Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Switching is too hard? (Score 1) 145

by NitroWolf (#47829823) Attached to: FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler Says Switching ISPs Is Too Hard

Logged in to say this, but see you already got to it. This monopoly crap is what needs to be fixed. Right now, I would gladly take a difficult (and expensive) to terminate service over the choice I have now: Take Comcast or take nothing reasonable (satellite? Riiight...)

We need someone to bust up these monopolies and let other companies in to compete. This "we are locking in this neighborhood" crap has got to stop and I think it's the biggest hurdle to any sort of competitive broadband in this country (compared to other countries).

Comment: Encryption (Score 2) 92

by NitroWolf (#46936461) Attached to: Dropbox and Box Leaked Shared Private Files Through Google

A more important question is why are you using a cloud provider without using encryption? No one should be storing any sort of sensetive file on a cloud service without first encrypting it. I use Boxcryptor on all of my cloud services... Truecrypt also works well for that sort of thing... anything. Use something to protect yourself instead of giving unfettered access to the cloud provider and their (lack of) security.

They have little reason to protect you.

Comment: Re:Bad for stability (Score 2) 320

by NitroWolf (#42201025) Attached to: Race To Mine Bitcoins Drives Enthusiasts Into the Chip Making Business

The ASIC era will aim to fix the 51% attack problem... or at least make it extremely costly. The farther we get into the ASIC era, the less and less likely and more costly it will be for someone to subvert the network.

1 year ago, it would have taken less than 1 million dollars to wreck the bitcoin network. 1 year from now it will take at least $100 million, if not more, assuming the price of BTC doesn't tank or something.

Granted, $100 million is pocket change for some large corporations and of course governments, so the threat is still there. But as time goes on, the cost starts to rise further and further out of reach of all but richest of entities, until it gets so costly as to be unfeasible. At that point, it's cheaper to wage a legal or physical war, but that's another problem entirely.

Comment: Re:Um? (Score 1) 320

by NitroWolf (#42200951) Attached to: Race To Mine Bitcoins Drives Enthusiasts Into the Chip Making Business

Like I said - "...last I heard." When they first started taking pre-orders, it was bitcoin only. I'm buying bitcoin outright these days, so I haven't followed the saga.

mmmph. Recaptcha: "outright"

But again, that is incorrect. BFL has always taken Bankwire along with bitcoins. There has never been a time BFL only took BTC for payment, ever.

Comment: Re:Um? (Score 1) 320

by NitroWolf (#42199215) Attached to: Race To Mine Bitcoins Drives Enthusiasts Into the Chip Making Business

"If mining Bitcoins was so profitable why would they want to sell the chips? Wouldn't they be better off keeping these chips and mining the Bitcoins for themselves?"

They ARE mining bitcoin for themselves. The biggest player in the space - Butterfly Labs - is only accepting payment for their ASICs in bitcoin, last I heard. So their production line is just another bitcoin mining operation: and likely somewhat more profitable than outright mining over time.

This is, of course, false. BFL accepts payment via Paypal and bankwire as well.

Comment: Re:Um? (Score 4, Insightful) 320

by NitroWolf (#42198745) Attached to: Race To Mine Bitcoins Drives Enthusiasts Into the Chip Making Business

If mining Bitcoins was so profitable why would they want to sell the chips? Wouldn't they be better off keeping these chips and mining the Bitcoins for themselves?

If BFL were to mine instead of selling the chips, they would quickly have more than 51% of the network hashrate and the confidence in the bitcoin network would erode and the value would drop. It doesn't make any sense for one entity to mine all the bitcoin and devalue the currency... then it's worth nothing and it was for naught. No, it's far better to distribute the hardware far and wide, making it impossible for any single entity to gain a controlling portion of the network.

No, it doesn't make any sense for BFL to mine with their own hardware, it makes much more sense to grow the bitcoin network and for BFL to supply the hardware to do so.

Comment: Hah (Score 1) 423

by NitroWolf (#39752813) Attached to: If You Resell Your Used Games, the Terrorists Win

prices would have come down long ago if the industry was getting a share of the resells

AH-HAHAHA... yeah! Right! I guess we can chalk Braben up as one of those idiots that are good in one area that think they know what the fuck they are talking about in other areas. What a clueless fuckstick to make a comment like that.

Cause that line worked with CDs and all other media that preceded games and continues to be sold today. Oh wait.. not it hasn't. It has never worked, ever with any industry. The prices will remain high as long as people continue to pay the prices. They will only drop when people stop paying prices. Claiming otherwise is just idiotic. Making that claim and the used game market is utterly laughable and makes my opinion of Draben go straight to the toilet (yeah, like he cares, I know). What a dumb ass.

Comment: Umm.. disbarment? (Score 1) 271

by NitroWolf (#38938355) Attached to: Google In Battle With Its Own Lawyers

Uhh, isn't that grounds for disbarment? I thought it was basically illegal to represent both parties within the same lawfirm, it being a conflict of interest and all. It was my impression that it was grounds for disbarment if a lawyer knowingly did that. I would find it incredibly hard to believe that the firm did not know they were representing Google and also suing them... that just seems virtually impossible.

Comment: Re:Do these people understand ANYTHING about IT? (Score 1) 421

by NitroWolf (#38858853) Attached to: Copyright Industry Calls For Broad Search Engine Controls

Why the hell do these morons keep tabling impossible and/or extremely EXPENSIVE (compute-wise) proposals without talking to someone who knows ANYTHING about IT and technology FIRST?

The last thing the world needs is ignorant luddites making the technology decisions for the global internet infrastructure.

The real question should be, why doesn't everyone, everywhere just laugh at the *IAA's when they come into the room with their stupid demands? At this point, it's pretty much a given that anytime they bring something to the table, it's going to be utterly ridiculous and should be ignored by anyone with even a modicum of intelligence.

Why keep letting them into the room to begin with?

Comment: Smartphone pioneer? (Score 1) 139

by NitroWolf (#38543006) Attached to: HP Wanted $1.2B For WebOS and Palm

What? Smartphone pioneer? How do they figure that?

They were a PDA pioneer, but did very little, if anything revolutionary or pioneering in the Smartphone space. They just did what everyone else was doing... they did not pioneer anything in that space. They were already pretty much washed up and a has-been by the time the smartphone revolution rolled around. Not saying their phones weren't nice or quality or anything, just saying they weren't anything revolutionary.

The algorithm for finding the longest path in a graph is NP-complete. For you systems people, that means it's *real slow*. -- Bart Miller

Working...