Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment: What's disturbing... (Score 2) 81

by Glasswire (#48725593) Attached to: FCC Says It Will Vote On Net Neutrality In February

... is that all the the commentary on the FCC vote seems to define net neutrality as not interfering with "web sites" from other parties (good, but... ) however, this is opening up a potential loophole where traffic to and from apps could be limited because they are not "web sites". We can only hope this is result of FCC trying to make their intentions more understandable to the public and that the actual proposal will be what it should be:
ISPs should not be able to prioritize/ deprioritize IP traffic to or from the ISP client hosts with other internet hosts not affiliated with the ISP .
This covers web site, app, OS, device and any other traffic. There probably should be an exception for traffic the client customer EXPRESSLY requests to be prioritized eg. VoIP or VPN to a particular hosts. Note that this all about the relationship with the consuming end-point, last-mile, customer. It should not impose any restriction on commercial connection, peering or other upstream contractual arrangements.

Comment: Just wait.... (Score 0) 117

"Microsoft seems to be correcting its hardware strategy, as well as its software one, with the Surface RT flop getting the axe... "
Just wait and see how unhappy the buyers of ARM-based plain Surface RT tablets are when they find out
a) They aren't getting any new updates or UI improvements
b) App vendors are shifting to Surface Pro x86 binaries
c) They can't upgrade to Windows 10
The difference between disposable consumer appliance items like phones/(most)tablets and Personal Computers is that PCs can be upgraded (or get lighter OSes put on them when they get old. PCs are general purpose tools which allow you to do things the original vendor may not have expected or even approve of. They are not a closed,static gadget.
(BTW, if there's no Surface, doesn't it seem funny to only have a Surface Pro?)

Comment: Re:It's the OS, Stupid (Score 1) 252

by Glasswire (#48176553) Attached to: Apple's Next Hit Could Be a Microsoft Surface Pro Clone

This is easy. You architect around the most complex platform , eg this 2-in-1 in laptop mode which would have a fast Core i5 or Core i7 as cpu running OS/X. When you detach the keyboard and put it into tablet mode, it adopts an iOS skin, with emulator to run iOS apps (which you already do indirectly when you're building iOS apps on an OS/.X system now). You have the ability though, to have OS/X apps / utilities in the background, possibly providing local cloud services to the tablet layer.
It's interesting that while Intel produces the underlying architecture for both Surface Pro and this hypothetical device, Microsoft and Bershidsky resist using Intel's "2-in-1" name for this kind of platform - even though the main system architecture (processor, IO hub etc) is all an Intel design.

Comment: The problem is compelled surveilance (Score 1) 130

The issue is not that dark forces will be able to monitor your vehicle without your knowledge, it's that once the capability is common, you simply won't be able to get a license (car or driver) or insurance, without clicking "YES" to ALLOW MONITORING on the contractual EULAs. So you can't object - you agreed to it.

Comment: Nobody should be able to market a self-drive car.. (Score 1) 61

by Glasswire (#47324707) Attached to: Making an Autonomous Car On a Budget

... unless there's a sue-able multi-billion dollar corporation behind it. Even then, big automakers are barely able to afford recalls and liability suits now - a major wrongful death suit from a errant self-driving car will take out a smaller firm or make their insurance impossible to pay.

Are we running light with overbyte?