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: Going overboard while falling short (Score 4, Informative) 229

by WaffleMonster (#49160797) Attached to: Samsung Officially Unpacks Galaxy S6 and Galaxy S6 Edge At MWC

Oh come on 2560x1440 AMOLED is just insane and pointless. 1080 is ridiculous as-is nobody is ever going to benefit from or notice any difference.

More importantly I won't buy a phone with an AMOLED display. IPS is more reliable, lasts longer, no burn-in issues and easier to see in daylight.

Also no SD card? WTF were they thinking?

No replaceable battery in a device that costs hundreds of dollars... Don't think so - not that rich/stupid.

Comment: Re:Nope (Score 2) 229

by WaffleMonster (#49160727) Attached to: Samsung Officially Unpacks Galaxy S6 and Galaxy S6 Edge At MWC

A replaceable battery costs more upfront

Amazing the el-cheapo feature and smartphones are able to afford replaceable batteries while these things tend to go missing in higher end versions costing >5x more.

and is incompatible with thinness.

Why do you say that?

My phone has a replaceable battery, if it were any thinner I wouldn't want it.. hard enough as it is trying to hold without sides of your fingers touching the edge of the digitizer. I've seen back covers of LG and Samsung models and don't see any wasted space.

Most people get a new phone long before the battery dies.

Funny there seems to be a healthy market for replacement and aftermarket expanded capacity batteries.

Comment: Re:Better definition of planet (Score 1, Insightful) 188

by WaffleMonster (#49155983) Attached to: One Astronomer's Quest To Reinstate Pluto As a Planet

Holy balls, how many times have we had this conversation? Will you people ever give it a rest?

And queue yourself not giving it a rest.

First of all, the IAU's definition is for technical and scientific discussions/communications.

Scientific labels tend to be intentionally recognizably distinct from popular ones as lack of distinction is an invitation for ambiguity and confusion.

People would inevitable invent a new set of categories for the eight 'big' planets and the other 'smaller' planets. Some people's new terms would conflict with other people's terms. It would be a mess.

Yes this is what you get for "voting" rather than recognizing more work is needed to build consensus to get everyone save outliers onboard. 1/3 disagreeing isn't a consensus.

On the other hand, if you named the 'big' planets anything other than 'planet', it would lose efficiency. They are the planets that are talked about most often, so it makes sense to give them a short, concise name.

This sounds a bit lame as justifications go... lose efficiency? Since when are scientists in the business of conserving syllables? In astronomy especially they seem to be preoccupied with naming things after _all_ the principals who discovered them.

Comment: Re:Be Careful What You Wish For (Score 1) 630

by WaffleMonster (#49141801) Attached to: FCC Approves Net Neutrality Rules

There is no what it "might do" it is what they have been actively doing, and trying to get money out of...Also there is nothing in this that allows the NSA to get taps on it.

While NN provides protection against overt violations such as outright blocking or throttling of competing interests this hasn't been the vehicle used. There isn't some machine at the ISP explicitly designed to slow down or block all traffic to somewhere the ISPs dislike...it is all much more subtle than that. Hey look x victim interconnects with y,w and k so we will pref z,o and p to keep links g,h,i,j saturated. Then we will claim it isn't "our fault" your *** is slow.

I still believe the only solution that at all stands any chance of working are focused efforts to restore a competitive market. Break up monopolies, FRAND access to last mile, erasing anti-competitive legislation, etc.

Also there is nothing in this that allows the NSA to get taps on it.

I will assume you have carefully read all 317 pages which is great. I'm embarrassed to say I can't even find the text.

Comment: Known unknowns (Score 1) 99

The failure is business models requiring secrets to be burnt into hardware by manufacturer.

When customer takes delivery they should be responsible for installing keys.

Otherwise events like RSA FOB compromise or the proverbial safe company with stolen customer and combination lists will continue.

The only defense against mass exploit is decentralization. Not only does it make prospect of "0wn1ng th3 w0rld" less likely it keeps you from presenting a massive target to extremely well funded adversaries.

Comment: Mr Rogers imaginary neighborhood (Score 1) 406

by WaffleMonster (#49121455) Attached to: NSA Director Wants Legal Right To Snoop On Encrypted Data

So âoebackdoorâ is not the context I would use. When I hear the phrase âoebackdoor,â I think, âoewell, this is kind of shady. Why would you want to go in the backdoor?"

In venues I have read or listened to NSA brass speak they come prepared with exotic definitions of plain language and seek to confuse and manipulate perception by invoking nonsense that would give most lawyers a run for their money.

Completely Ignoring underlying topic when you act like a weasel hard to understand how it is you expect to earn any respect or consideration for your cause.

Comment: Re:This is the End, Beautiful Friend, the End. (Score 1) 279

Moore's Law had a good run, but she's dead Jim. Two, maybe 3 shrinks at most, and you're at the end of getting benefit from feature size.

Moore's law is really all about "cost" per transistor. While process shrinks are certainly an important enabler they don't have to be the only driver that keeps things going.

Comment: Circle of weeds (Score 2) 95

by WaffleMonster (#49117239) Attached to: Advertising Tool PrivDog Compromises HTTPS Security

Anyone smart enough to write an HTTPS proxy able to dynamically create and sign certs surely must have known enough about underlying technology to recognize and comprehend importance of validating trust chain. How does someone innocently "overlook" this in either design or test? Simply MUST have occurred to someone.

Comment: Re:Stupid assumptions (Score 1) 147

by WaffleMonster (#49115737) Attached to: Looking Up Symptoms Online? These Companies Are Tracking You

Why would anyone assume that? How clueless does someone have to be in 2015 to not understand that nothing on the internet is private, ever, in any way. It is a public place. Do not do anything on the internet you would not do in your front lawn.

Even in public stalking is still illegal.

Comment: Re:Software testing ... what a novel concept (Score 1) 108

by WaffleMonster (#49095467) Attached to: Scotland's Police Lose Data Because of Programmer's Error

At least this article admits to a level of "programmer error". However --- like most "computer error" news articles, this one misses a key point: This (like many others) is actually management error. Management failed to oversee programmers. Management failed implement test. Management failed.

Assuming story on its face is true the blame for failure to recover goes to IT hierarchy responsible for managing the database. No data programming error should have the capability of causing unrecoverable data loss. It isn't so much you guard against someone or something typing DELETE FROM ... as much as retaining ability to restore database to a transitionally consistent state immediately prior to execution. There is no excuse for failure to retain a chain of log backups.

Comment: Re:backups (Score 1) 108

by WaffleMonster (#49095397) Attached to: Scotland's Police Lose Data Because of Programmer's Error

Whatever happened to off-line backups? One mistake can't wipe you out then.

What is worse all database systems worth using offer the ability to view the database as it was at any point in history. It is like a rolling historical backup guaranteeing data cannot be lost forever due to mistakes manipulating data.

Comment: Re:Ah yes... (Score 1) 108

by WaffleMonster (#49095307) Attached to: Scotland's Police Lose Data Because of Programmer's Error

The good old "DELETE FROM records WHERE 1;.... FFFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUU----" on the production system on a Friday afternoon...

Even then you would have to be a hack to not be able to recover a snapshot of database prior to the incident from redo log.

Properly managed capability to see database as it existed at any point in time is maintained throughout the useful life of the database with no exceptions.

Nothing is finished until the paperwork is done.

Working...