Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment Isn't this why those subsidies exist? (Score 3, Insightful) 356

And this is a problem how? Don't those subsidies exist precisely to encourage the development of these sorts of technologies? The government (and theoretically, by extension: the people) decided that to encourage the development of greener technologies and/or space technologies, they would provide various bits of assistance to companies, as well as consumers buying into said technologies. Musk appears to be successful in developing these technologies. Now people are complaining that he got government subsidies? Bah. We, the people get the benefit of these new emerging technologies, and Musk gets to make some money doing it so that these emerging technologies exist. Win-win scenario. The subsidies will go away at some point as the technologies become more mainstream.

Comment Re:And here I am about to ditch Chrome... (Score 4, Insightful) 102

Somehow I've never understood the penchant for people to have tens of tabs open in a browser. Right now I have 4, and two of them are email tabs. The only time I get anywhere near tens of tabs is when I'm actively searching for things and I open potential results as a new tab. But as I go through and determine which are useful, I close the rest until I'm down to the 1 or 2 that I actually need. With hundreds of tabs, how do you even find the tab that you need?

Comment Re:Yay (Score 5, Informative) 69

Read the article closer. Nowhere does it say that a stock phone is susceptible to this sort of attack. The story is presuming that malware has been installed onto the phone. Then, shockingly, software that has been granted access to the hardware can read the hardware. Inertial navigation systems have been in use since at least WW II. And if you have software on the phone that has purloined access to the accelerometer... it would like also have access to the wifi, cell and GPS stuff too.

Comment Re:Yep, they were... (Score 5, Insightful) 369

I have to disagree with you. This wasn't a case of "hey, let's try this new, innovative thing" followed by "whups, unintended consequences, we need to stop doing that". This was a case of "Hey, those printer ink guys can get away with this stunt, and the software guys can get away with this stunt. So what if the actual consumers of both of those things abhor the idea. We're gonna do it anyway because more $$$$!" followed by "Oh wait, our customers have a choice to do something else with their coffee, so they're not buying our stuff anymore. Well, lets put out a 'oops' statement, and perhaps let a few more people use our DRM thingy." There needs to be _punishment_ for this. A failed marketing line was New Coke. This is quite a bit different.

Comment Re:Wow ... (Score 1) 263

Erm, the comment I was replying to specifically called out bringing physical hardcopies. Although another poster did mention that perhaps having a physical copy at the gate might have been a good idea (don't consume weight on the plane, but is available to deploy if needed. Although does nothing for in-flight problems.). Would have turned cancelled flights into delayed flights.

"The Mets were great in 'sixty eight, The Cards were fine in 'sixty nine, But the Cubs will be heavenly in nineteen and seventy." -- Ernie Banks