Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Legitimate Marketing Traffic (Score 3, Informative) 159

by tysonedwards (#48398467) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Dealing With VoIP Fraud/Phishing Scams?
Yes, because making new marketing materials, distributing updated business cards and getting everyone involved to stop using the old number and separate the old number from the company is *such* an easy task and can happen overnight!

The phone number of a presumably reputable business that parties would likely recognize for their Caller ID number is a social engineering trick to get around one of the roadblocks and make people subconsciously overcome one of their answers to why this is a scam. Any act at this point is damaging the brand of the business, whether they capitulate and change their number, or whether the scamming entity continues to portray themselves as the company in question.

Let's change this a little bit and put a name to these calls... What if instead of "unnamed company", it was "Google" that had someone using their corporate phone number to do these calls? What about "Amazon", or "Microsoft", or "Apple", or "Cisco", or the "FBI"? Would your opinion about "just change your phone number" be the same?

Comment: Re:TWC are (surprise, surprise) crooks and thieves (Score 1) 223

by tysonedwards (#48377767) Attached to: Overbilled Customer Sues Time Warner Cable For False Advertising
This is actually a very reasonable idea, considering that in many jurisdictions the last mile deployments have been subsidized via government grants or guaranteed loans and bonds. The justification for these companies to apply for such money is that without the support of government, it would not be economically practical to provide service to various localities. By taking all last-mile deployments out of government hands, many of which simply have been ignored outside of big cities anyways, then individual cities could utilize funds from property taxes to provide the actual termination to each residence and business. Then, there can be the immediate possibility of competition of middle mile providers within these localities for those customers without such significant expense to them, effectively lowering costs for their customers.

Although on the flip side, we know full well that costs won't go down, even as responsibilities are split... It'll just be that everyone realizes "Oh, this is the biggest number that the vast majority of people are willing to pay today, so that is what we charge!" to which the market will naturally settle on a tacit understanding of multilateral screwing despite the new appearance of choice.

Comment: Re:Blatantly wrong summary (Score 1) 139

That is ultimately the problem. Once things get to the point where the courts are involved, much like scientific debates depicted on television, they are reduced to 1 person for, and 1 person against, and are largely not representative of the consensus of the scientific community as a whole. The format combined with subject matter that most people choose not to attempt to understand creates the illusion that there is still cause for discussion on the matter and that one crackpot saying "I can predict big earthquakes, and so can you! Look at this data, there was all of these events going on for months, so why wouldn't they think that there was something going on in a seismically active region?" versus the 99 others saying "Here are 500 other instances where in this very city, these same conditions were present and absolutely nothing happened. If we alerted everyone, everywhere every time that there was a minor event based off of the potential that something *could* happen, there would be no credibility when at some point in the future we have adequate technology and understanding to predict these events!" And that is ultimately the problem, out of an emphasis of "fairness", both sides are given equal time and their information presented is gauged based off of which is more plausible for a layman to understand and are most compatible with their social biases and prejudices. It ceases to be about which side is right but rather which side is more likable and most compatible with the political and social viewpoints of the community.

Comment: Re:Could have been worse (Score 1) 236

by tysonedwards (#48325045) Attached to: CNN Anchors Caught On Camera Using Microsoft Surface As an iPad Stand
So, you're complaining that using a Legacy OS in conjunction with devices that typically did not include GPS support and where touchscreen capabilities largely didn't exist doesn't have the application support that you'd want, namely up-to-date, finger friendly apps for you to use on your capacitive screen Windows Tablet?

That's like the argument that people use for why they don't have Photoshop or XYZ Product for Linux... I have it and it is of tremendous value to me, but I can't use it to it's potential because I don't have all the tools that I need it to do.

Handheld, finger friendly touchscreen devices running Windows are receiving support now because people are buying them, and the mere fact that there is a viable market where a developer *can* make money and thereby will be able to feed themselves means that they are likely to build said products and support those users as there is a segment of the market that *actually has* those products. And I say that as a long time Tablet PC User, back to the Compaq TC1000 and various models of the Fujitsu Stylistic slates over the years. Until Windows 8, they *were* a hobby! Great for Journal until OneNote came on the scene, and then OneNote was where it was at, and now with Windows 8 they're largely useful for everything. However, in terms of devices with GPSes and thereby helping with your use case, that is still the extreme minority and typically relegated to a USB or Bluetooth Accessory versus built in to *every* Android or iOS Tablet made, hence the disparity in what's available for each platform that also meets your functional requirements.

Comment: Re: No thanks. (Score 1) 558

by tysonedwards (#48235871) Attached to: Rite Aid and CVS Block Apple Pay and Google Wallet
Banks are happy because there is biometric auth for the transaction, meaning they can go in and say "oh, you're saying that there was fraud on your account, but this transaction came from your iPhone and was authenticated by your thumbprint... So, can you please explain how this is possible before we move forward with reversing this charge for you?" That's incredibly valuable for banks, hence the lower rates for transactions!

Comment: Re: Good luck with that. (Score 2, Insightful) 558

by tysonedwards (#48235805) Attached to: Rite Aid and CVS Block Apple Pay and Google Wallet
Than opening wallet, removing card and swiping it, entering a pin / signing a signature, returning it to your wallet versus just touching a device to a reader and having your device authenticate via your fingerprint / continuous biometrics?
Yeah, that is so much easier. Plus, there's the general liability concern with the transaction being biometric secured versus someone stealing your card. There's obviously some interest in why banks are interested in this detail for sure, hence why they even implemented single transaction card numbers.

Comment: Re: $3500 fine? (Score 3, Informative) 286

by tysonedwards (#48217077) Attached to: Tech Firm Fined For Paying Imported Workers $1.21 Per Hour
Further, the "wage" payments were just the differences between their dollar and change an hour rate and minimum wage for technical work that would require a skilled employee. So, even that is a slap on the wrist. And there was no concept of "time and a half" or whatever else for the mandatory 120hr week slave conditions for these employees. As such, the lesson taught was very much a "just don't get caught next time" one.

Comment: Re:Possible sequence (Score 1) 171

by tysonedwards (#48077349) Attached to: Apple Sapphire Glass Supplier GT Advanced Files For Bankruptcy
Not necessarily. There is the very limited section of the market for which a fitness tracker is an ideal device, and for them a device which has the capabilities like the Apple Watch actually looks like it could be pretty nice. There are even verticals such as those with diabetes where continual optical monitoring of blood glucose levels or heart arrhythmia through infrared pulses can be extremely positive. These considerations are things that have not yet been incorporated into a device like FitBit or Up, despite it being great functionality that could work very well in those areas! Frankly, the current state of assistive devices for those with legitimate medical conditions is a joke and largely has stalled in technological advancement since the late 90's. Smart watches and similar form factor devices can be immensely useful for improving the quality of lives for people who suffer with legitimate medical conditions who the market largely ignores due to existing technologies that are declared "good enough" by their respective research and development teams.

However, yes, as a communications device, a 1 inch screen is not a very practical form factor and as long as a device whether it be from Apple, Motorola, LG, Samsung, or any of the other companies for that matter that are releasing Smart Watches to the market continue to fall into that mindset of "this let's us sell people an 9" smartphone next year through overcoming the difficulty of removing it from one's pocket to see 'why did my phone just buzz'?" then these devices will continue to be largely ignored in the marketplace.

Comment: Re:Possible sequence (Score 1) 171

by tysonedwards (#48074791) Attached to: Apple Sapphire Glass Supplier GT Advanced Files For Bankruptcy
Except, there have been screen (or rather the lenses with digitizers) produced that were tested via optical spectroscopy and validated to be comprised of sapphire, and of the dimensions of the iPhone 6 displays. Those didn't just appear out of thin air, they were manufactured by *someone*, and as such it is reasonable make the leap that when Apple paid GTAT $578M upfront to ramp up large scale sapphire production through the addition of enough furnaces that it could produce enough sapphire that would enable the production of roughly 110M iPhone class displays per year by volume that GTAT would be the party *producing* said displays instead of *some unknown other party*, or that the speculation regarding the part in-hand was simply wrong.

More plausible explanations are that GTAT was either behind schedule and would have risked Apple pushing back their iPhone release date, or that the quality of the product offered was not of the level that had been promised, including the durability concerns / shatter resistances of Sapphire Crystal versus a more traditional silica glass.

If money can't buy happiness, I guess you'll just have to rent it.