Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


+ - FTDI drags consumers into an IP war: updates drivers, bricks devices->

Submitted by DeathToBill
DeathToBill (601486) writes "According to Hack-A-Day, about a month ago FTDI released a new driver for their venerable USB-to-serial bridge chip, the FT232. This driver was pushed out to Windows systems via Windows Update. Unbeknown to, well, everyone except FTDI, the driver included an update to the terms and conditions, including the text, "Use of the Software as a driver for, or installation of the Software onto, a component that is not a Genuine FTDI Component, including without limitation counterfeit components, MAY IRRETRIEVABLY DAMAGE THAT COMPONENT." Now, your average slashdotter might see that warning on a license agreement and think, "Ha ha, yeah right," but this driver update is a bit... special. It uses small differences in the behaviour of counterfeit chips to detect them, then reprograms the chip's USB PID to 0 — preventing any operating system from loading a driver for the device and very effectively bricking it."
Link to Original Source

Comment: Wind Industry (Score 5, Interesting) 310

1. From inside the base of a wind turbine tower in rural Inner Mongolia province, China. Or, alternatively, from a caravan in the middle of a forest in Eastern Finland in the middle of winter - minus 30 C outside.

2. While nearly frozen to death (see 1b).

3. Wrote a program from? Or wrote a program for? The latter is probably a Danish PLC which I will not name here. It has an in-house OS with an in-house executable format which is based on ELF, loosely enough that none of the standard ELF tools work on it. A serial console is the only debugging interface available. An actual debugger is out of the question. All debugging output is truncated to 20 characters. The thing has a 100MHz CPU and all floating-point math is done in software (no FPU). Its reaction to almost any programming error is to hard reboot (and "programming error" here includes calling printf with any but the most basic formatting string). Perhaps most frustratingly, when it hard reboots it claims to write a stack trace of the faulting code; about 4 times in 5, this is truncated to some extent, often to only the first function in the stack.

4. A Windows programme to drive EtherCAT IO modules from a standard Ethernet socket.

Do I win?

Comment: Re:From many points of data (Score 1) 772

by DeathToBill (#47109729) Attached to: Belief In Evolution Doesn't Measure Science Literacy

No, you don't get to say, "That would seem to be an important factor in scientific literacy," in the face of the data - that's just assuming your conclusion. The point of the article is that this is not borne out - people who don't believe that evolution explains the development of species are nonetheless equally scientifically literate in all the other areas of science.

Comment: Re:From many points of data (Score 2) 772

by DeathToBill (#47107115) Attached to: Belief In Evolution Doesn't Measure Science Literacy

Um, you've just ignored the data in front of you - the data collected shows no correlation between "someone's inclination to believe religion over science" (ie their position on the evolution v creationism debate) and scientific literacy. There is no value in that measurement - it has no predictive power of the scientific literacy.

Comment: Re:Untested? (Score 2) 1198

by DeathToBill (#46878033) Attached to: Oklahoma Botched an Execution With Untested Lethal Injection Drugs

I wondered about this. If being untested is a problem for methods of execution, how exactly are you ever going to have a usable method of execution?

I'm sure those opposed to the death penalty like it this way; methods of execution are not usable until they've been tested and they can't be tested because they're unconstitutional. Ergo, we can't execute anyone. But the same legalistic argument presented many times above applies to them, too; the constitution does not forbid capital punishment, only cruel and unusual punishment. If you want to get rid of capital punishment, you need to change the constitution, not try to game the legal system to get what you want without the due process of changing the constitution.

I never cheated an honest man, only rascals. They wanted something for nothing. I gave them nothing for something. -- Joseph "Yellow Kid" Weil