Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Why a classroom? (Score 1) 348

by c (#49556931) Attached to: The Future Deconstruction of the K-12 Teacher

So, basically, it's going to be just like school is today, except the teachers will be working remotely?

I suspect that veteran teacher has been doing it so like that he can't get outside of the box and imagine education without classrooms, schools, or even structured classes.

I think the future is going to look a lot more like home schooling (possibly in groups to get around the whole school-as-babysitter issue that allows parent to hold jobs) than anything close to the institutions teachers currently work in.

Comment: Re:Protect the income of the creators or they can' (Score 1) 301

Copyright needs to (I reckon) end with the death of the creator; simple.

Given that we've established that the entertainment industry is a collection of sociopathic asshats, are you quite sure you want to give them a genuine monetary incentive to, say, kill copyright holders in order to plunder their now-orphan works?

Then there's the whole question of figuring out if/when a creator died.

A reasonable fixed term from publication/creation makes the most sense. Emphasis on "reasonable".

Comment: Re:Wait, what? Even in offline mode? (Score 1) 117

by c (#49541915) Attached to: iOS WiFi Bug Allows Remote Reboot of All Devices In Area

34% of users can't tell their iPhones not to connect to a hotspot named attwifi. That sounds like the ability to force connection to a WiFi network to me.

I'm thinking that if a malicious hotspot cycled through the known pre-installed SSIDs like "attwifi", common open SSIDs like "linksys", "NETGEAR", "dlink", "default", etc, plus corporate branded/hotspot SSIDs such as whatever Starbucks or McDonald's use, they could easily increase the vulnerable population to well over 75%.

Comment: Re:Why? (Score 1) 356

by c (#49520725) Attached to: 'Mobilegeddon': Google To Punish Mobile-Hostile Sites Starting Today

The only time I have ever been aware of hitting a mobile site is when you have that "gah, WTF is this crap?" moment where you can't find anything and the link you followed has been swallowed by the crap which has said :"hey, you're on a mobile, how about we fail to show you what you were looking for?".

Their guidelines suggest suggest this is one of those things that will be punished. Which makes this smartphone user quite happy.

Comment: Re:So? (Score 2) 138

by c (#49497479) Attached to: John Gruber On Third-party Apple Watch Apps: They Suck and Are Really Slow

What's worse than the apps on an Apple watch?

A 2 hour podcast about the Apple watch.

Keep in mind that you're looking at people who spent hours upon hours writing blog posts speculating about the leather and alloys Apple would be using in their watch bands.

A 2 hour podcast about an actual shipping device seems comparatively reasonable.

Comment: Re:Meh (Score 1) 179

by c (#49493027) Attached to: Cyanogen Partners With Microsoft To Replace Google Apps

Yeah the MS junk won't be installed into CM just yet - but wait until that "Deep integration" Kirt McMaster keeps talking up starts happening - you're going to see architectural changes happen in CM designed solely to be beneficial to Microsoft.

Well... I'm less certain of that.

CM/Cyngn has to walk a fine line between making investors/partners happy and not pissing off the CM community. They don't make money from the community, but the community is a huge QA base and they'll have a lot of trouble developing and supporting Cyanogen OS without it.

If they ram through MS-specific stuff (versus just expanding the capabilities of the OS for everyone), a huge chunk of the community is going to bail on them.

I don't think they're quite stupid enough to do this. But I did say "Yet", because ... well, aside from their inability to muzzle their CEO, publicly fucking over a loyal customer with an international reach in favour of a regional exclusive was easily one of the most boneheaded things I've seen in a while. Short of changing the default boot animation to an android waving its dick around, I can't imagine a much more effective way to scare off potential Cyanogen OS customers...

Comment: Re:Technically right (Score 1) 245

by c (#49484737) Attached to: Google Responds To EU Antitrust Claims In Android Blog Post

That's probably because somewhere in the google complex, there are some crusty old bureaucrats that just cant let go of the notion that "Proprietary == Profit!", and that "Control" takes many forms other than just "Stop all competition at all costs!"

I think it's just as, if not more, likely that within the Google complex the general mindset is that any Google service in Android (or more generally, on the web) is going to so much better than any competing service that nobody in their right mind would care about that competing service.

Which isn't an entirely unreasonable opinion/bias if you think of it from their perspective. There's obvious counter-examples like Google+, but in the case of the core services like search, maps, their app store, etc, it's... well, I don't think it's the slam-dunk Google might think it is, but there's at least a rational basis for having that bias.

To some degree, that's where this EU action leaves a sour taste... there might be a basis for some action (scraping competitors websites for data to use in a shopping service *does* sound pretty dodgy), but the overall tone of it seems like the EU attempting to punish Google for sincerely believing that their own products are best of breed in their respective spaces.

Comment: Regulation is ok, but the EU can't be a bad actor (Score 1) 247

by cpt kangarooski (#49476387) Attached to: EU To Hit Google With Antitrust Charges

Google does have an effective monopoly in search, and it's not a bad idea to have some degree of regulation in place to make sure that it doesn't harm consumers. (Though nonsense like a 'right to be forgotten' is going too far, and should be dropped)

The problem is that that very well may not be the EU's only motive here. At about the same time that the charges were announced, Gunther Oettinger, the EU's Digital Commissioner gave a speech where he said:

A great challenge is also Europe's position in the development of the next digital platforms that will gradually replace the current Internet and mobile platforms. We have so far missed many opportunities in this field and our online businesses are today dependent on a few non-EU players world-wide: this must not be the case again in the future. ... We need European industry 4.0 champions to win the global game in industry 4.0. ... Industry in Europe should take the lead and become a major contributor to the next generation of digital platforms that will replace today's Web search engines, operating systems and social networks.

Maintaining a level playing field and ensuring fair competition is one thing. Using the law to rig the market in order to engage in protectionism, however, is not acceptable. If the EU wants to pursue Google, they're going to need to do so in a way that is justifiably beyond reproach. Otherwise it's relatively easy for Google to restructure the way it does business internationally to avoid the EU from having any power over them, while still offering its services to persons in the EU, and to have many people cheer them on in the process.

Comment: Re:Brand names mean a lot in some places (Score 1) 198

by c (#49369933) Attached to: Best Buy Kills Off Future Shop

What I've seen is that american brands have had trouble penetrating that market because preference goes to the incumbent local company.

There's a certain amount of truth there. But there are also counter-examples. Walmart, in particular, destroyed quite a bit of the competition (Woolco, K-Mart, Zellers, etc).

And then there's cross-border shopping...

Target is struggling to gain acceptance

Well, not anymore. The best I can determine is that Target's approach to the Canadian market was to push brand recognition, but their supply chain, pricing, and how they ran their stores was jarringly different from how they ran them in the US, and enough Canadians knew the difference that once the word got out, the impression was they were trying to milk Canadians without bringing anything new to the table.

Canadian Tire is still the go-to

Canadian Tire hits a real sweet spot in terms of locations, pricing and selection. I can't really think of any other competition which covers quite the same ground.

even major e-tailers like Newegg have trouble over the other Canadian e-tailers

True. I think ncix.com was solidly established well before Newegg opened a Canadian store.

The problem for these companies is that their .ca sites routinely offer less to Canadians at usually substantially higher prices than their .com's, and while there may be legit business reasons, nobody likes being treated as a second-class citizen. So there's always a bit of resentment.

Hell, Sears seems to have won mindshare by having a little maple leaf in their Canadian logo.

I think Sears won mindshare in Canada from catalog sales. There are Sears mail-order outlets in every stinking little town across the country, and Canada has a lot of stinking little towns; up until maybe 10-15 years ago when e-commerce took off they were the household name for remote purchasing. But they're no longer the only game in town, and their supply chain is still stuck in the 90's; I can buy Craftsman parts directly from China faster and more reliably than I can get them from the local Sears parts store. I'd be very surprised to see them last another five years.

The absent ones are always at fault.

Working...