Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Oh, baloney (Score 1) 558

Or some idiot drives into a lake or down a jogging trail because he or she is just TOO STUPID to understand that they're not driving on a road anymore.

I once was told by my SatNav to drive into a lake. There is a lake, an island in the lake with a major tourist attraction, a ferry, and the road goes straight to the like so you can drive onto the ferry (and you need to have some good reason to do so because car traffic is normally not allowed on that island).

I actually drove past the car park 150m away from the lake before I spotted the end of the road. In the dark you could easily drive into the lake without being a complete idiot (a bit stupid and careless, but not a complete idiot).

Comment Re:Someone, please make my dream come true (Score 1) 558

For YEARS, I've hoped for GPS software that had three features:

4. Find a petrol station along my way with the smallest possible detour. TomTom finds the nearest, but that might be two miles away which means four miles detour. But 20 miles further there might be one just along the way.

5. Find the "cheapest" route, taking into account wear on the car, fuel, and my time.

Comment Re:Getting away with it? (Score 1) 409

A door handle is not involved with security IMO.

That's debatable, since its literally the interface to open the door, and is often integrated mechanically and electronically with the locks.

Not to mention in some vehicles such as mini-vans and SUVs the side and rear door handles are little more than fancy switches that send an open/close signal to a control unit.

Comment Re:Smart! (Score 1) 181

IF there was an actual store that did that I would go in there once a week, fill my cart up, have the cashier ring me up, bag the groceries and then flip out and storm out when they refused to take the cash

And you could do that once. The second time you'll get banned from the store. The third time they call the cops on you for trespassing.

Comment Re:Old news (Score 1) 63

You're assuming I'm not aware of this, and yet you've explained yourself why you'll always struggle to get rid of them in practice - it's politically untenable to tell people you're drastically raising their taxes, even if you do explain to them that stuff they buy will become cheaper.

I fully agree that in an ideal world we'd follow the path you suggest, and similarly I've always argued that true costs should be pursued in other ways. For example, I've long been an advocate of the fact that health service costs for health issues that stem from pollution (i.e. asthma) should be levied against carbon emitting companies, such that the price of coal would reflect it's true cost, rather than have it's true costs hidden by subsidy to the tax payer. This would force energy bills up to reflect the true cost of coal and would bring down the healthcare bill drastically reducing the need for high taxes whilst also encouraging companies to move to clean energy because when the real cost of coal is realised it's astoundingly expensive compared to nuclear etc.

But as nice as doing this would be, and forcing people to understand the real cost and value of things allowing the market to work in places it doesn't currently because true costs are hidden, it's just never going to happen. The idealist in me comes second to the realist - I don't believe there's much value in arguing that we're stupid for not basing our lives around that which is simply not practical and never going to happen in the near term. It's a great philosophical discussion to have, and great as a very long term goal (decades away), but it really doesn't help us right now in the reality we live in.

Comment Re:Wait a mintue (Score 4, Informative) 247

The former. All modern browsers except Firefox have decomposed their browser into multiple processes, so that a compromise from one site will only gain control over an unprivileged (i.e. isolated from other stuff the user cares about) process. They also run plugins in separate processes and have fairly narrow communication paths between them. Firefox is still a massive monolithic process, including all add-ons, plugins, and so on.

This basically means that you just need one arbitrary code execution vulnerability in Firefox and it's game over. In contrast, if you have the same in Chrome, Edge, or Safari, then it's just the first step - you now have an environment where you can run arbitrary exploit code, but you can't make (most) system calls and you have to find another exploit to escape from the sandbox. Typical Chrome compromises are the result of chaining half a dozen vulnerabilities together.

Comment Re:This is a big bitchslap to Mozilla (Score 4, Interesting) 247

It also scales based on processor resources. They hit serious TLB scalability issues at around 17 processes (varies a bit between CPUs, in some systems - particularly mobile - you'll hit RAM limits sooner), so if you have more tabs open than this, you will start having multiple independent sites share the same renderer process.

Comment Re:tom (Score 1) 119

Typically not to end users though. Microsoft sold the BASIC that computer vendors (including Apple) burned into ROM. Microsoft QuickBASIC for DOS contained a compiler that could produce stand-alone .exe or .com binaries, though the free QBASIC that they bundled with DOS 5 and later was a cut-down version that only included the interpreter.

Comment Re:Turing Evolved (Score 2) 203

Robots don't feel those emotions, and have committed no massacres on that scale. I trust robots more than I trust humans.

Do you trust a gun? Do you trust a bomb? Of course not, because the concept is meaningless: neither will cause harm without instructions from a human. Both can magnify the amount of harm that a human can do. Autonomous weapons, of which landmines are the simplest possible case, expand both the quantity that a person can do harm and the time over which they can do it.

During the cold war, there were at least two incidents where humans refused to follow legitimate orders to launch nuclear weapons - in either case, the likely outcome of following the orders would have been the deaths of many millions. The worst atrocities of the second world war were caused by people 'just following orders'. And you think that it's a good idea to remove the part of the chain of command capable of disobeying orders.

Comment Re:All us Mac users . . . (Score 1) 189

Err... Why? Who gives a shit who else uses your OS? It's not a lifestyle choice, it's a fucking operating system.

True, but it's been marketed (and bought) as if it *were* a lifestyle product, so it's not entirely surprising.

Also, was "his personal preference is Mac" in the summary actually meant to be a Penny Arcade reference or was it just me that thought of that...?!

Slashdot Top Deals

My sister opened a computer store in Hawaii. She sells C shells down by the seashore.