Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Note: You can take 10% off all Slashdot Deals with coupon code "slashdot10off." ×

Comment Re:Is it going to be like last time again? (Score 2, Interesting) 257

I believe HP was one of the companies affected the most, and I notice they're not listed in these new manufacturers.

From the summary:

, NextWindow, which already supplies HP's market-leading TouchSmart line, and Dell's Studio One

They're not listed as a new one because they've been selling touch screen computers, successfully, for awhile now. The TouchSmart line was introduced in 2007.

Comment Re:I can already see (Score 1) 299

Providing free patches, partially funded by advertising revenue to you is not.

It's not free, nor was the original game. Wipeout HD is $19.99 and the expansion is $9.99. So these people are paying $30 for this nice new "feature".

Quote from http://blog.us.playstation.com/2009/07/17/wipeout-fury-developer-diary-new-game-modes/

Before I talk about what I've been up to on the WipEout HD Fury expansion pack, I would just like to let you know that the pack will be available from PlayStation Store on Thursday, July 23rd for $9.99.

Comment Re:Missing the point of the brand... (Score 1) 629

Just imagine if you could walk into a Radio Shack and have a selection of stuff like what you can get from Digikey and Newegg combined. That would totally kick ass.

Just add a Hackerspace in the back and it would be perfect.

P.S. To any prospective business out there, I, and I'm sure the Anonymous Cowardon above, would be perfectly fine with you stealing this idea and implementing it. It's encouraged.

Comment Re:Sorry Eric (Score 1) 128

It's been interesting watching Apple and Google get more negative comments on Slashdot over the last few months (or the last couple of years in Apple's case).

I think the criticism of Apple is partly because of their inherent need to have control, which clashes with a community of geeks who love to hack at things, find non-obvious/non-intended uses for them, and just generally gain more knowledge. That then boils over when, like you said, some Apple fans are so quick to jump on any criticism at all (see: Reality Distortion Field).

Google, on the other hand, has a lot to do with privacy and their enormous databases. I also think that after seeing what happens when one company becomes too big/has too much control (Microsoft), the slashdot crowd is being a lot more vigilant to possible abuses. It seems too many people are quick to implicitly trust and not question anything for no other reason than "It's from Google", which can easily lead to bad things when left unchecked, as it did with Microsoft.

Comment Re:only mp3 players left (Score 1) 128

Google Search Appliance is a single purpose server to provide in-house search services. It's basically a search program that happens to come with a server, not a server to be used for anything.

Xserve is a general purpose server. Google only competes with Apple here if your only intention for the Xserve was to implement a custom search engine on it. Even if that were the case, the main selling point for Google in that instance wouldn't be the hardware, but in the performance of their search method compared to your own. As far as I know, Apple doesn't sell their own search algorithm so it still wouldn't be competing with Apple.

Comment Re:Easy to avoid (Score 2, Informative) 394

Have customers just select a password for each account. Retailers would verify the password the same way they verify CSC numbers now,

Visa and Mastercard have already implemented this option. The only problem is the store has to be capable of handling it, and not all of them are, unfortunately.

https://usa.visa.com/personal/security/vbv/index.html?ep=v_sym_verified
http://www.mastercard.com/us/personal/en/cardholderservices/securecode/index.html

The account number is simply placed on the card, and authentication comes from physical ownership of the card. (PINs don't count because they are unfortunately verified based on machine-readable information on the card itself.)

This is wrong. PINs haven't been stored on the card for a long time (I'm not even certain they ever were for all cards). You can easily check this yourself with a relatively cheap reader, or you can build one yourself.

Comment Re:Obsolete (Score 5, Informative) 423

Not only that but they can make web tools Live/Bing/Hotmail work best with their browser - influencing users of those tools to almost be forced to to use IE.

They've already been bitten by that one. They blocked all browsers except IE from accessing MSN.com. After two days of people making noise about it they let everyone view MSN again.

Did they learn? No. Less than two years later they served a stylesheet to Opera (and only to Opera, other browsers received a working stylesheet and IE had its own) that deliberately broke the display of the page. They served Opera the IE stylesheet, which displayed fine, after some more complaints.

Was that enough for them? No, they tried again with hotmail. They sent Opera an incomplete javascript file that was missing a required function to empty the junk e-mail. Other browsers were sent a different javascript file.

I don't think they'd dare try again with how closely the EU is monitoring them now.

Comment Re:Think about it yourself... (Score 3, Informative) 251

It was 500 billion in Icelandic currency (krona), not 500 billion euro or USD.

According to xe.com:

500,000,000,000.00 ISK = 3,904,722,881.3900 USD

However, the wikileaks summary says "45 million to 1250 million euros". I haven't read the post that the GP links, except to check the currency type, to find out where it gets the 500 billion number.

Security

Submission + - Clampi risk increases with new exploit

riskpundit writes: "The risk associated with Clampi, a three year old Trojan-type virus, has gone from low to extremely high due the exploits of an alleged Eastern European cyber-crime group. On July 29, 2009, right before Black Hat, SecureWorks published a summary of its research about how Clampi is being used. http://www.secureworks.com/research/threats/clampi-trojan/ The anti-virus vendors have rated the risk level of Clampi as Low. But it's the exploit process that makes the risk level high. In fact, it's really the process that's the issue, not the actual Trojan. Other Trojans could and have been used."

Do you suffer painful illumination? -- Isaac Newton, "Optics"

Working...