Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Deal of the Day - Pay What You Want for the Learn to Code Bundle, includes AngularJS, Python, HTML5, Ruby, and more. ×

Comment Re:Hydrogen Storage? (Score 1) 91

The energy density of compressed hydrogen is bad enough as it is without making it even less dense by putting lots of liquid molecules in between. Remember the breakthrough isn't that this liquid can increase the density of stored carbon, it's that it can selectively capture CO2 from the air.

Of course there is already another way to store hydrogen very densely in liquid form at room temperature, but separating it from the oxygen is the tricky part :)

Comment So what is the IoT angle here? (Score 2) 100

So what is the IoT angle here? As far as I can tell the malware was placed on the drive of the bodycam as a file (it's the only infection vector that makes sense in this case), and that can happen to any USB drive. While I'm sure it's possible to design a worm that can infect IoT devices, this doesn't seem to be an example of one.

Comment Re:Security as a trade-off (Score 1) 291

OpenBSD is probably unbreachable but it's terribly useless as anything but a firewall; to use it as a general OS, you have to turn a lot of its security precautions off. Linux (and by that I mean "GNU/Linux" e.g. RHEL, SUSE, Debian; not Android) gives us a healthy balance between usefulness and security. That's why almost every webserver runs Linux.

So OpenBSD makes a poor "general" (workstation?) OS, which is why "almost every webserver runs Linux"? Huh? Something being used for running as a server doesn't (and probably shouldn't) have to run well as a general OS.

Sure really tight system security probably would make a desktop OS more difficult to use, but the same doesn't apply to servers where security is more important.

Comment Re:If the black cabs have a legal monopoly... (Score 1) 216

Black Cabs don't have a legal monopoly on taxi services in general, only metered street-pickup taxi services. There's already a thriving "mini-cab" service in London and the rest of the UK where rides must be called for (by phone or at a mini-cab office) and a fixed price is given at the start of the journey.

In London mini-cab drivers do have to be licensed, but the licensing requirements are much less strict that for black cab drivers. Seems like Uber drivers just need to pick up mini-cab licences.

Comment Re: Oracle's monopoly? (Score 1) 457

Alright, the court case is still on-going to decide if reimplementing an API is fair-use. If it is fair-use it would put us back to where we were before, if it's not then that's set a precedent where there is no fair-use protection for someone to re-implement an API, which again is what WINE, Mono, GNUstep and many other projects do.

Comment Re: Oracle's monopoly? (Score 2) 457

But it's not resolved because if it's fair use to re-implement an API then everything's fine. The problem is if APIs are copyrightable with no fair-use exemption to use/re-implement then that's an issue, because anyone who writes a compatibility layer or service that adheres to a 3rd party's standard is just one copyright claim away from ruin despite the actual implementation being an original work.

Comment Re: Oracle's monopoly? (Score 4, Interesting) 457

They didn't make something that worked similarly to Java - that would have been OK, C# is similar to Java after all. They made something that was *identical* to Java. If they didn't want to be sued they should have made their own API and their own language

What it comes down to is should APIs be copyrightable. Google created their own implementation of the Java API, if companies are allowed to copyright APIs then you can kiss WINE goodbye immediately, anyone wanting to implement an existing API would also be in trouble, and you might not even be able to create a program that even accesses an API without explicit permission.

To come back to your metaphor just because something implements the IDuck interface doesn't mean it's the same kind of duck.

Comment Re: Oracle's monopoly? (Score 5, Informative) 457

That means that Google must comply with Oracle's terms within the limits defined by law.

But Google doesn't use Java, they use Dalvik/ART, which aren't written by Oracle and therefore don't have Oracle's ToCs attached to them.

They do happen to be compatible with Java, but if you are allowed to copyright APIs (which is what Oracle are pushing for) then that would be absolutely insane for the IT industry, as you wouldn't be able to implement an API (or possibly even access an API) without the permission of whoever wrote that API.

Neckties strangle clear thinking. -- Lin Yutang