Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Get HideMyAss! VPN, PC Mag's Top 10 VPNs of 2016 for 55% off for a Limited Time ×

Comment Re:Shitty refund policy (Score 4, Interesting) 129

If you could return the car brand new in the shinkwrap, never used, then perhaps a refund might make sense. But cars suffer wear and tear. The guy could have driven over a series of speed bumps at 30-40 miles an hour, doing significant damage that maynot yet be evident under a typical inspection. Plus already having an owner on the title affects value, and possibly even the next owner's ability to finance it as new rather than used. I don't think it's reasonable to expect a full refund, but I agree that "buy buy" is probably pretty misleading for the vast majority of customer.

Also, the reason he had to file the lawsuit is that he probably did want a full refund, rather than the buy back which surely was in the contract he signed (we can't go understanding what we signed, now can we).

Also, interesting thing about the guy's auto-park-fail video. First, he never shows us what's inside the garage, so who know what might be obstructing the cars path. 2nd, you notice the car stops it's autopark the very second that his motion sensitive garage light turns on. That seems like a very interesting coincidence.

Comment Printable instant tickets? (Score 4, Interesting) 44

WTF...the client, which is in the hands of thousands of potentially-hostile vendors, has control over the transaction and is allowed to decide whether it is committed or not AFTER receiving the winning/losing info?

But that implementation failure aside, I sure hope they fired whoever had the brilliant idea to have printable instant tickets. That's just insane. Having a printable ticket that is instantly identifiable as a winner/loser is just asking for fraud. Aside from the absolutely terrible design of the system in this story, even in a properly designed system, it would be easy to cheat. You setup a system that, when a ticket is printed, a computer scans it and decides if it's a winner. If it is, you keep it for yourself and instantly print up another ticket to hand over to the customer. This is exactly why almost all instant ticket have scratch off covering to conceal the answer and instantly identify tampering to the customer buying it.

Comment Re:Waze (Score 4, Interesting) 151

Exactly, and there's other apps too. I don't recall if it was in another slashdot discussion or somewhere else, but this topic came up recently and someone pointed to some sort of documentation or other official info on the matter. The gist of it was that apps only have a limited (short) amount of time to run in the background, and then they are forced to shut down. It then went on to say that certain apps that have permissions for certain things can continue to run.

So in summary, apps are not allowed to continue running in the background....unless they are allowed to do so. Which makes the entire argument of "you don't have to manually close them" complete bullshit. Maybe you don't need to for MOST apps, but there are still plenty that do have the permission to continue running.

Comment Re: Accidentally (Score 1) 387

We aren't talking about new versions. He was saying that they were going to later charge people to use the version of Windows 10 they upgrade to today

I don't think that's what he was saying. In fact, he explicitly said "All they have said is that it is free for the life of the device". So he was clearly saying it would be free forever on that device. Thus I thought his point was either, 1) they'll charge you when you upgrade to the next version (which as we can see from current situation, they like forcing down it your throat), or 2) they'll charge you for the same windows 10 once you need to buy a new device (which, if you want to put your tin foil hat on, they can control by forcing patches on you that decrease performance for your old hardware).

Comment Re:Banks should still roll a joint for you (Score 1) 471

Since when are banks that issue payment cards no longer willing to let a cardmember add a joint account holder?

Why would I want to become an authorized user and have her card show up on my credit report? The current system works very well.

Then perhaps that bank needs to Discover some cardmembers that aren't you.

LOL...with as much money as I've made off them? Not a chance. They've done many things to annoy me, but I've made about $2500 off them in the last 6 months alone. I can deal with separate accounts.

Very convoluted trail you are leading me down to avoid cookies.

Comment Re:Separate authentication from authorization (Score 1) 471

For simple browser tabs, I have no interest in multiple windows logins. And besides...that doesn't even address the 1 example I gave. I need to login to the same website with multiple credentials while keeping the tab open. I don't want to have to "switch user" every time I go back and forth. And I have no idea where you are going with the authorize-to-make-payments thing. To make the payments, I have to log into the bank's website with the appropriate credentials. And there's no way most banks are going to let me pay her card from my account. Hell...Discover, for example, won't even let me manage my own two cards from the same account...I need a separate online account for each card.

What does contributing browser extensions or patches accomplish? The specification itself needs to be fixed. And how do you suggest I "contrbute browser patches" to something like IE/Edge? And extensions serves no purpose, as only a minority of people install them. Even something as widespread as adblocking is only installed for something like 10% of users last time I checked.

Sorry, its just broken. Cookies, on the other hand, work perfectly fine for 99% of users. Good enough for me.

Comment Re: Basic auth or TLS client certificate (Score 1) 471

A user who is ending his or her browser session so that another user can begin a session will be closing all tabs anyway.

What? Says who? My wife and I login on the same browser all the time without closing tabs. In fact, I do this all the time when paying bills. Have one tab open with my online banking account, another tab open with my bills spreadsheet, open a 3rd tab to login to my credit card. I setup a payment to my card and log it in the spreadsheet. Logout on the 3rd tab, login to my wife's card account at the same bank, setup a payment on her card, log it in my spreadsheet. Then finally I use the online banking again to shift the necessary money between checking and saving.That's just one of many examples where we do that.

Beside that, there's just the matter of security. I'm not closing my browser because I need to keep pages open, but I want to logout of websites so that I'm no longer using. I shouldn't have to close all my tabs to do that

You're trying very hard to contrive some arrangement that makes basic authentication look like it's not utterly broken, but's utterly broken. Why do you think almost nobody uses it? Do you think nobody knows about it?

Slashdot Top Deals

These screamingly hilarious gogs ensure owners of X Ray Gogs to be the life of any party. -- X-Ray Gogs Instructions