samsung television for $3700 at Best Buy that will fill the same amount of my vision from my couch as a theater screen from the middle of the room, and I can put my feet up and have a drink.

Comment Can't stop the older stuff from getting out. (Score 5, Informative) 91

People were freaking out about FPGAs, microcontrollers, etc. that were in some of these drones. Fact is most (all?) of it was older & EOL things that you can find on Ali Express and other sites for peanuts.

There's no way to stop the recyclers from selling the parts off.
Apple

Submission + - Apple facing class-action suit over AirTags (npr.org)

Theaetetus writes: A class-action suit was filed Monday in the U.S. Northern District Court of California with two plaintiffs who said Apple's AirTags made it easier for them to be stalked and harassed.

The complaint contends, "[w]hat separates the AirTag from any competitor product is its unparalleled accuracy, ease of use (it fits seamlessly into Apple's existing suite of products), and affordability. With a price point of just $29, it has become the weapon of choice of stalkers and abusers."

Apple stated in February 2022 that, "We have been actively working with law enforcement on all AirTag-related requests we’ve received...
Every AirTag has a unique serial number, and paired AirTags are associated with an Apple ID. Apple can provide the paired account details in response to a subpoena or valid request from law enforcement. We have successfully partnered with them on cases where information we provided has been used to trace an AirTag back to the perpetrator, who was then apprehended and charged."

According to the complaint, neither of the plaintiffs appear to have used this process.

Comment Re:Maybe they don't want to work there? (Score 1) 394

This is a radical idea, but maybe they don't want to work in tech? It certain seems that no matter how much they try to create a welcoming environment, women simply do not want to work in tech.

For all his awkwardness, maybe James Damore was on to something? You know, that something that got him fired for daring to suggest men and women are attracted to different things.

Programming used to be female-dominated, only a mere 60 years ago. More importantly, modern humans first appeared around 300,000 years ago, while "tech" careers have been around for only a mere eyelash of a blink of that time. It strains credulity to say that there's an inherent biological sex difference due to hundreds of thousands of years of evolution that is (a) that strong and pervasive throughout the population to have the effect we see today, and (b) flipped in only the past two generations.

Comment Re:Secondary Effects (Score 3, Insightful) 394

3) A class of first-class workers (women) dominates the workplace, that you cannot argue nor contradict. As a female quitting is much worse than a male quitting.

...This happens in every single business trying to force 'equality' because of the simple law of offer and demand.

So you have an example of these businesses that were male dominated but now have first-class female workers that can't be argued with or contradicted?

Comment Re:I liked the part (Score 1) 30

Nobody would SWAT anybody if it didn't come with a risk of death, that's literally why they are doing it.

I'm sorry but that's horseshit. People act as an outright nuisance all the time without the goal of killing people. e.g. calling in fake bomb threats, accusing someone of something they didn't do, etc.

That's his point - there are tons of ways to be an outright nuisance that are nonetheless safe. SWATting carries the possibility of death. It'd be closer to calling in a bomb threat... and also planting a bomb.

Slashdot Top Deals

1 + 1 = 3, for large values of 1.

Working...