Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re: The answer isn't begging for money owed. (Score 1) 223

If you closed the loopholes, the corporations that actually paid for them would get upset. The only reason people are in a tizzy about Apple, Google, Amazon, and company is that they were clever enough to realize that, once on the books, the tax laws are available for anyone to use. If they'd paid their Danegeld to the appropriate politicos like Halliburton, Bechtel, Accenture (Arthur Anderson under their new name), and the like have done, there would be no issues raised.

Comment Re:Do a dutch auction (Score 1) 171

That works for performers whose sole revenue stream is their stage performance, but for performers who depend on revenue streams outside of the stage performance (e.g. selling albums), selling via auction would likely harm their long-term profits since they'd effectively be limiting their addressable market.

Right now, most musicians sell tickets for less than their actual worth (hence why scalpers are flourishing) as a way of rewarding their fans for their dedication. After all, up until relatively recently anyone willing to camp at a ticket booth/website could get a ticket fairly easily, simply because a willingness to camp was the constraining factor, rather than the money. But the artists weren't acting altruistically by pricing tickets like that. They were ensuring that anyone at all could become a dedicated fan, because doing so ensures that they have a steady revenue stream from album sales and other paraphernalia. There are only so many seats that can be filled at your performances, but there isn't a cap on how many albums you can sell. More fans = more sales, so you want to make the seats attainable in order to attract more fans who will buy your other items.

A rich fan may pay more for a seat, but they generally won't buy more albums than the next fan on the street, so if you limit your addressable market to the rich by pricing the tickets out of reach for the everyman, you're limiting your revenue from secondary sources. Again, that works fine if you're making the lion's share of your money at your stage performances (e.g. circuses, operas, etc.), but it doesn't work so well if you want to increase the number of people interested in you so that you can drive up sales of secondary items.

Comment Re:Depends on price (Score 1) 309

Even $25 is a lot to ask for someone such as myself. We have two national theater chains in the college town where I live, and their prices for tickets are ridiculously cheap. I have a pretty decent entertainment setup, but I can't compete with the big screen. When IMAX tickets are $7.75 each and regular tickets are $4.75 each, why would I choose to pay more for a worse experience?

Admittedly, the value proposition will be a lot different for others, particularly those with larger families, given that the ticket prices here in my town are unusually low (not that I'm complaining!), but regardless of where I live, I'd consider it a non-starter if it costs anything more than COST_OF_TICKET * FAMILY_MEMBERS_WANTING_TO_SEE_FILM. At that point, you're break-even on the cost, so all you're doing is trading the big screen experience for the convenience of watching on your own terms, which may be worth it on occasion.

Comment Re:Well... (Score 1) 104

No, what he is referring to is that you get into a command shell, you can invoke an unsigned PowerShell script with PowerShell.exe -file. But that's not much different than source in bash.

But it's hard to imagine a social engineering attack that would get a user to download a file and then get them into a CLI session to override execute flags or signing to invoke the script file.

Comment Re:Not that big a leap (but I doubt OOP @ times) (Score 1) 104

This is one of the reasons micro kernels have a much more manageable security model. The problem being microkernels have some performance penalties that, at least in previous generations of CPUs, lead most OS developers to work in monolithic or mixed models. Yes, there are user space device drivers, so there has been a lot of work done to move device drivers a lot further away from Ring 0 and Ring 1, but even this simply makes monolithic kernels even more complex, and complexity is always the enemy of security.

Comment Re:(bash|sh|ksh|zsh) && !PowerShell (Score 1) 104

The kinds of vulnerabilities that PowerShell suffers would be suffered by any operating system that has a fairly comprehensive scripting language. The issue simply is if you can automate OS functions like creating, altering or deleting files and other system resources, someone can write a malicious script that, if run even in an non-super user context, can wreak havoc, but if run in a super user or similar higher access context can lead to enormous damage or to compromised systems. There are ways to mitigate this for both Windows and *nix, but more often than not you have to be proactive about it.

Slashdot Top Deals

Research is what I'm doing when I don't know what I'm doing. -- Wernher von Braun

Working...