Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Comment TURN OFF MMS (Score 1) 81 81

or never configure it in the first place to work.

that's your fix.

and slashdot editors: MMS IS NOT SMS SO FUCK YOU SLASHDOT EDITOR. it's not even remotely same technlogy.

mms is vulnurable? duh. how about sharing the image preview vuln(presumably) that's actually used since that has much more to it than just mms. but that mms implementation is exploitable is quite a bit less fatal/interesting than sms vuln.

besides than that I'm pretty fucking sure that 950 million android phones (total androids out there) don't have preview of mms in the notifications bar. only a subset has that feature. but the more interesting and potentially attackable route is through anything else that shows images.

Comment older devices don't get patched.. (Score 1) 81 81

for iphone 4 as well? I don't think soooo.

anyhow... expect mobile networks to filter these messages in

either that or 400 million phones in use in asia will receive an attack today if the attack really works as described in the blurb (proof of concept that installs something or gtfo).

(if you browse on a mobile from asia you might notice that shitloads of adverts that try to exploit or trick the user into installing sw. even slashdot carries occasionally ads targeted to asia tha will just straight up open another page that will try to fool the user into installing sw and doesn't let the user easily press back. thats without clicking the friggin advert. it's like ad networks do no curating whatsoever of asian targeted ads)

Comment Re:How soon until x86 is dropped? (Score 1) 109 109

I'm not sure I've heard anyone suggest ARM is superior. It happens to be fulfilling a good niche as an architecture that provides decent performance per watt. But you're not seeing anyone wanting to use it in areas where power isn't a concern.

I suspect ARM will eventually be the architecture that's supplanted, not ix86 or ix86-64. Intel's getting good at producing low power ix86 family CPUs - I have one in my tablet, and the mobile space isn't really wedded to any architecture, but the desktop space is.

Comment Re:Update Clashes (Score 1) 307 307

You know, it kinda makes sense, but given that I've had months where I've been unable to play a specific game or two (without turning off various features that severely degrade performance) because "the latest driver" from AMD/ATI has had one issue or another, with no bug fixes available short of running the unsupported beta version, the idea of being forced to upgrade a driver that is currently not causing any problems is a definitely negative to me.

It'd be one thing if display card drivers were always being updated to fix bugs/security holes, but in practice, 99% of the updates I see are actually to support new cards (which isn't something I need or want a software update for), or to fiddle with the hardware optimization in theory to improve performance (which might be useful, but there's no reason to force such an update on people.)

Windows Update needs the ability to "pin" versions much as apt-get does. For security updates, fine, force them, but if an update is solely there to "improve performance" - or will have no affect whatsoever, it absolutely needs to be blockable.

Comment Re: Potential, or likelihood? (Score 1) 307 307

Well, Microsoft had a Windows XP and a Windows 7 in between those bad releases. Otherwise, Windows market share might have suffered a lot more.

Now it will be interesting to see if Windows 10 can be one of the good versions. But even if not, Microsoft can survive thanks to Windows 7 until Windows 11 comes out. Displacing a succesful Windows version is very hard, to the point where a lot of people still run XP (even if I doubt the wisdom of that...).

Comment Re:How about this... (Score 1, Informative) 177 177

They might cut their bandwidth cost in half. Computational cost for each video will possibly increase

You'll be surprised what can be done with a codec like MPEG-1 if you have unlimited computational power. Much of the point of better codecs is to reduce the computational power needed to achieve a substantial reduction in bandwidth for a given level of quality. So while it'll likely increase, the amount is unlikely to be substantial, not even a doubling of processing power.

Comment Re:How about this... (Score 1) 177 177

Google has gone out of their way to invest in video codecs to ensure there are non-encumbered standards that are in the same ballpark as H.264. There will always be incentive to improve bandwidth by producing better codecs.

I suspect actually that patents are holding back codecs, not helping. Who wants to innovate in that space if you know that whatever you end up with is likely going to be crippled with other people's patents given you'll have to build on the work of others to make something affective?

Comment Re:They do it because of VR (Score 1) 177 177

I get the impression H.265 isn't good enough given what you suggest it needs to do. It's only a 50% reduction in bandwidth compared to H.264. The fact Carmack can just casually announce he's dropping support suggests that the industry itself didn't see it as much more than a convenience.

If graphics hackers are so smart, why can't they get the bugs out of fresh paint?