Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


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

Comment Re:Just curious... (Score 1) 218

They found it because there is a whole bunch of Pluto-like objects out there, which is the whole reason it got demoted once this was recognized. Take ten thousand high-albedo objects (Pluto is at least partly high albedo), and say "point there, that's where we think it is" -- even if you really have no data, just a hunch -- and there's a good chance a dedicated observer will find something. They found Pluto not because it was Planet Nine, but because it was Dwarf Planet One of Thousands. While it was unlikely that they'd find that exact one, the chances of finding something substantially similar are much greater.

Comment Re:Doesn't really matter who fired the shot (Score 2) 334

The "must accept" clause simply means that the device needs to deal with such interference without aggravating the problem. Not by emitting more noise of its own to try to shout over it. It doesn't mean it has to remain in perpetual BOHICA mode.

A device isn't allowed to shoot back under Part 15 rules. That doesn't mean it has to be the goatse guy.

Comment Doesn't really matter who fired the shot (Score 5, Insightful) 334

It doesn't really matter who was firing the shot, so much as all those loaded, pwn3d weapons remaining in the wild that can be pressed into service again and again. This is not the first such event, it's at least the third. It won't be the last either, and the only way I can see to stop it is to permanently dismantle the IoT until it can be rebuilt from the ground up with security in mind. If security is too hard for the poor vendors and end users, then don't rebuild it. The health of the network as a whole is far more important than any single purpose for which it is used -- besides which, the devices can't be trusted to do their jobs anyhow once they've been pwn3d.

Make the vendors take them back in a recall -- could be a service recall in which they are made field-upgradable, or if they're hard-coded then they get the Galaxy Note 7 treatment as the hazards they are. Those who won't take them back should be cited under FCC Part 15 rules and have their certifications revoked and fines levied. It is easily provable that the devices are "causing harmful interference". It's time to get them off the network. Like yesterday.

Comment Make someone care, IoT device owners don't! (Score 1) 264

Time to demand recalls of all affected devices as the hazards that they are. Those who wish to keep them become responsible for what they do -- if your IoT "cloud" shits all over the network again, you get switched off.

If the end users don't care (and may not be able to care if they can't patch the devices), then it has to go a step up the food chain. If the manufacturers won't comply, pull their FCC certifications.

Comment Sometimes being first isn't the best plan. (Score 2) 254

Having a plan to survive interruptions in logistical support is literally a matter of life and death -- not just for interplanetary settlers, but even for ones just crossing an ocean. Rushing things when the support services are not yet developed is not exactly a safe plan. Bold, certainly, but quite possibly bordering on suicidal.

Comment Not just SSDs, but mSATA and M.2 (Score 1) 161

Yes, NVMe provides some real, quite quantifiable benefits. Provided that everything in the path supports it, there is simply no disadvantage other than cost. But it's not a necessity for SSDs to finish eroding the hard drive market, ultrabooks are doing that just fine by themselves. There is no room for a 2.5" drive, only mSATA or M.2. Even if that M.2 slot is SATA III and not NVMe, it still necessitates an SSD rather than spinning rust. Desktop motherboards are also shipping with M.2 slots on them, and if you lack one, a PCIe x4 card can make up for it.

SATA III is definitely getting long in the tooth, though I expect it to be around for many years. Read speeds on SSDs have been constrained by SATA III for at least three years now, and write speeds are as well in many cases. Although I'm pleased enough with my hacked C720 Chromebook, it would have been nice if it had NVMe rather than SATA III for its M.2 slot. (Never mind that I don't think there are any NVMe drives in 2242 form yet -- there will be.)

Slashdot Top Deals

To do two things at once is to do neither. -- Publilius Syrus