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


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:This is what real choice looks like (Score 1) 389

Ok... then how about notifying the user that the part cannot be trusted and offer them the choice to continue by entering the PIN and disable access to all items in the keychain until repaired by apple? Hell, even flush out all saved passwords and force the user to re-enter for email and other apps.

I'm really not seeing the justification for bricking the phone out-right.

Comment Re:This is what real choice looks like (Score 1) 389

Agreed -- it's an awesome security feature which helps secure your data.

However, I'm unsure how useful it is to brick the phone rather than disable the fingerprint reader in question and force the user to enter their passcode they created when configuring touch id? I don't see THAT as really adding security while refusing to use the fingerprint scanner and FORCE passcode entry would if it didn't trust the fingerprint hardware.

Comment Re:True artist (Score 3, Insightful) 296

David Bowie and Bing Crosby. I don't think anybody will ever beat Crosby's records (though I think "we are the world" took the number one spot for a while -- and it took every pop artist of the time to knock Crosby down a notch) but that duet between Crosby and Bowie was awesome and demonstrates the longevity of his career.

I'm not a fan of all Bowie's work -- certainly not most of it. But there's enough of his catalog that I believe we'll see/hear his music long after the majority of "pop stars" today are gone (I'm looking at you Beyonce).

Comment Re:Another reason to ban rifles (Score 3, Insightful) 1134

"Actually, moron"

Let me stop you there as you are being moronic. You seem to understand the volume of guns but seem to think something can magically make them go away? Not going to happen. 3d printed guns? Zip guns? And the fact that there are, as you say, 250 million proper guns.

Think about this -- with reasonable care, guns last centuries. There are multitudes of 17th century guns that can still fire -- never mind the NEW stuff.

I think you need to find a different solution.

Comment Re:First web sale perhaps but not first Internet s (Score 1) 53

I thought it was about eCommerce. It might be subtle difference but perhaps not. Posting a "for sale" note on usenet or a BBS and then paying for/picking up the item in person doesn't necessary qualify as ecommerce. Commerce yes, but not ecommerce. I think the transaction needs to take place electronically -- not just the "promise" to buy/sell.

We also had services like compuserve which allowed placing at least airline reservations (can't remember if they allowed outright purchases). Even that may not really qualify as payment was fixed to your account. Please someone correct me if I'm wrong -- I'm pushing the limits of my memory of a service I had ~30 years ago.

I believe the article is spot on with the CD sale being the first (or at least the first verifiable) "on line" purchase and the start of e-commerce. The payment type was selected (random credit card) -- the transaction was secure -- it was transmitted electronically -- received and funds transferred -- and the purchased item was delivered to the purchaser.

To argue earlier instances of "commerce" taking place using usenet or BBSs as a means to arrange the deal as being the first "ecommerce" is akin to saying the fact that light bulbs existed before Edison so what he did wasn't that important (other than take a wire that would glow for a few mins to a few hours and extend that to months and build it cheaply enough to sell to everyone and are now ubiquitous).

Comment Re:There's two sides to this... (Score 0) 246

"What benefit is there to de-anonymizing past postings? Will it really help if you know the names of the people who wrote those vile things?"

Maybe force people to think before they "speak"? Society is an imperfect machine at best and if you take away the only 'lubricant' it has (civility) things will break down.

Will it help me know who they are? I really don't care who they are. Maybe their spouse, parent or child knowing will effect their future behavior. Maybe their girl/boyfriend knowing will effect their future behavior. Shame can be an effective tool.

Comment Re:This is *SO* unethical ! (Score 1) 246

"most don't say that these changes will be retro-active." Actually, they do. Kind of. They use terms like

Such updates, revisions, supplements, modifications, and additional rules, policies, terms, and conditions (collectively referred to in this Agreement as "Additional Terms") will be effective immediately and incorporated into this Agreement.

"Imagine if contracts worked like this (hint, EULAs are generally treated like contracts). After years of paying, say, ten dollars a month the contract gets changed retro-actively to 100 dollars a month, and you're stuck owing thousands of dollars."

That part gets a lot more tricky and cant really work the way you suggest it might.

Comment There's two sides to this... (Score 0) 246

The paper's new policy has proven controversial among readers. "This is the end of open and honest comments on this site," wrote one user, who goes by the name BGF. "It is easy to put your name to your comments if you are retired. But it is another thing altogether if you have to worry about upsetting your peers and bosses at work."

My daughter was the victim of a horrific crime. One that was all over the news in a big market city (and surrounding cities). It's insane how nasty people can be when they don't think anybody will know it's them. Or how nasty they'll be if they don't think a victim or family member might see their post. I have no problem with news sites having policies like this. There are sites that allow anonymous posting elsewhere if someone has some political or "whistle blower" message they feel the need to post. This policy just cuts out trolls on a particular news site.

Comment Re:This is *SO* unethical ! (Score 1) 246

"They are breaking the terms under which posters made their previous posts."

Did you read the terms? I didn't -- never signed up for that site. I have ready many terms of sites I have signed up for and virtually all of those include some line where they can change the terms in the future. Not saying they had that -- but you are talking as if you read the terms and know exactly what it says and are full of righteous indignation.

If you haven't read the terms, then you are full of something other than righteous indignation. I leave exactly what that is up to the reader's imagination.

Comment Re:Why would Disney do this? (Score 1) 262

"The corporations that operate in this country have an obligation to the society that makes it possible for them to successfully conduct business."

I see this bogus argument a lot. It always ignores the benefits society has for the people.

The roads don't just exist so corporations can make money -- they bring food in so that people can eat.
Laws and enforcement agencies don't just exist to protect corporations money -- they protect the people trying to work and live.

How long would society last if the food is cut off? Or water? Or random bands of raiders attacking and stealing resources? People in general and not corporations see far more of a benefit from these things.

A corporation has absolutely no obligation to any society other than to follow it's laws. And when those laws become harmful to corporations, what do they do? They move away or go out of business. And then where does that leave the (former) employees? Repeat that enough and you'll have ghost towns falling apart as people move to towns that aren't scary to businesses.

Comment Re:Why would Disney do this? (Score 1) 262

"The current corporate belief is that they have no duty or obligation to their employees."

Rightly so. And employees have no duty or obligation to their employer. There is an exchange of labor for money -- period.

No, why not make a good argument as to why it's a bad idea for HB1s to drive down the cost of labor and displace native workers? THAT is an easy and good argument to make. But suggesting an employer has any obligation other than to exchange money for labor to any employee willing to exchange labor for money is just a bogus argument.

Slashdot Top Deals

Another megabytes the dust.