Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:A low price is not a bad thing. (Score 2) 93

They could be betting that, at a lower price, more people will be willing to cough it up for the data. The first thing to consider is that real professionals won't be affected by this type of thing - they store separate backups on another server (or offline entirely) and so would just restore the data from the backup.

Having worked for a web hosting company for a couple of years, I envision this being the scenario the ransomware makes the most money from:
(1). Ransomware encrypts (say) the web site of a small business owner or independent realtor.
(2). Realtor doesn't notice the site is down for a week or two, by which time the free backup from their cheapo hosting plan has been overwritten with an infected copy.
(3). Having no backup, realtor is faced with a decision to either pay $800 to have the site recreated by a web dev, or $300 in BTC to pay the ransom.
$300 If they wanted 10 BTC, it would be more cost-effective to just build the site again, netting the ransomers nothing.

Comment Re:foobar2000 (Score 1) 889

I've never used foobar for bit-perfect playback, and from what I've seen on the foobar support forums that's not a very common scenario for foobar users either. The reason foobar is so far beyond the competition is because of its simple but highly customizable scripting features - particularly relating to file management and tagging. It's also got a huge list of smaller features that don't come together in any other player / library management software... ReplayGain scanning, applying RG to MP3s without re-encoding (useful for devices that don't support RG tags), a nice way to assemble stats on pretty much any aspect of your library or tracks you select in any combination (sample rate, bit rate, codec, running time, file size...). or to sort by any of those in the playlist view. The converter functionality is great too, you can use any command-line encoder with it. Processing with DSPs during the encoding process... being able to script the file name and folder path during the encoding process. I could probably go on for quite a while.

Other players might have a subset of these features, but they're all missing big chunks of what foobar does, and almost all of them use way more system resources. I checked out the latest version of Amarok recently, and got blasted with a gaudy inefficient UI and the program trying to connect to something over the internet for some reason, without me even having clicked anything yet. There's really nothing to compete with foobar on Linux (or on Windows for that matter). It's in a class of its own and has been since at least 2006 when I started using it. I'm frankly surprised there is no open-source equivalent - all the OSS developers seem to be stuck emulating Winamp or iTunes.

Slashdot Top Deals

"The only way for a reporter to look at a politician is down." -- H.L. Mencken