Forgot your password?

Close
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:There is a huge positive bias (Score 1) 364

by 0xG (#39658997) Attached to: Assessing Media Bias: Microsoft Vs. Everyone Else
THE MAN has shifted the debate.

Like you, I recently came to the realization that my life is not centred around my phone, and that if it does a few basic things: who cares?

But the debate has been cleverly shifted. It's like Coke and Pepsi. The question is no longer "Should I drink overpriced sugary flavoured water?". Now the question is "Which brand of [sugary flavoured water] should I swear fealty to?".

Clever marketing in both cases. I am sure you can find other examples.

Comment: Re:Perspective, people, perspective (Score 1) 262

by 0xG (#39474899) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: How Would Room-Temp Superconductors Affect Us?

>the insanely rich and greedy
>anathema to greed
>psychopaths are able to exclude others
>psychopathic capitalism
>deny wealth to others
>deny others access to democracy
>Ostentatious egotistic posing
>driven by psychopathy and narcissism
>majority are forced to live in poverty
>enemy of psychopathic exclusivity

Hey, I'll bet you are really fun at parties...

Microsoft

Passwords Not Going Away Any Time Soon 232

Posted by Soulskill
from the 12345-letmein dept.
New submitter isoloisti writes "Hot on the heels of IBM's 'no more passwords' prediction, Wired has an article about provocative research saying that passwords are here to stay. Researchers from Microsoft and Carleton U. take a harsh view of research on authentication (PDF), saying, 'no progress has been made in the last twenty years.' They dismiss biometrics, PKI, OpenID, and single-signon: 'Not only have proposed alternatives failed, but we have learnt little from the failures.' Because the computer industry so thoroughly wrote off passwords about a decade ago, not enough serious research has gone into improving passwords and understanding how they get compromised in the real world. 'It is time to admit that passwords will be with us for some time, and moreover, that in many instances they are the best-fit among currently known solutions.'"

Comment: Re:theater (Score 1) 1003

by 0xG (#38402056) Attached to: Why the NTSB Is Wrong About Cellphones

Why is the NTSB targeting gadgets instead of bad drivers?

Because it is always easier to come up with a technological solution (even if it doesn't work) than it is to address the real (usually human) problem.

even hands-free phones

This really illustrates the absurdity of the claim that phones are to blame for the problem.

If you're using a hands-free device, you're just basically having a conversation with someone who isn't actually in the car. It's not going to be any more inherently distracting than having a conversation with somebody who is in the car. So if hands-free phones are a problem... So is talking to a passenger.

Wrong.
1) Your passenger is an additional set of eyes on the road.
2) Talking to someone over a phone (even hands-free) requires you to be mentally in "another place" with them. I'm not explaining it well but I am sure that you get the idea.
3) It has nothing to do with dexterity (using your hand). I have seen pedestrians cluelessly crossing the street at a red light while yakking. Why? Because their attention is in that "other place".

Thousands of days of civilians ... have produced a ... feeling for the aesthetic modules --