"We're going to do business with people who aren't bigots" is extortion? Really? Do you call it blackmail when a person decides not to shop at a Wal-mart where a manager called them a fag?
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
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).
Thanks for letting us know that the real problem here is the particular word he used to refer to women, not the policy that discriminates against men.
Are we looking at the same poll? Because it looks almost exactly like that. The first and last options have the most votes. There's an even number of options, so there's no option that's exactly in the middle, but the fifth and sixth options (right after the middle) are just about tied for third-highest number of votes.
Or are you referring to the fact that the first and last options are different from the rest of the poll, which probably threw things off anyway?
That's a fairly well-known phenomenon, actually. All other things being equal, the first and last results in a poll will get the most votes, with a curve between them and a small spike in the middle.
If you're doing a multiple-choice poll to survey data, it's best to randomize the order of the choices for every individual in order to mitigate that.
I don't know about Apple Pay in particular, but I can say that all of your concerns are invalid with Google Wallet, because:
1) Credit card information is not actually stored on your phone, so it would be impossible to get it off of there.
2) Unless you hack your phone, Android disables its NFC transmitter when the screen is off or locked. Since your phone has to be within a few centimeters of the receiver for it to active, it would be impossible for anybody to try to request payment from your phone without you realizing it.
3) Even if that happens, you have to enter a PIN in order to authorize payment. The above situation couldn't happen even if your NFC transmitter was on all the time, unless you had a habit of entering your PIN any time your phone requested it. Somebody who stole your phone would have to first get through your lock screen (assuming you set an unlock code or use a fingerprint scanner) and then guess your PIN, which isn't 100% unbreakable, but would likely take more than long enough for you to realize your phone had been stolen and deactivate that account.
NFC payment devices actually use the same technology inside the US, too. I'm not sure where the people who are whining about fragmentation are coming from.
Whether you're using a card or your phone, you have to get something out of your pocket either way (which only takes two seconds anyway, unless you keep your phone on a belt clip). Typically all you have to do is unlock your phone and touch it to the device, no need to open an app (although depending on your security you may be asked for a PIN).
And if unlocking your phone really bothers you that much, it's possible to modify an Android phone so that the NFC transmitter is on even when it's locked, but that's kind of insecure since somebody could just brush a reader up against your pocket when you're not looking.
The attractiveness of using your phone is that it works just as well as a card (if not better, since nobody can access it unless your phone is unlocked) but you don't have to carry around an extra card.
To be fair, in order to take advantage of that, you have to:
1) Actually create a physical key based on the one you took a picture of, which also requires special machinery to do.
2) Find the house the key belongs to.
3) Take the time to go there and actually gain physical access.
4) Hope there aren't separate keys for the deadbolt and knob.
5) Hope that the house doesn't have an alarm system and nobody is home or watching you who will call the police.
All of that put together is prohibitively time-consuming and dangerous. To take advantage of a credit card number you stole, you have to:
1) Go type the numbers into a field on the internet.
And you're done. You don't even have to actually use the number yourself, there are black market credit card number dealers who will gladly take it off of your hands. By the way, some people actually do have electronic locks for their homes.
Also, that is all completely irrelevant anyway because the original poster said there are no advantages, but there clearly are, even if you personally don't think they're worth it.
You seem to suggest that because we recognize we're being misled and lied to that we are Luddites.
No, I'm suggesting you're Luddites because your first reaction to a new technology is to disregard it without actually learning about it and then justify it after the fact.
I already stated a number of useful practical purposes of mobile payments. Convenience, security. I'm carrying my phone around anyway, so carrying extra pieces of plastic in my wallet is just a liability. You can steal a credit card by looking at it. If somebody swipes your wallet, you're never getting your cash back. And if somebody wants to pay me for something and doesn't have exact change on hand, that's also trivially easy to do and secure. I'm not seeing any disadvantages except for tin foil hat paranoia about not trusting a company with your personal information, but I'll bet that your bank is already way scummier than Google is.
Sometimes I'm amazed at how, for a site aimed at nerds and technology enthusiasts, Slashdot can be very conservative when it comes to new technology.
I mean, this poll doesn't even have an option for "I already use one regularly." It's incredibly common in many countries, and even in the US, it's a viable option in many locations. Many pharmacies, grocery stories, fast food locations, and so on near where I live accept Google Wallet. And why not use it (or something similar)? I don't have to carry around several different cards in my pocket to pay from different sources, and it's impossible to steal my credentials without also stealing my phone. If it does get stolen, I can easily cancel it without affecting any of my bank accounts. My phone keeps a transaction log that's more useful and more convenient than my bank's web page.
But, of course, the first comments on Slashdot are from people insisting credit cards are perfect, carrying around cash is better because it's anonymous, or saying they won't tolerate any closed source software on their phone.
And corporations stifling speech is still an infringement of speech.
On the other hand, why should a private corporation be obligated to provide you with a platform for your speech? If you run your own web forum, would it be ok for me to fill up your forum with, say, posts advocating White Power, or would it be reasonable to ban me? I shouldn't even need to post the obligatory XKCD comic here.
"Oh torrents are pirate channels!". Really? Updates from Blizzard are all pirated????
Pretty sure nobody said that. If you'd bother looking at the article at all, you'd see that references to specific sites that are known for pirating material are being flagged. Go ahead and talk about Blizzard's updater all you want.
And note that you can be kicked out of Steam for this, whereupon your ENTIRE collection becomes null and void.
What are you talking about? Please show me any indication at all that somebody has been banned from Steam and rendered unable to access any of their games because they tried to talk about torrents.
Yeah Steam has the BEST DRM! In just the same way as firing squad is the best form of murder!
And you make the BEST points, in the same way that Hitler had the best final solution! See, I can also use extreme, irrelevant hyperbole!
In the course of one post you went from being somebody who didn't understand how free speech works to somebody who is using extreme hyperbole to argue against something that didn't even happen. Good job.
People actually want their information stored in Microsoft's proprietary format? I thought that was something done out of ignorance, or because you felt forced to do so.
No, and yes, that's right. I don't know that anybody has said, "Sweet, I love Outlook!" Rather, you use Outlook because you work for somewhere that uses an MS Exchange e-mail server whether you like it or not.
Anyone else go through this?
Nope. Throwing faster hardware at a problem is much cheaper than having a team of developers spend weeks optimizing a framework or making a new one.
"Very few places" here being slashdot, youtube, reddit, twitter, and pretty much everywhere else on the internet...
You can say anything you want, but you'll probably get modded down and ignored quickly, if not banned.
And even if you don't, you've still got a reputation. Your real identity may not be attached to your posts, but you've still got an identity, and people will at least remember what you say and possibly track down your uses of that identity on other web sites.
Anonymity isn't just a feature on 4chan, it's part of the culture. Nobody can punish you for anything you say, nobody can speak louder than you, and nobody can embarass you because there is nothing linking your identity to your words.
People make a lot of noise about "evil" things being said on 4chan, but that's not quite right. There's a lot of honesty on 4chan. Without any repurcussions, shame, or punishment, everybody can say exactly what they're thinking. They're still thinking it elsewhere -- but they feel like they can vocalize it on 4chan. And there's a lot of interesting, insightful discussion that goes on there, too, especially with regards to subjects that are too taboo or embarassing to discuss in places where you have an identity.
Got any reliable citations for those sources, or is it just the nebulous "some"? I mean, some sources say the NSA has brainwave scanners and can tell what you're thinking from a van outside your house. But those guys are nuts.
The protocol is an open standard, and anybody who has looked at OpenSSH's source code has "cracked" it. It's not terribly complex. If you're transmitting over an unencrypted connection or using a compromised cipher or key, anybody can figure out what you're doing.
The real issue (and what you're probably thinking of) is whether the NSA has backdoors in or has cracked different encryption ciphers that are commonly used over SSH. If they have, that's a much more widespread problem than just SSH, because those ciphers are used elsewhere, too (like in HTTPS).