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


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:No Compromises (Score 1) 94 94

Have you looked at any of the BLU phones? I picked up one (the Studio Mini LTE) after a customer was raving about his and I have to say I'm VERY happy it it. Its a quad core with a GB of RAM, 4GB storage with a MicroSD slot, gets great battery life, easy to root, just a real sweetheart of a phone.

The nice thing is they have a ton to choose from so you can just pick the features and price point you want. Want Windows instead of Android? They got that. More storage? Octacore? yep. Hell they even have a $60 entry smartphone and a $20 dumbphone for those that don't want a lot of bells and whistles. The only downside is since they are a relatively new company there isn't any mods that I have been able to find yet, but considering its low price and easy of rooting I have no doubt they'll be coming. All in all I'm quite happy with my BLU...You're my boy BLU!

Comment Re:Most people won't care (Score 1) 85 85

They won't care because of one simple fact, a little rule I pointed out years ago which has always proven to be true, lets call it "The Hairyfeet Rule of Open".

The Hairyfeet Rule of Open....If the only selling point you have is that you are "open" by some arbitrary definition of the word? Then YOU WILL FAIL because being open in and of itself is simply not a big enough selling point for the vast majority to care about.

We have seen this rule played out dozens of times, from "open" phones to "open" tablets, from "open" GPUs to "open" CPUs, if your ONLY selling point, the only thing you have going for you is "open"? Its over, hit the lights on your way out. Mark my words they will run out of funding and close down within a couple years because they will not be able to generate enough interest to keep going because you have to have something, anything, other than just "open". Be it faster, easier to use, more power saving, its gotta have something other than just open or its screwed.

Comment Re:Yeah, So... (Score 1) 245 245

I use JS on my site - to drive navigation. Show me another way to do this efficiently and dynamically

Use some sort of server-side code?

Using "some sort of server-side code" would require re-sending the entire web page if one small part of it has changed. This is slow and expensive on cellular or satellite connections. It also requires a hosting plan that allows use of "some sort of server-side code", unlike ad-supported shared hosting providers that have historically supported only static HTML files.

Comment Re:OpenID Connect scales at O(n^2) (Score 1) 344 344

Then let me reiterate the question I linked above: How should I, as a server administrator or as the developer of an application that will be installed on servers by third parties, go about determining at any moment in time what "the top several" OpenID Connect identity providers are?

Comment Re:No kidding. (Score 1) 245 245

As the window narrows, it gets rid of the columns

This when one user instructs another on how to use the site:
"...and look in the right column."
"What right column?"

Also, how do you avoid loading the HTML that goes into the hidden columns so that mobile viewers don't have to pay data overages for things they'll never see?

Comment Because of holes in browser support (Score 1) 245 245

Isn't the POINT of the internet browser and HTML concept a sort of 'Swiss Army Knife' of applications, meaning that it's the website's job to deliver content to the browser so that we don't need a separate "program" for every single stupid thing we're trying to do online?

In theory, that's the point. In practice, the web browser included with Windows (Internet Explorer), OS X (Safari), and iOS (Safari) has tended to lack support for key web standards. For example, the latest version of Internet Explorer for the oldest supported version of Windows didn't support most HTML5 features until April 2014, when support for Windows XP was ended, and it won't support WebGL until April 2017, when Microsoft plans to end support for Windows Vista. Safari for iOS didn't support photo and video uploads through the browser prior to iOS 6 nor WebGL prior to iOS 8. A lot of browsers still lack support for, say, plugged-in USB joysticks. For anything that the user's browser doesn't support and which cannot be polyfilled efficiently if at all, the user will need to install a native app.

Comment Re:One wonders (Score 1) 245 245

Please don't start a sentence in the subject and finish it in the comment. It makes it harder to quote your post for context.

I can think of three kinds of interstitials, each with a different set of who pays and who earns. For ad interstitials, the advertiser pays, and the ad network and the "publisher" (site on which ads are placed) earn. For stickiness interstitials, such as follow us via e-mail or Twitter or download our app, the same happens except much later when the user visits again later and views more ads. For subscription interstitials, the user has to pay to make the box disappear.

tab close an if the "do you really want to do this"

I've seen this with "1 weird trick" clickbait ads that lead to a 20-minute video infomercial with no progress meter. Click the back button or close box, and they will replace the video with a transcript and put up an "are you sure" to let the viewer choose to finish the ad in case the viewer prefers text to video.

Comment Re:How much is an AG these days? (Score 1) 246 246

I would disagree with this. As has been proven by high rollers on both the right and left. You're immoral billionaire's money is just as good to these 'hoes as corporate money.

Because a billionaire is just as much a product of the system than a company is. Nobody makes a billion dollars through their own work, they make it by extracting value from other people's work. Which means their wealth is a product of and dependent on the system, thus they can be trusted to be utterly loyal to the system - slaves with golden chains, but slaves nonetheless.

Kings might have had it better than peasants, but neither could opt out of feudalism. It wasn't until capitalism - a new system - began making inroads that new opportunities opened up. And now capitalism is worn at the seams, at least in the developed world, and a seemingly neverending cascade of problems defy attempts to solve them through means acceptable to the system, which has caused a predictable retreat into fundamentalism - in this case free-market fundamentalism - for many who are heavily invested in the system. Whether this is the final crisis of capitalism, or whether it can ride out the storm once again by lifting the rest of the world to the developed status remains to be seen - but either way, it won't last forever any more than any previous system has.

Comment Re:If you have physical access... (Score 1) 68 68

It doesn't really mean that, though that helps. It means that at some point you must have had a way to inject your software onto it. That might mean physical access to the computer. Or it might mean physical access to the operating system image before it was loaded onto the computer. Or it might mean physical access to the bespoke software image before it was loaded onto the computer.

One scenario, for example. You work for a company that produces software to control lottery random number machines. You insert, suitably obfuscated, code working on this principle into the software before release. The code is audited, but as all eyes are on modules relating to the retrieval and display of the random number, your code is largely ignored and just assumed to be poorly written, not evil, per-se.

Your accomplice then gets a job as a janitor at SuperMegaBall HQ, one of your clients. They're able to use a cellphone to extract the secure login credentials, which you then crack, and said accomplice is then able to gain full access to the computer with the credentials and upload a software update that'll give you the numbers you want.

This is so foolproof I could work as the scriptwriter for "Scorpion". *kills myself*

Comment Re:And Lattice wont shut this project down because (Score 1) 85 85

What is to stop Lattice from simply shutting down this project for an open FPGA toolchain for their FPGAs?

Reverse-engineering for the purposes of interoperability is a protected activity under the DMCA (and basically all other purposes are prohibited.)

Comment Re:How soon until x86 is dropped? (Score 0) 143 143

Don't even try the "embedded market" BS. Debian is incredibly bad for anything "small". How big is a pure "base" install again? A fuckload more than 99% of embedded devices have.

The entire logic (read: Debian Political BS) behind what arch's are supported is (a) popularity, and (b) having a pool of active maintainers. SPARC has neither of those. The entire backstory is over a year long and boiled down to some nut screwing up the gcc packaging -- changed only for SPARC, that broke only SPARC. (I smell a rat.) Ultimately, it probably needed to go. Just like for the PC -- where amd64 took multiple eons for the fools to finally support -- many eons have passed without a migration to a full 64bit distro. The build system still, to this day (22 years on), builds everything as 32bit. Yes, there's a 64bit kernel, there are 64bit libraries, and gcc can output a working full sparcv9 64bit executable, yet, they still spit out a 32bit userland.

(One would hope this lights a fire under the sparc64 ports project.)

Comment Re:Most people won't care (Score 4, Insightful) 85 85

It's kind of the same issue with open source software, as far as the "most people don't care" aspect, but at an even greater disadvantage that open source software. I don't have a chip fab (at least I could compile open source software), and so even if I were capable of understanding the chip design, there's not much of a guarantee that the physical chip I purchase doesn't have some proprietary back door built into it.

Like most people, I'm even lazy about the open source software I use. While I try to download from trusted sources, there's no guarantee that what I actually install matches the current stable version in the repo. I'm taking a leap of faith.

In both cases (including the former where I indicated my ignorare about chip design), presumably I am counting on other experts to understand the chip or understand the source code for me, but only in the latter case could I actually assemble the product myself in order to guarantee matching the reviewed, stable code.

If you have to ask how much it is, you can't afford it.