Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

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).

×

Comment: Re: what will be more interesting (Score 2) 617

by Mattcelt (#49345447) Attached to: Jeremy Clarkson Dismissed From Top Gear

The Beeb are not a government organisation. They are independent of HMG (at least in name).

They are not directly tax-funded. Subjects in the UK pay a TV licence (currently about £145, IIRC) that subsidises the organisation in the UK.

The BBC in the UK are, I believe, non-profit - meaning only that they spend all of their £5 billion+ endowment each year. The details are less clear on BBC Worldwide, at least as far as I can find; I have a sneaking suspicion that that organisation is actually a for-profit centre and somewhat independent from the BBC in the UK. Don't quote me on that, however - it's conjecture and speculation on my part.

Comment: Re:Are the CAs that do this revoked? (Score 2) 133

by Mattcelt (#49330389) Attached to: Chinese CA Issues Certificates To Impersonate Google

If you can't trust that the entity with which you're exchanging information has the security of the information as their highest priority, no amount of securing of channels is going to help.

How do you know the person handing you the fingerprint hasn't switched it for a manky one?

How do you know the server that generated the key hasn't been compromised?

For that matter, how do you know that the remote entity hasn't been strong-armed into simply giving over all of your information? A government threatening to shut down a business or jail its workers shifts the priority to their own self-preservation, which means that in most cases, you're fucked.

The Certificate Authority model is the best one we've been able to come up with to date. It's been around for 20+ years, and while it does have its flaws, it is the least flawed system I've seen proposed.

Comment: Re:Look and Feel case of the music industry (Score 1) 386

OTOH, it may actually make it easier for us. Canon in D is very clearly in the public domain, and if every song using four chords is a derivative work, then all the songs you mentioned are themselves ineligible for copyright, at least in part. So while I couldn't reproduce the lyrics of "It Was Good" by Better than Ezra, I could reproduce the chord changes exactly and be entirely worry-free* that I was infringing on his copyright.

*worry-free that I was actually infringing. I would still have to worry about a potentially very-expensive court case.

Comment: Re:WTF (Score 1) 110

by Mattcelt (#49160975) Attached to: Ultra-Low Power Radio Transceiver Enables Truly Wireless Earbuds

I have a pair of the Plantronics Backbeat Go 2. For a $70 bluetooth set, they are more than adequate. I have used them daily for nearly a year with no major problems.

Battery life is approximately 4-5 hours for phone conversations; slightly less with louder and/or bass-heavy music. Recharge time is slower than I'd like (about 0.5x discharge time), but they're not bulky, are fully flexible (no hard parts between the buds), and very comfortable in my ears. I wear them around my neck constantly so there's no risk of damaging them in pockets. I also run 5-10k with them at a stretch with no discomfort or real risk of falling out.

My only complaint is there's no way to disable the 'play' button functionality on android devices over bluetooth (only with wired headsets, argh), but overall they're as close to the holy grail of bluetooth talking/running phone/music buds as I've ever found.

Comment: Re:Glaring Mistakes (Score 1) 226

I think this leads to a more pressing question: How do you decide where to balance technical accuracy with accessibility for the majority of people who won't understand it? Does the show count on getting away with some minor mistakes, knowing that 99+% of the audience won't catch it?

I've noticed several mistakes myself (in the handful of episodes I've watched with my girlfriend, who loves the show), especially around quantum physics (my preferred subject of study). I always wonder if they're deliberately introduced, or if they are genuine mistakes by the writers and/or actors due to lack of understanding or knowledge.

Comment: Re: Automated notice not necessary here (Score 1) 368

by Mattcelt (#47664535) Attached to: Comcast Drops Spurious Fees When Customer Reveals Recording

IIRC AT&T (I can't find a link, so my details may be off - YMMV) lost a case regarding this several years back, claiming that their "we may record this conversation" disclaimer applied to only the originally-disclaiming party.

To wit: if the other party consents to the recording of their own volition, you do not need to get additional consent to record, in any state. Their "this call may be recorded" statement provides their blanket consent to all recording.

"Mr. Watson, come here, I want you." -- Alexander Graham Bell

Working...