Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
Compare cell phone plans using Wirefly's innovative plan comparison tool ×

Comment Re:Rant: REBOOT the WEB (Score 2) 243

Because everyone has perfect sight, wants the same size browser window as the developer, browses at 100% zoom level, with the same fonts, on the same screen resolution, with the same sub-pixel rendering, right? Sure, we're all machines.

Those silly users with their 4K screens should just set them all to 1366x768 like the crappiest notebook LCDs! Jaggies forever! Screw mobile users, damn hipsters can get stuffed.

You're right. Fuck screen readers, accessibility, personalization and anyone with even the slightest disability (colourblind? Sure, we've got burnt umber on light green for you!). Because the designer's view of perfection is what everyone should see, dammit, even if they can't read a word. Design over function.

Of course, if you're being sarcastic, then sure. But you might want to make it more obvious.

Comment Re:As with so many "is it time" questions... no. (Score 2) 566

They're not that non-standard. Lots of them are USB3 nowadays, and the prices aren't THAT insane (e.g. $100-$300 depending what you need).

I've had a comparable one for my notebook and work notebook, it's two cables to be up and working with the high-res screen, mouse, keyboard, anything else USB and a GbE. It's almost easier than a model-specific dock because you don't have to work out where the locating pins go (but you do need to deal with the 4-dimensional USB connector). It's a short step from that to USB 3.1 single cable, with the dock delivering power and connectivity, and I fully expect Targus or their ilk to produce a "one size for all" - an adapter for the notebook power into the dock, and a single USB to the notebook.

Comment Re:Why conceal it? (Score 1) 740

Then where, exactly, should the information be provided? Does each product need to come with a paper leaflet? Do you assume all consumers have ubiquitous Internet access such that they can hit the company website to see what's in a product? Or should they all register all product recipes with a central government agency? In my experience if a company isn't forced to toe the line like this, the ingredients will be listed on the back of a tomato sauce sachet in 1pt yellow on white type, which can be found "on display in the the cellar, in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet, stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard." [Douglas Adams, paraphrased].

Comment Re:When is it going to be free (Score 2) 84

It's called LetsEncrypt. You only have to turn over appropriate access to your server to client software (even though to trust it you'd have to review the code or write it yourself). And your web server has to be able to access the LE servers, so you (currently at least) have to permit outbound access from a device providing the website (there are larger configs where you could mitigate that somewhat but this is the simple case).

The client hits the LE servers, gets a string to write to a server-specified location (/.well-known/acme-challenge/URI). Oh, and that retrieval by LE is done over HTTP, so there's NO chance that could ever be subverted.

Comment Re:Google knocks Apple, Bing and Microsoft (Score 4, Insightful) 84

And because we need to ~double the amount of data used by all the hamster forums, cat videos and aircraft curation guides, especially when a lot of the world's users are on slow or data-limited connections?

Look. I get that it's good to ensure that there's no injected content, and that you know you're connected to the site you want - but that's only true for 1% of the population. The rest of the world wouldn't know the difference between and Both "secure" because they're HTTPS, right?

Factor in all the browsers deciding that privately-signed sites are worse than plain http, that no-one needs to actually SEE the protocol, or the URL, that all the certs are issued by a cabal of companies who just see the benefit of charging for a NUMBER, but barely doing validation ... but sure. "Adding security". Right.

Comment Re:A solution in search of a problem.. (Score 2) 111

That's a ~95% solved problem and has been for decades. Room key on thick plastic block, block goes in a cradle inside the door, activating power to the room. Pull the key to leave and everything goes off.

Worked in the 90's at least when I started traveling for work, and it wasn't just in big city hotels then. Perspex blocks don't have to be smudge-free, don't need extra power of their own, won't break down, are significantly cheaper, can't be trivially hacked to screw with every other room in the hotel - no this is a solution looking for a problem.

Comment A mini ice age? Really? (Score 2, Insightful) 185

This is why no-one trusts the media. I doubt even the most fervent anti-CC campaigner believes this to be true. And while I don't think climate change itself is a hoax, I'm far less convinced that it's a death sentence (e.g. as far as I know we've had higher levels of CO2 in the atmosphere in the past without all life dying).

Comment Re:Hardware VPN device (Score 1) 173

Is this like the other Meraki stuff where you have to pay Cisco licensing each year to be able to continue to use and manage the hardware (without paying the license it's a brick)? If so it may not be the best solution (also consider - to manage the device you have to have it connected to the cloud, so if that connection goes away or gets flakey, you're SOL).

Plus you have the delightful experience of buying new hardware rather than continuing to use existing stuff if you don't want to pay the danegeld any more.

For those reasons I can't recommend Meraki kit (unless I'm wrong and it's changed) - try the Ubiquiti or Microtik kit instead, or Sophos Home Edition, or frankly anything else that doesn't have continuing payment requirements.

Comment Re:Will Power Shell become useful? (Score 1) 285

Because this is a direct outcome of configuring secure-by-default. It's there to stop people shooting themselves in the foot the first time they try. Don't like it? Try one of the FIFTEEN WAYS you can run a powershell script without requiring a policy change.

I personally prefer #9 but YMMV.

Comment Re:Clean room implementation? (Score 1) 223

And why should developers and other companies "benefit from Java API's good design with $0 license payment"? That's exactly why Oracle are introducing their Licensed Java Developer program. For only $10,000 per annum, you can be certified to write code that uses the Java API. If you're writing for a company, that company will need to be part of the Licensed Java Application program too, at $25,000 per annum. Extra programs can be brought under the same company umbrella for just $5,000 each. Please note that this program only covers internal applications used by staff, and interested organisations should ensure they comply with the Licensed Java User and Licensed Java Non-Staff User agreements. Applications and code delivered over the Internet will require the organisation owning the code to comply with the terms of the Licensed Java Internet Application agreement, and pay the annual $100,000 fee to Oracle.

You might need a few <sarcasm> tags there, but I do wonder how far Oracle will try to push this.

The next problem though is this. If the Java API is copyrighted, then _any_ API must also be copyrighted. Thus the following are also all copyrighted works which you can't use without the owner's permission:

  • * int main (int argc, char**argv)
  • * int swap (int a, int b)
  • * Any C/C++ header file
  • * Any object hierarchy, containing at least one class, method or property

You.can't specify a level of complexity (it will be gamed) so you cannot avoid even the simplest "API"s from being copyrighted. It's not quite "the end of the world" but it's a pretty good attempt.

Comment Re:"Need more info" (Score 1) 486

No, unless it is or can be economically comparable to costs at the time it is commercially available, it's next to useless. You seem to have forgotten inflation, price gouging, increases in demand from consumers etc.

You're suggesting that if it's commercially available in (say) 10 years, and approximately a 1:1 direct replacement for fossil diesel, it has to sell for about $2.80 a gallon (at today's prices from some presumably US site called "Daily Fuel Gauge Report"), even if fossil diesel is selling for $6.00 a gallon. That's illogical.

Slashdot Top Deals

System going down at 5 this afternoon to install scheduler bug.