Forgot your password?

Comment: Who authenticates to whom? (Score 1) 214

by Chelloveck (#47559511) Attached to: A 24-Year-Old Scammed Apple 42 Times In 16 Different States

What kind of numbnuts trusts a phone number given to them by the person being authenticated? "Here, call my accomplice-- er, I mean account rep, and he'll verify me." Yeah, pull the other one.

Unfortunately, even my credit card issuer can't get this right. They called me about some charges. "Now sir, to verify that I'm really talking to the account holder, what is your social security number?" Um, no. YOU called ME. You can reasonably assume that the phone number you have on file for me is valid. It's up to YOU to prove to ME that you're from my credit card company. "But sir, we ask this for your own security..." Eventually I got them to give me a ticket number so I could call the number printed on my card and get back to them. Turns out it actually was my issuer calling, not a scammer. Guys, you really should know better!

Comment: What an utterly pointless article (Score 1) 60

by Chelloveck (#47523321) Attached to: How the Internet of Things Could Aid Disaster Response

What an utterly pointless article. IF we had an Internet-of-Things, and IF they all talked with each other directly instead of needing infrastructure, and IF emergency services were prioritized over regular traffic, and IF people were cool with having random devices they own connect to random devices other people own for the sole purpose of forwarding messages in a mesh network, THEN we could use the IoT as a spiffy disaster-resistant emergency network.

No shit? Is that all it takes? Sounds like someone trying desperately to figure out just why the hell anyone would want an Internet-connected toaster, anyway. Emergency services, yeah, that will sell it!

Comment: Re:Don't buy cheap android (Score 3, Interesting) 290

by Chelloveck (#47508451) Attached to: Why My LG Optimus Cellphone Is Worse Than It's Supposed To Be

Two words: "Market Differentiation". I once worked for a company which made printers. One printer line had a low-end model and a high-end model. The hardware was identical except for two things: (1) The print head, which produced higher-quality output and was more durable in the high-end model; and (2) the color of the case. That's it. Otherwise they were identical. The marketing guys decided that the print quality alone wouldn't tempt people towards the high-end model, so they required us to hobble the software. The same software build was loaded into each model, but if it detected the cheap print head it inserted wait-states into memory access to force about a 30% decrease in formatting speed. Voila! Now the high-end product had enough benefit to justify the price difference!

tl;dr: Sometimes yes, companies will expend extra effort to intentionally make a crappier product, if it means that they'll sell more of an expensive higher-profit-margin product. And yes, it drives the engineers completely bananas.

Comment: Performance Art (Score 1) 100

by Chelloveck (#47495677) Attached to: New Digital Currency Bases Value On Reputation

Anderson isn't aiming to supplant Bitcoin, or even challenge the money-exchange model that drives society. But he's hoping it will change the way people think about currency

Ah, so the whole thing's just a performance art piece, not a serious proposal. Good to know. Now we can just ignore him until he goes away.

Comment: Re:So this means... (Score 1) 214

by Chelloveck (#47449605) Attached to: Economist: File Sharing's Impact On Movies Is Modest At Most

For me, price is also a factor. Watching it just while cooking alone or something, I don't want to pay $5 for something that is just not that good. Crappy stream quality also doesn't matter in that case.

There seems to be a trend of the studios to allow digital "purchase" of movies but disallow rental, even for older releases. I'm only going to watch most movies once. $5 is my sweet spot for watching a movie. I'll gladly pay $5 for the ability to stream it for 24 hours, on the same model as the video rental store. I won't pay $15 to "own" it, especially when "ownership" is simply an indefinite-term rental until such time as the streaming service goes out of business. I'd rather just go without than play that asinine game.

Comment: A virtuous Perl programmer (Score 5, Insightful) 192

by Chelloveck (#47333533) Attached to: An Army Medal For Coding In Perl

Sounds like someone who embodies the Three Virtues of a programmer: Laziness, Impatience, and Hubris. Well done!

I'm always amazed at what non-programmers are impressed by. Code up some major application, and... Why doesn't it have this feature? Why does it have that workflow? What kind of colorblind dyslexic idiot designed this UI? But whip up a simple script to automate some repetitive, routine task and you're a genius!

Comment: Re:Evolution isn't science (Score 1) 649

by Chelloveck (#47273359) Attached to: Teaching Creationism As Science Now Banned In Britain's Schools
You asked for citations, he produced some. If you want an intellectually honest debate the burden is now on you to show why those citations are inaccurate. You're not allowed to simply assert "lies and more lies!" unless you want to grant him the same tactic to dismiss your arguments. Point to the creationist.

Comment: Re:What about flat cards? (Score 1) 142

A lot of {regional} food isn't real {regional} food. It's {localized} {regional} food.

You can fill in {regional} with any non-local region. In the US you can say it for Mexican, Thai, Italian, German, Polish... In the northern US you can say it for Southern food, and so on. It's kind of a variant of the "no true Scotsman" argument. No true Chinese person would cook like they do at PF Changs, therefore PF Changs is not true Chinese.

Uncompensated overtime? Just Say No.