Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Submission + - Slashdot poll: Best cube 3

An anonymous reader writes: 1. Rubik Cube
2. The Cube (movie)
3. Tardis Siege Mode
4. Lament Configuration
5. Weighted Companion Cube
6. Borg Cube
7. The Inhibitors (Revelation Space)
8. Icecube

Comment Re:Uber's in a completely different market (Score 1) 183

So I live in Downtown Atlanta Ga which is far from suburban. There are plenty of taxi stands around but I prefer to use Uber. Why? Because almost invariably the taxis do not operate "within the law as the state, the counties, and the cities require."

When I walk up to a cab they ask me where I'm going, and if I'm not going very far they almost always refuse to give me a ride. Many also don't turn on their fare meters and make up rates (I've lived Downtown for 16 years, I know what a ride is supposed to cost). My understanding is that both of these actions are in violation of the ordinances that govern the operation of Taxis in the city.

Could I report these people or challenge their bogus practices? Sure. But instead I just take Uber where these issues don't exist and I ALWAYS get excellent customer service - whether in a Town Car or a Hyundai.

The situation in other cities might be different, but here, the cab drivers have dug their own graves.

Power

Why Elon Musk's Batteries Frighten Electric Companies 461

JoeyRox writes: The publicized goal of Tesla's "gigafactory" is to make electric cars more affordable. However, that benefit may soon be eclipsed by the gigafactory's impact on roof-top solar power storage costs, putting the business model of utilities in peril. "The mortal threat that ever cheaper on-site renewables pose" comes from systems that include storage, said physicist Amory Lovins. "That is an unregulated product you can buy at Home Depot that leaves the old business model with no place to hide."

Submission + - Comcast Forgets To Delete Revealing Note From Blog Post

An anonymous reader writes: Earlier today, Comcast published a blog post to criticize the newly announced coalition opposing its merger with Time Warner Cable and to cheer about the FCC’s decision to restart the “shot clock” on that deal. But someone at Kabletown is probably getting a stern talking-to right now, after an accidental nugget of honesty made its way into that post. Comcast posted to their corporate blog today about the merger review process, reminding everyone why they think it will be so awesome and pointing to the pro-merger comments that have come in to the FCC. But they also left something else in. Near the end, the blog post reads, “Comcast and Time Warner Cable do not currently compete for customers anywhere in America. That means that if the proposed transaction goes through, consumers will not lose a choice of cable companies. Consumers will not lose a choice of broadband providers. And not a single market will see a reduction in competition. Those are simply the facts.” The first version of the blog post, which was also sent out in an e-mail blast, then continues: “We are still working with a vendor to analyze the FCC spreadsheet but in case it shows that there are any consumers in census blocks that may lose a broadband choice, want to make sure these sentences are more nuanced.” After that strange little note, the blog post carries on in praise of competition, saying, “There is a reason we want to provide our customers with better service, faster speeds, and a diverse choice of programming: we don’t want to lose them.”

Comment Re:Well, let's face it ... (Score 1) 390

gstoddart said:

But let's not for a minute pretend this is being done for any reason besides the zillions of dollars Disney expects to wring from this franchise.

I understand your point, but why would anyone think that Disney is doing this for any other reason than the profit? Seriously, no studio is going to make a movie like this for the fan service - especially as a 'loss leader'.

Indie studios may do a movie for the art, but it's obvious that Disney paid ~$4.1B US for a property they think will make them money back in excess of the purchase price.

m

Submission + - What Does The NSA Think Of Cryptographers? (i-programmer.info)

mikejuk writes: A recently declassified NSA house magazine, CryptoLog, reveals some interesting attitudes between the redactions. What is the NSA take on cryptography?
The article of interest is a report of a trip to the 1992 EuroCrypt conference by an NSA cryptographer whose name is redacted.We all get a little bored having to sit though presentations that are off topic, boring or even down right silly but we generally don't write our opinions down. In this case the criticisms are cutting and they reveal a lot about the attitude of the NSA cryptographers. You need to keep in mind as you read that this is intended for the NSA crypto community and as such the writer would have felt at home with what was being written.
Take for example:
Three of the last four sessions were of no value whatever, and indeed there was almost nothing at Eurocrypt to interest us (this is good news!). The scholarship was actually extremely good; it’s just that the directions which external cryptologic researchers have taken are remarkably far from our own lines of interest.
It seems that back in 1992 academic cryptographers were working on things that the NSA didn't consider of any importance. Could things be the same now?
The gulf between the two camps couldn't be better expressed than:
The conference again offered an interesting view into the thought processes of the world’s leading “cryptologists.” It is indeed remarkable how far the Agency has strayed from the True Path.
The ironic comment is clearly suggesting that the NSA is on the "true path" whatever that might be.
Clearly the gap between the NSA and the academic crypto community is probably as wide today with the different approaches to the problem being driven by what each wants to achieve. It is worth reading the rest of the article.

Comment Re:Dumb idea ... Lots of assumptions .... (Score 1) 698

You can go to any gun show and pick up a crate full of Mosin Nagant pistols for as cheap as 20 bucks each, No background check.

Rubbish...

First of all, a Mosin-Nagant is a bolt action rifle introduced in 1891 in Russia. There is a Nagant revolver, but you aren't going to get one of those for $20/ea. And you certainly won't find 'cases' of them.

Second, if you buy from a FFL dealer, you *will* get a NICS background check, even at a 'gun show'. You might find a private individual who will sell you that case for $20/ea, but that is unlikely.

m

Slashdot Top Deals

Real Users know your home telephone number.

Working...