Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

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: Re:How? (Score 1) 304

by rockNme2349 (#34924162) Attached to: Encrypt Your Smartphone — Or Else

My Blackberry is set with an 8-character moderately complex password, but the key is to have a try limit. If you enter a bad password ten times, my Blackberry will nuke itself clean of all data.

This is definitely a good idea, as long as the data isn't too sensitive. You need to remember that a sufficiently equipped adversary won't be brute forcing your encryption on the Blackberry, but on their own system after they've extracted the encrypted data. Probably one of the best security measures you can have is a physical chip which contains the key, with a physical self destruct after too many attempts. I remember reading an article about a flash drive like this. This of course assumes that you can make this chip very hardened from an attacker extracting the key.

But I mean if it's only someone casual you're worrying about, and not the NSA you're probably fine.

Comment: Re:Repeating history (Score 1) 266

by rockNme2349 (#34918526) Attached to: GE Venture Will Share Jet Technology With China

Of course as we all know, the whole thing about prisoner's dilemma is that it falls apart in the long-term.

Wait, don't you have that backwards? The prisoner dilemma as I understand it is ONLY stable in the long-term. If you only perform one iteration of the prisoners dilemma, then the dominant strategy is to choose the "bad" move. However if you can account for there to be many iterations then the maximum profit is found in both parties performing the "good" move, which is easier for large corporations who only have a few rivals.

Comment: Re:Welcome to 1994... (Score 4, Insightful) 179

by rockNme2349 (#34870486) Attached to: First Ceiling Light Internet Systems Installed

i agree, it's little different from wifi, but i don't understand why it's better than wifi? ... It doesn't work through drywall.

I don't claim to understand this system completely, but that sounds like a feature to me. Crowded apartment building? This gives an alternative to a saturated wifi network.

Comment: Re:So what about... (Score 1) 738

by rockNme2349 (#34853666) Attached to: Jerry Brown Confiscates 48,000 Cell Phones

Just want to make a point here about a common fallacy when doing math in cell phone plans.

If you have a plan for $40 which gives you 450 minutes, it only costs you $40/450=8.9 cents per minute if you use exactly 450 minutes.

For example, If you use 300 minutes in a month, it costs you $40/300 = 13 cents per minute.

If you use 500 minutes in a month, assuming they charge 25 cents per minute overages (the actual number isn't important), then you pay ($40+50*$0.25)=$52.5/500 =11 cents per minute.

This is why tiered plans are deceptive.

I would also be cautious in assuming that since the average phone bill is $36/month that the phone companies are charging $36/month per phone. I would assume that someone as large as a government organization doesn't have to deal with tiered plans, and can just purchase minutes at a set rate. This means that assuming that the price of the phone is negligible (maybe not), the better deal for the organization is simply from whoever bills them a lower rate for the minutes (you or the phone provider).

Most likely though this is a better deal for both of you. You subsidize buying a phone and a plan for the government, and (assuming you would buy a phone anyway for personal use) since you were not using your entire 450 minutes anyway and did not have to increase your plan, you get some of your minutes partially refunded by your employer.

Comment: Re:Even if it only raises temperature 1.64 degrees (Score 2) 747

by rockNme2349 (#34498130) Attached to: Doubling of CO2 Not So Tragic After All?

Neat fact:

Raising the partial pressure of CO2 exponentially results in a linear increase in the pH.

This is because the Concentration of CO2 in the water is determined using Henry's Law, a linear relationship between partial pressure in the gas and liquid concentration. At the relevant concentrations the concentration of H+ is linearly related to the concentration of CO2 in the water.

I never cheated an honest man, only rascals. They wanted something for nothing. I gave them nothing for something. -- Joseph "Yellow Kid" Weil