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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Hey tablet vendors - pay attention (Score 5, Insightful) 168

by gru3hunt3r (#38583286) Attached to: Transformer Prime To Get ICS On January 12, Boot Unlocker Coming

Hey tablet vendors - pay attention, Asus isn't just catering to the home user - they're catering to the corporate IT user.

Our employees don't need Google videos ..
But to get OpenVPN on android 4.0 I (currently) need to root it.
Making rooted devices is incredibly appealing.

ASUS - Nice job!
Guess which device just went to the top of our "IT recommended devices" list for employees.

Can't wait to see it - if this device officially "supports" roots .. in the sense that I don't have to worry about you deciding to remote kill + brick the device then we'll just make this the only device employees can receive reimbursement for.

God I can't wait for a decent Windows 8 tablet. This android ipad walled garden policies *crap* is so incompatible with the company I work for. While I'm not a microsoft fan, at least they understand business.

Comment: article is out of date - Android 4.0 ICS update (Score 4, Interesting) 136

by gru3hunt3r (#38583234) Attached to: Securing Android For the Enterprise

This article is out of date the following IPsec VPN options are available on a Google Nexus Galaxy from Verizon running Android ICS (4.0)

IPsec XAUTH PSK
IPsec XAUTH RSA
IPSEC Hybrid RSA

Android 4.0 supports standard IP sec gateways as well as Cisco's proprietary Xauth -- and unlike apple the android release does NOT require a company go out and buy a new Cisco Pix running IOS 7.0 or higher like the Apple iPhone 4 does (Iphone doesn't support xauth rsa profile).
This little .. ahem, oversight on the iPhone made it so our company chose NOT to reimburse employees for iPhones since they can't be used for work -- so at least for our company if employees want reimbursement for phones, they need to purchase a device that's compatible.

While I'm ranting-- I figured I'd also say that I wish either vendor apple/cisco natively supported OpenVPN so I could kill off my IPSec VPN I'd be thrilled, and the first vendor who does will receive the "recommended device" status for our employees.

IPSec is my last choice, not my first - it's not well suited for modern day deployments anyway since it doesn't work through some NAT gateways (at many hotels), and it *never* works [by design] if two people on the same network are connecting to the same endpoint from behind the same nat firewall (ex: two employees at the same coffee shop both trying to do their work.. or a husband wife who both work for the same company trying to concurrently connect to their own home network)

As NAT becomes more and more common (aren't we out of IPv4 addresses?) IPsec will cede way to more flexible solutions like OpenVPN.

Comment: Re:Hope they do better than Egghead did! (Score 1) 559

by gru3hunt3r (#37533204) Attached to: Can Newegg Survive the Post-PC Future?

Lol .. actually "newegg" is egghead - rebranded.

The software giant (who failed to successfully make the transition to a hardware / repair shop) was afaik the very first company to close it's retail stores and go purely online around 1995 as I recall .. it was a sign of things to come.

If memory serves I think they couldn't get the name egghead.com, or perhaps they just didn't want to be associated with their software business (after all this is the "new egghead").

I remember how shocked I was when they exited the retail market and started selling HARDWARE on their website .. this story struck me as incredibly ironic since the author clearly doesn't know the legacy of the business (which in the past NEVER sold hardware).

Comment: Re:mm (Score 1) 641

by gru3hunt3r (#34162234) Attached to: Oracle To Monetize Java VM

PostgresSQL has a fraction of the momentum that Mysql has, or at least had.

By Oracle literally buying and slaughtering their leading open source competitor they effectively showed that Goliath, equipped with an expensive helmet would have absolutely routed David.

For big companies (the type who pay for support to fund those projects) they won't put their eggs into a basket if they think they are likely to get crushed. Oracle is better off waiting till a project gets some momentum then killing it. Each battle will be different, but because of Oracle's war-chest of money they will ultimately win.

Get used to it.

Comment: Re:Take a lesson out of Google's/Facebook playback (Score 1) 338

by gru3hunt3r (#34162148) Attached to: How Hulu, NBC, and Other Sites Block Google TV

#1. search term on Google "Yahoo.com" - yes, I know where the URL bar in my browser is, most people don't.

#2. I agree they probably don't have the balls to do what I proposed, but who knows what they are capable of under the new corporate doctrine of "quid-pro-quo"

#3. Google needs to diversify it's business to keep their stock strong. Placing big bets in other industries and toying with disruptive technologies is key. You're looking at their failures, instead of understanding how each of those was a success in it's own.

NexusOne - okay so nobody will build a droid handset, how will motorola, nokia, lg, etc. feel if we get into the manufacturing business -- oh they are threatened? so now they want to make droid phones -- good? WIN GOOGLE.

Wave/Buzz - oh facebook (our soon to be nemesis) is getting a huge amount of PR, how can we steal focus from them for a while and slow their growth curve. Wave/Buzz probably cost Zuckerberg at least a couple of billion on his FB valuation, that's a couple billion he won't have to fight against them later. Wave and Buzz effectively stole the conversation from Twitter, Skype, etc. and that kept those companies from being worth "as much" since they suddenly had a well funded, tech-savvy, company who had an untarnished brand, and a reputation as a disruptive force in technology as a competitor. Those projects were cheap and never needed to succeed though I'm sure Google would have liked if they did.

 

Comment: Re:Take a lesson out of Google's/Facebook playback (Score 1) 338

by gru3hunt3r (#34162062) Attached to: How Hulu, NBC, and Other Sites Block Google TV

Please the parent is a troll.
This discussion has nothing to do with copyright infringement.

In either case - Linking is absolutely not infringement except in a few very very very narrowly scoped situations. (Deep Linking for example). For the court's it's about intent and that lawsuit would be tossed and the attorney's who filed it would be reprimanded by the judge.

Comment: Re:Take a lesson out of Google's/Facebook playback (Score 1) 338

by gru3hunt3r (#34162036) Attached to: How Hulu, NBC, and Other Sites Block Google TV

This parent is just a moronic troll - can somebody please downmod the parent?

Look Dude - I don't know what Intertubes you're using but I assure you on this one THERE WILL BE PLENTY OF SITES COVERING ANY MAJOR SHOW THAT ARE NOT OWNED BY A NETWORK.

There's this one called Wikipedia which comes to mind.

As a corporation not having control of the conversation about your shows would be TERRIFYING. But highly effective as it would infuriate all the talented people who work within those organizations and put a high intensity light on the morons who make those decisions.

Comment: Re:Take a lesson out of Google's/Facebook playback (Score 1) 338

by gru3hunt3r (#34161996) Attached to: How Hulu, NBC, and Other Sites Block Google TV

Google already "interferes" with your search results.

So you're suggesting that Google should actively/knowingly send visitors to sites that don't work? Because I can tell you they already filter sites like that.

They also scan sites for mal-ware and do dozens of things for you.

Also - I took the bing challenge, and came back to Google - I dare you to try the same!

Comment: Re:Take a lesson out of Google's/Facebook playback (Score 1) 338

by gru3hunt3r (#34161964) Attached to: How Hulu, NBC, and Other Sites Block Google TV

First - I completely understand WHY the DOJ went after Mirosoft - it was due to a clear lack of political contributions on behalf of Microsoft, and plenty of donations from their competitors. Notice the shift in their political strategy since the DOJ lawsuit, they now have a sufficient number of lobbyists to ensure that does not happen again. If you think it was anything else - you are naive.

Second - this is about accessibility. Technically what the networks did (intentionally breaking their site) is more of a violation than what Google could do.

Comment: Re:Take a lesson out of Google's/Facebook playback (Score 1) 338

by gru3hunt3r (#34161922) Attached to: How Hulu, NBC, and Other Sites Block Google TV

Have you seen how Google TV does Fantasy Football while you're watching the game. It's basically augmented TV - which is pretty bad-ass. It blurs the distinction between the web and TV.

I also disagree they'd look like a whiny child. They need to deliver an optimum experience for all clients, they already incorporate a large number of accessibility facets into their ranking system.

In fact I think they did the same thing with sites that require ActiveX a few years ago.

Comment: Re:Take a lesson out of Google's/Facebook playback (Score 1) 338

by gru3hunt3r (#34161892) Attached to: How Hulu, NBC, and Other Sites Block Google TV

I didn't say it was "okay", or that I was a fan. That wasn't an endorsement of Googles business tactics at all, merely an observation of a major policy shift for Google. From 'Don't be Evil' to 'Don't be Evil to non-Evil people'.

I agree it's a slipperly slope, and we'll all see how Google manages.

It was NOT an endorsement or a free pass of their business tactics. I'm not a fan of seals eating cute little penguins, but I understand why they need to do it.

Comment: Take a lesson out of Google's/Facebook playback (Score 5, Insightful) 338

by gru3hunt3r (#34153774) Attached to: How Hulu, NBC, and Other Sites Block Google TV

Hmm.. well Google ultimately (at the moment) has the most control.

What they did with the Facebook address book is interesting - they said "you either play nice, or we won't" - and that's a VERY interesting corporate precedent they've established.
It basically translates into a simple "quid pro quo" - or perhaps even better "we only have to play nice, when others do".

What I'd like to see Google announce tomorrow --
Okay NBC, Hulu, etc. our new policy: we won't index sites which decide to arbitrarily support devices due to "incompatible business models" ..

and poof - from one moment to the next there will be a big black smoking crater where those websites once were in the google index.

I don't see why Google.com should be expected to maintain a compatibility database for sites, and return different results so they don't accidentally send Google TV viewers to NBC, Hulu, etc. it's probably easier for them to just drop those offending sites until they "work out their technical difficulties".

Alternatively Google can just put up big red warning messages adjacent to search results that basically say "this site is broken, it may not work correctly" as sort of a warning that "you either fix it, or we'll drop you in 30 days" or something like that.

"I will shit on the towel of anybody who pee's in the pool."

Comment: Re:mm (Score 5, Insightful) 641

by gru3hunt3r (#34153644) Attached to: Oracle To Monetize Java VM

I agree - the fact Google uses/relies on Java is really an Achilles heel for them. I'm 100% certain that when Larry bought Sun he scratched a 10 year itch he's had for how "Sun ought to run their business" - by making two versions of java one "free" crippled, and another enterprise one. Get 'em hooked, then bend 'em over and make 'em take it up the ass and pay for the service - that is the Oracle business strategy isn't it? Ellison could care less if anybody new ever uses/deploys Java -- because the installed application base alone in fortune 500 companies (existing oracle customers) is easily enough to pay 10x for what Sun cost. It's a freaking mint, and I think he's doing the right thing (for his shareholders) - he's not interested in the long term business plan, only short term revenue.
Killing mysql (a competitor they were losing business to), killing open office was just icing on the cake, and monetizing Solaris were just a few of the ways he's planning to make money.

I imagine this conversation happening in the Oracle board room:
Ellison: "we gotta nip this free software thing in the bud boys, next thing you know our stupid customers will be expecting our stuff for free too." (look of disgust)
Henchmen #1: "yeah boss, but how we gonna pay for it? the shareholders will never buy it"
Ellison: "those morons at Sun have been doing it wrong for years boys, what have I always told you"
Henchmen #1: "the customer will always pay more?"
Henchmen #2: "who cares if it's crap, ship it anyway?"
Henchmen #1: "who cares if my jet wakes people up? i'm rich?"
Henchmen #2: "nothing is sweeter than making the customer pay up the ass for crap?"
Ellison: "no, well - yes, I've said all those things, but I'm talking about how I'd run Sun, how I'd make everybody pay for Java, nobody should expect to use it for free"
Henchmen #2: "oh yeah boss, that was a good one"
Ellison: "look at this boys, it's like it's a god damn christmas - we stop mysql for a few years while the community 'forks' or whatever, you realize how much revenue that is going to protect for us?"
Henchmen #2: "oh yeah boss, that's alotta money"
Ellison: "then we kill open office, teach anybody who bought it a lesson, nothing is free - you want to use it - you should pay for it"
Henchmen #2: "yeah boss, keep going"
Ellison: "you realize how many of our customers depend on Solaris - they can't replace it for at least a few years, in the meantime we can tear them a new asshole and let the money flow out"
Henchmen #2: "that makes sense"
Ellison: "and then there's Java, wow.. what a stupid bunch of dumbfucks Sun was, I'll replace their free love society with Larrys pleasure palace where you have to pay me for some action"
Henchmen #2: "you mean metaphorically right boss?"
Ellison: "hard to say, all i know is that in the next few years boys, we're definitely going to be busy screwing all Suns customers up the ass, and charging them for the pleasure of it"
Henchmen #1: "so you mean basically we're going to do business as usual here at Oracle Co.?"
Ellison: "exactly"

The key word in business is "momentum" - the Sun acquisition took momentum from so many projects, and anybody that was using those projects (for commercial purposes) now is in the unenviable position that they need to either starting pay Oracle, or try and find a viable competitor (at least 5 years). In the short term everybody will pay, do you realize how many billions of dollars we're talking about - in 5 years they'll wash rinse repeat. This is the cycle we should expect to see in the future - I think it will be very good for Oracle (bad for the community, but nobody really gives a damn what those free-loving hippies think anyway)

Remember Fortune 500 CIO's can't risk their enterprise to free "crippled" versions of software, they can't use unproven forks, if something goes wrong - it's their ass (and bye bye stock options), they'll choose free only when they absolutely have to. Nobody cares how much money "they save", it's a corporation, it's not about saving, it's about CYA.

Oh my god I hope the folks at Oracle never get ahold of ASF.

I have to admit - the folks at Oracle are brilliant (from a shareholder perspective) because they get how big businesses work.

Comment: Got Talent? (Score 1, Troll) 223

by gru3hunt3r (#28661641) Attached to: Developer Stigma After a Bad Or Catastrophic Release?

I have personally been through this. When companies (or at least the sales people in companies) aren't making their monthly quota they start to get desperate and throw every piece of trash against the wall to see what sticks. I used to think this was a bad thing so I feel a certain kinship to this author. As a developer the consequences of delivering, or attempting to deliver what they told/sold the customer causes their requests to become more and more asinine until eventually they are selling software with features only found in fairy tales.

But just because sales has started promising free elevator rides to the moon so that customers will buy your product does not give you an excuse to not build it... that is what we, as developers do. We make the impossible seem easy, we make it seem magical. That is the career path we have chosen. Alas, perhaps you're not that talented. Perhaps you should consider a job at best buy and continue the 9-5 grind.

The path I will suggest is arduous it will not be paved with roses and cupcakes. Yes, projects will crater, and the disasters will be spectacular -- with enough shrapnel flying every direction to damage everybody. Your companies reputation will become the equivalent of a "turd sandwich", and you will on some days resemble an angry hobbit screaming rants in languages long since forgotten during this age of men. You will need to bend time, and find a way to work 30 hours a day, and your body odor will, at times cause small children and virtuous women to shun you. (It helps if your office has a shower) .. But your skills through this process, they will become uber, nay.. "legendary".

Some slashdot trolls here will say that what I propose is impossible - that you cannot dodge bullets shot at you at point blank range -- but they don't realize you won't need to dodge the bullets at all.

So if you believe the force runs deep and strong in your blood young padawan, then trust it. Give yourself over to it, let it control you and guide you. You'd be amazed what you can do with the blast shield down if you just fucking try.

Oh.. and to respond to your question: True JEDI's don't apply for jobs, they choose which job they want and take it.

ps> After 7 years as CTO .. I ended up getting the CEO's job. (true story)

Comment: Potential solution. (Score 1) 784

by gru3hunt3r (#25154391) Attached to: Studies Say Ideology Trumps Facts

Assumption: the 'product' of a news channel is the education of their viewers.

Schools are given scores based on how they educate students.

Seems a similar grading scheme could be applied to news organizations based on surveys of their 'regular' viewers (students).

It would be valuable for [news channel] to be able to say "our viewers are smarter, and better informed than the other guys when it comes to facts."

Leading to the slogan: don't be dumb, watch [our channel]. Our viewers scored 75% smarter than the other guys.

Seriously - we should be able to grade news channels based on the job they do, or rather *should* do.

This grading could even be segmented further into topics revolving science, elections, politics, religion, etc. Hopefully this would lead to less time being spent on analysis, or at least more fact checking on pundits and their outrageous claims.

On a personal note: I'm normally a CNN viewer. I agreed to watch Fox for a day because my parents told me "how much better it was".
The first story of the day was about the LHC and it was titled "Doomsday machine starts tomorrow" after that I turned off the TV. I booted up world of warcraft and ignored the news for the rest of the day! it was fun.. I should do that more often.

I have never seen anything fill up a vacuum so fast and still suck. -- Rob Pike, on X.

Working...