Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment The war is not lost (Score 1) 260

"Standard" is just a label you give to a proposal. Right now all effort has been focussed on preventing to stick that label on EME. I think that effort could have been spent better.

You can for example make browser vendors adopt only DRM plugins that charge money for each visit, that will drive away all the little websites and makes every website owner think twice before they put their video under EME DRM. Really the worst that can happen now is that every video website on the web starts putting all their video into this EME DRM. This is what the actual war is about.

However, you can't introduce such a payment barrier overnight, as there is still flash. Users must uninstall flash in large numbers, and once browsers don't offer the flash plugin any more, you can make websites pay. So first step, petition people you know to uninstall flash, and all other plugins, maybe uninstall it yourself, and then as second step petition website owners which require flash to drop that requirement. Petitioning while you still have flash enabled may be more comfortable, but it sort of misses the point.

Comment Re:Speak password out loud? (Score 2) 54

Yes, but if that is the point, why not let the user speak the username instead of the password? After all if you say it out loud, it can be intercepted much more easily (not all people are proficient with reading people typing keystrokes, although you should consider this too, and probably cover yourself when you type in your password), so there is no sense in keeping the spoken phrase secret.

Comment Re:Its too early IMO (Score 1) 202

OMG, you mean if the technology doesn't work and people give it a bad reputation because it doesn't work that's somehow "horrible"?

No, of course the reasoning is sound, but it would be horrible overall if the technology would be demonized and all its development on it abandoned before it even had the chance to mature because some people thought it already was mature enough to completely go driverless.

Comment Its too early IMO (Score 2, Insightful) 202

I think its too early for autonomous cars to drive around without drivers. Imagine what happens when an accident occurs. Then the technology will be demonized. That would be horrible. Only allow autonomous cars to drive around without drivers once you are certain they are not just better than the average driver, but than 95% of all human drivers.

But I guess its like with most people who have a risky driving style: they say "who cares", until something horrible happens due to that carelessness, and then they are either unable to say anything any more, or are terribly sad.

Comment Re:Fantastic, really. (Score 5, Insightful) 306

Wouldn't it make more sense to dominate the battery market?

No, it makes more sense to produce shitty and expensive products whose quality degrades over lifetime than to sell products where the customer buys it once and is so happy with it they don't need to buy it again.

In fact, many products in the world have gotten planned obsolescence put into the product so that you have to buy a new one over time.

Ever heard of the light bulb cartel?

Comment Re:Companies doing fine; not comsumers (Score 2) 319

And its made harder for many companies to make money once net neutrality gets removed. It essentially brings ISPs into the position to extort large sums of money from the service providers, and obviously on their own discretion. So it harms all companies which provide a service. Net neutrality also drives innovation by giving new and young service providers a more equal playing field with more established ones. Google can just say "well, then search, youtube and drive will be utterly slow", and can use this as leverage, but smaller companies don't have this lever. So it is against innovation and this is ultimately bad for the service provided to customers, and for the economy. The only ones profiting are the big ISP monopolists, but nobody else does.

Comment Re:Also gets rid of Steam (Score 1) 307

The more Microsoft continues work on its store, the more Valve will invest in SteamOS. Unless they want Steam to be history...

Also, never forget the network effects. Right now if steam is not working, nobody would like to use microsoft where only the store works.

Comment Its about taxes (Score 5, Insightful) 307

Microsoft sells this as important step against bloatware/malware, but this coudn't be further from the truth. Windows 10 desktops come preloaded with bloatware, and often it re-installs itself after you have removed it. The real motivation for microsoft to do this is because the model of making a limited app store and then taxing every app a big amount (30% usually) has been very successful on the mobile market and they want this for windows too.

Slashdot Top Deals

Work continues in this area. -- DEC's SPR-Answering-Automaton