Forgot your password?

Comment: This would never work (Score 1) 437

by bleh-of-the-huns (#46031241) Attached to: You Might Rent Features & Options On Cars In the Future

Cars are sold for a profit (regardless of how thin it is). If they want to use this business model, they would have to sell a loaded vehicle at a loss, and hope that customers would then pay for the features at a cost point to make the sale eventually profitable for the manufacturers.

Then there is the used vehicle, sure I might sign an agreement that says I will pay for whatever features I want on a rental basis, but I still bought the car, I can sell the car to anyone I want, and there is no way that the manufacturer can enforce any contract on the second owner, which means he could in theory use alternate methods of reactivating all the disabled options...

Hell, in theory, once I own the car I could just make the features work, this is not a lease, (unless they restrict the rental options to leases only), at most they could void the warranty.. who knows.

Comment: The issue I have with patents.... (Score 1) 102

by bleh-of-the-huns (#45965255) Attached to: Notorious Patent Troll Sues Federal Trade Commission

Is not the patent itself, or even patent holding companies (to some extent).

What I do have an issue with is those holding companies going after the end users. To me that is double dipping. I purchase a product that does "X" made by "Company Y". Y purchases components and licenses the technology needed to manufacture/perform X, that is the end of it, the patent holder has received his/her pound of flesh.

Going after End users is essentially asking to be paid multiple times for the same product/technology instance.

Comment: Re:This just in, spy wants spy rules to stay (Score 1) 316

Well, hence my ( ) statement, yes they are operating in the US, but my response was to the poster who rattled off a list of US locations. Once the NSA became aware of a domestic issue, they are supposed to/should have notified the FBI and let the FBI do their thing. The ineptitude of the FBI is also a topic for another time.

As I said earlier, my point was strictly about jurisdiction, not about methods, and who was breaking what laws.

Comment: Re:This just in, spy wants spy rules to stay (Score 1) 316

And in every one of those places, the NSA has no (well is not supposed to anyways) purview. Domestic issues are meant to be handled by the FBI.

The NSA and CIA mandates are to operate outside the US, so yes, I have no issues whatsoever with the NSA spying on everyone and there mother outside the US, just like those same countries spy on everyone else. We just got caught with our hands in the cookie jar. Operating within the US is supposed to be illegal, although it appears no one in power wants to enforce the mandates.

Comment: Barnaby jack jackpotting ATMS (Score 4, Informative) 252

by bleh-of-the-huns (#45820215) Attached to: USB Sticks Used In Robbery of ATMs

Google the subject, he performed this attack live at both Blackhat and Defcon 18. It was definately an eye opener, and one of the reasons I tend to avoid those rental ATM's you see in mom and pop stores, and restaurants/bars...

yes I realize that even the major Bank ATM's are susceptible, but at least with a major bank you have some recourse if you have issues.

Comment: Re:Stability Control (Score 1) 961

by bleh-of-the-huns (#45587801) Attached to: Is the Porsche Carrera GT Too Dangerous?

Exactly, I did not say that it did not exist, I said that it was still in its infancy, and not widely in use. The calculations required in a supercar is a little different than trying to keep your BMW 3 series from sliding around when you hit a puddle.

Stability control or ESC was introduced around 94. Consider computing power and the requirements to develop advanced electronics. Look at the difference between computing process progress between 1994 and 2004, and then look at the processing power progress between 2004 and today. We have made significantly more process in the last 10 years over the previous 10.

Comment: Re:Should have been driving a Tesla (Score 1) 961

by bleh-of-the-huns (#45584133) Attached to: Is the Porsche Carrera GT Too Dangerous?

Really, you are going to compare a 10 year old race car (remember, for Porsche to compete in the GT series, they had to make a bunch of them road going and sell them to the public, so this is a race car with lights) to a modern car with more electronics than a small datacenter.... Because that is apples to apples comparison...

Comment: Re:Most are missing the point (Score 1) 961

by bleh-of-the-huns (#45584095) Attached to: Is the Porsche Carrera GT Too Dangerous?

Who said they were racing, racing had already been ruled out. Additionally, speculation has it that they were going slightly over the limit when they reached the end of the road which drops to a 15 mph limit and a sharp turn (maybe the speed drop should be further up the road).

Keep in mind that the CGT handles much better at 150mph then it was at 40mph. A simple bump in the road while braking would easily cause teh CGT to lose control, and unfortunately, it appears the point of impact was also the gas tank.

Ma Bell is a mean mother!