Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Why won't Qualcomm stop selling chips to Apple? (Score 1) 56

I'm sure Apple would foot the bill just out of spite for Qualcomm's bullshit. It would also pay off in 5 years, minimum.

If it will pay off so quickly, then that may mean the market value of the patent is more than I suggested. The true formula would be to actually perform a Net-Present-Value calculation against the expected Sales/licensing revenue minus costs for this patent over the number remaining years of its life.
In the real world, that would be realized by putting the patent up for auction and taking the highest bid to be the value, or find independent appraisers to determine its value.

All the above said; I personally feel that the Profits to a creator for Intellectual Property should be capped, and after the cap is exceeded, those rights are depleted, and your solely remaining exclusive rights are Performance rights, Trademark, and Moral rights, only retained if you fully patented or copyrighted with full publication of source code, etc. If you are producing a product yourself, then you should be able to deduct your actual material costs, physical labor for assembling a product, and research and development (but no other costs), but if you are licensing to someone else, such as software IP, receiving royalties, or payments from a lawsuit or settlement, every $$$ received should count towards the cap, And the cap should be set at something like $10 Billion per Year.

Just Sorry... "You were sufficiently rewarded for your creation, or discovery," But sufficient reward for one act of invention does not mean Unlimited piles of cash with zero additional work, forever.

Comment Re:Why won't Qualcomm stop selling chips to Apple? (Score 1) 56

No, not buy, we Eminent Domain that shit as part of leasing the spectrum that We The People own.

Eminent Domain requires paying fair compensation, per the constitution, which means at least the fair market price, which is probably more than $10 billion the US government would have to pay to Qualcomm to "Eminent Domain that shit".

Comment Re:AI will drink software's milkshake (Score 1) 134

AI will drink software's milkshake

Who cares, as long as it brings all the Boys to the yard?

I understand NVidia has some products in this area, regarding machine learning, they are a chip maker after all.
So the claim could just be the typical sort of self-serving thing CxO's say, -- marketing message trying to pique peoples' interest in AI Silicon.

Comment Re:In case you wondered... (Score 1) 109

system gets hacked and flies the plane into a mountain with the pilots powerless to do anything about it.

The system need not allow that, just like current flight automation systems could deny the pilots' from doing that.

I don't think there's a material change of risk in that. Commercial planes ALREADY rely on automated navigation systems and software -- the pilots are already dependent on the computer, and already rely on consent of the computer to do any manual flying.

At least by having a ground security crew with additional monitoring, there can be some Benefit added to go with the risks.

Comment Re:In case you wondered... (Score 1) 109

Well, if the terrorists are already in the cockpit, all bets are off. Obviously. Do you have a better idea?

Yes -- PIN+Biometric; a Two-Person rule for opening the security door, multiple automation and redundant systems, and ground crews monitoring commercial flights with an ability to remotely override a rogue pilot.

Comment Re:In case you wondered... (Score 0) 109

However, the pilots can simply block entry with a single switch. Since they have 30 seconds to do so, this is not really a big security risk either.

Ok... This is a good idea UNLESS the hostile force is Already in the Cockpit, OR the emergency is so imminent that everyone will be dead in 30 seconds. So if the terrorist is already in the cockpit, they can just take their time and keep everyone locked out, AND use the locked steel door to protect the terrorist from the passengers, Passengers who now know about 9/11 and would likely make any sacrifice needed to stop terrorists, while they plan where to crash the plane, And the steel door becomes the liability for everyone, that's not very re-assuring.....

Comment No (Score 2) 303

Over the last few years, I have grown endlessly frustrated with Chrome's resource management,

Sorry..... SECURITY trumps resource management, and Chrome is much more secure than Opera thanks to being miles ahead in process sandboxing.

especially on MacOS. Admittedly, I open too many tabs, but I'd wager that a lot of you do, too.

So stop doing bad things. You've gotten into a lazy habit of holding too many tabs open. Yes, tabs have their place. Their place is not to have 10+ tabs open; if you find yourself opening more than 5 or 6, you need to concentrate efforts on bookmarking things to check back later and close tabs.

Comment Re:how is this unjust? (Score 1) 78

But I don't see this as a patent trolling. They invested to create those ideas.

Intellectual Property is not Ideas; it is the implementation of the Ideas....... Copyrightable code and Trade secrets.

If the product contains a copy of code owned by ZeniMax, then they're due royalties or an ability to deny Samsung the ability to make and/or profit from the product.

On the other hand, if there's no code in common, Samsung could potentially have a re-creation or an independent implementation not subject to their copyrights.

Comment Re:h8 crymes (Score 2) 486

Very few professionals need to communicate with a large audience. "Yo!" will suffice in general if it is in common usage.

The professors are forgetting that their job is to provide the service their customer (Their student) is paying a lot of money for.
If you want to dictate everything about this relationship, then become like Google and provide your service for free, take it or leave it.

Comment Re:Excluding the unfortunate exceptions (Score 1) 507

So...Windows shouldn't be used by small or medium-sized business without IT workstation teams then?

If you're a SMB, then it is vanishingly unlikely that an Update-induced outage will cause a critical interruption of business.
If it would, then either change your design, Develop a plan to mitigate Update-induced outage, OR else, it really is worth paying
for the team to do this right.

ON THE OTHER HAND, a Security-breach-induced-outage could very well put you out of business;
if Uptime of this application is as critical as you would like to suggest.

Comment Re:Excluding the unfortunate exceptions (Score 2, Insightful) 507

Makes sense, but not an excuse for turning off Updates.

How about your company's team (with the prod. servers) does their job, then? And tests and Rolls out the updates BEFORE Windows update automatically installs it.

Leave Windows Update Enabled, schedule all new updates to install on X Day; However, If Windows updates rolls out the patch its own, then YOUR TEAM failed to conduct its job appropriately, which was to perform a controlled rollout in a timely manner (BEFORE The update is a week old, And the failsafe triggers to protect your organization's security).

Comment Re:The government wont stop this stuff (Score 1) 323

throw a bunch of lobbying money at world governments to get laws passed to stop the hoarding.

If not world governments, then Cybercriminals. They're all the same.

How about putting that money towards making software that is actually secure, starting with network protocols?

This SMBv1 bug would have been a non-issue had the SMB service been sandboxed such that arbitrary code running as the SMB service cannot initiate an outbound connection or Modify files except after passing through a user credential for a particular Instance of the service process.

Slashdot Top Deals

Counting in binary is just like counting in decimal -- if you are all thumbs. -- Glaser and Way