Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
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 Re:Who cares....its almost summer rerun time anywa (Score 2) 200

Netflix and Amazon series writers are all the same union as the broadcast nets. So it's more likely the new kids would look to license (more) archive material from the older networks, as the oldsters have a much deeper inventory. If recent Netflix and Amazon original shows make their way to the broadcasters more rapidly, the value of Netflix and Amazon original content to the consumer diminishes greatly.

Probably won't affect Netflix, Amazon, or Hulu. Their contracts are not broadcast contracts like ABC, NBC, CBS, etc have. I would expect they have their own streaming contracts, and Netflix at least is known for offering better deals than Hollywood and the Broadcasters when it comes to making their original content. Joint-Developed content, however, might suffer though.

The irony is that it may prevent them from licensing material to the broadcasters though.

Comment Re:Clone RFID (Score 1) 178

The RFID protocol

I think you're talking about one particular application/protocol, while i'm talking about a class of devices.

There's nothing stopping you from using RFID in more elaborate ways. Once you have something that knows sort of a private key, but without the ability to reveal the actual key, you're on smartcard-level security. And that was my whole point when saying

RFID chips can be made as impossible to clone as smart cards.

If you're using the RFID as a seed into something else (e.g a seed to generate a decryption key)...then yes, you're correct - you can use it in more elaborate ways; however, Smart Cards are not RFID; they're more akin to NFC - a separate standard that allows a lot more to take place for communications. RFID is a dead simple tech and extremely limited too; move beyond that and you're no longer doing RFID.

Comment Re:Clone RFID (Score 1) 178

RFID chips can be made as impossible to clone as smart cards. No, gaining access to the smart card contact pads won't help you in any way, neither will MITMing it.

IOW you're full of shit.

RFIDs are far simpler than Smart Cards, and a lot easier to clone. The RFID protocol just extracts a single integral value - what length of data, what is in the data, etc is completely up to whomever programmed the chip and determined by the chip used too. But in the end, it's not very secure, and often they're passively powered - meaning you just apply power and the RFID chip starts transmitting the number where actively might be able to do some other stuff too, but even then that's really just for when you don't have time to passively power the chip before reading it.

Once read, the chip value doesn't change, and can therefore be easily cloned. IOW - you could (in theory) use a rifle with a directional antennae to read an RFID chip from a fair distance away - this was proven years ago at a quite distance from the chip - https://www.theregister.co.uk/..., in part due to security concerns with RFID data being implanted into passports. Once you read the data, cloning is generally easily to do - just program a similar chip to emit the same value.

RFIDs are rather stupid in terms of data security and complexity. Typically the value is aligned with a value in a database somewhere - the RFID value being just an lookup in a column in the database; so minimal data is transferred and allowing the system to otherwise track it using other means.

So yes, copying RFID is trivial and by itself provides no means of verifiable authentication as a result; combined with other data (f.e a PIN number), however, it can work pretty well.

Comment Re:Fails a basic test... (Score 1) 88

I would go even further and say that just because instagram has some feature (like stories or whatever) doesn't mean that all users utilize that feature... I can't stand them, and I wish there was a way to disable them in instagram altogether. It's just an annoyance and consumes screen space that could be used for something interesting. That, plus the "live" (also stolen) feature are designed to keep you perpetually engaged in the platform through FOMO, "maybe you won't see something if you go offline for a few days."

Like FB's new "Your Story" and "Direct" taking up 3/4" (20mm) of screen space? Yeah...just as annoying.

Comment Fails a basic test... (Score 1) 88

...it assumes that all potential users of Snapchat would actually use Snapchat. That is *never* the case. So yes, FB might take *some* real potential users of Snapchat, but the majority are probably people that would never use Snapchat any way and only use it because it is in the FB app.

Personally, I won't use it either way - thus I'm not in that "potential user" category...but you shouldn't make that assumption - it's a really bad one.

Comment Re:Dedicated patent courts. (Score 1) 55

We have dedicated courts specifically for Bankruptcy and Immigration. We need a dedicated court for both Patent and Malpractice issues.

We have dedicated courts for Patents, that's a good bit of the problem. Congress created it to take the load off SCOTUS (who use to be the sole arbiter of patents cases); since then NPE's have arisen and it's become a nightmare for everyone.

Comment Re:Not everyone is happy... (Score 1) 110

They don't have to "Sign it away to heirs". Copyrights automatically become property of their estate, Unless they put in a legal structure to explicitly donate that asset, and their heirs will ultimately direct the disposition.

And the Executor of the Estate has to usually be convinced of to do what is being asked, they often have not understanding of the field, etc - so it's usually a very long, hard road; usually code gets rewritten in those cases.

Comment Re:Can allow specific license changes (any version (Score 1) 110

The standard GPL license has a clause allowing the code to be distributed under the current license *or any future version* of the GPL license.

That's not part of the GPL AFAIK, rather it's the language some developers (not all) put into the code files that they are licensing. Personally, I don't do that and any version of the GPL that does auto-include such language is something I'd avoid. Sure, I trust the license that I am using now but I don't necessarily trust a newer version to do something I don't approve of.

Comment Re:Misses the main problem (Score 1) 75

It's easy to do your own programming on your own computer. It's only through the trap of sloppiness one would use their employer's equipment. That's one reason it's nice the California law focuses on that: make some minimal effort to partition your life, and in return get some (unfortunately minimal) protection. Likewise, "free time" for someone on salary is meaningless. The problem is entirely "existing or prospective," which this policy doesn't seem to change from the California baseline. It's onerous because:

- you are likely to be interested in similar things to your work, otherwise you wouldn't have taken the job.

- for large companies the category is incredibly broad. For example, at Google it would cover basically anything, so the pattern of discretion that their judgement committee exercises determines how onerous this rule is, not the law, and not the policy.

Well, this may be something that is more unique to GitHub (and similar companies - GitLab, BitBucket, etc) where the companies product is something it's employees would like to use on their own for their own projects. Essentially, if they were an employee of GitHub under most normal policies they wouldn't be able to use GitHub for their personal work or contributing to projects hosted by GitHub as that would be using "company resources". So the change is slight in that it is really just allowing their employees to use their product - which has become a standard in the industry - for the employee's personal works without GitHub being able to claim ownership of random things.

And in all honesty, when I talk to employers about jobs I make sure to have something similar - I have my own projects that I am working on, and while I avoid using company resources for those projects, I still want clarity that it's mine and the company can't take it or I don't sign.

Comment Re: Stop discussing vaporware (Score 1) 251

It's a nice snarky response, but not appropriate for lab technologies. Lab prototypes are not exactly like commercial cells; they tend to be heavy and/or require a lot of supporting hardware and/or are sensitive to their operating conditions and/or other issues. The potential of a technology that's been researched in the lab requires analysis; turning it into finished commercial products takes money. You can't just say "send me a working battery" as if things pop straight from lab tech to some sealed product that blows refined commercial products off the market.

Thankfully, at least from reading the paper, the tech being utilized here doesn't sound particularly complicated to build. Hopefully there will be some outside attempts to reproduce it soon. If outside attempts confirm the results, then it can start to come time to think about making it into actual battery products. Although they're going to need to have a firm understanding of exactly what's going on in order to be able to optimize it. If outside attempts can't reproduce it? Then there's a good chance it'll go down the cold fusion route.

To which they could just invite him to the lab. The snarky response is mostly to keep away people that are just tossing out theories with no proof. Musk would probably be glad to stop by and see a working prototype, get the explanation, and then participate in the validation phases. But it keeps away the people asking for research money saying "I can do X if you give me $YYYYYYYYY" - he's not interested in funding that.

Comment Re:Mozilla further alienates it's user base (Score 1) 322

Mozilla is largely use to be used by tech-savvy people. I use it because I can mod the living daylights out of it, from about:config, to the way it acts, looks, performs using on-baord tweaks or add-ons. No other browser allows this level of customisation. Mozilla are losing users because they cannot leave well enough alone.

FTFY. With changes Mozilla is making, they are quickly killing their long time user-base. By FF57 they will have probably 50% of their current users.

I've been a long fan of Firefox due to the TabGroups (Panorama) functionality. FF57 will see an end to that as the new API that the add-ons must use can't support it. Add on to that the massive memory/cpu bloating that has gone on lately, and Firefox is being replaced more and more with Chrome.

Comment Re:I can't believe this is considered acceptable. (Score 1) 322

I've come to the conclusion that there's only about 500 Linux desktop users in the WORLD who have PulseAudio problems. They're all the same people posting on forums about it.

Every other Linux desktop user uses the distro default which is usually PulseAudio, and it works.

KDE-based distros do not. They use GStreamer instead because of the hell that is PulseAudio.

Comment Re:This is silly (Score 1) 322

While I quite like PulseAudio, does it even run on anything but ALSA? And would therefore maintaining the old ALSA-only codepath in parallel not be much of an imposition?

Qt and KDE replaced dependency on PulseAudio and GStreamer with Phonon (developed by KDE, and for a while part of Qt) because supporting multiple backends was a PITA and PulseAudio made it even worse.

Anyone in their right mind would not use PulseAudio - another bastard child of Poettering that he developed before systemd.

Comment Re: This is silly (Score 2) 322

What benefit do Firefox users get?

Future compatibility for when systemd wraps pulseaudio into itself. You know it's coming.

GIven PulseAudio was also written by Poettering I'm surprised it hasn't been already.

That said, PulseAudio is another bastard that needs to die a horrible death. KDE/Qt riped it out long ago because of the issues in favor of GStreamer.

Comment Re:The death of an industry (Score 1) 164

Don't confuse a TV with "TV" the service.

A TV is just a display device, and IMHO though I don't subscribe to any cable or satellite services, I still find kicking back on my couch a LOT more comfortable than trying to hold up my smartphone in front of my face (much less 12" away - the eye strain from that would be horrible).

Probably 90% of the video I watch these days is Youtube (with the reamining 10% Netflix) but I still do so on a Roku stick on my TV downstairs.

If I can, I watch it on the computer, but I'll put the phone/tablet down some where - on an arm of a chair, on the back of the couch (while standing to fold laundry), propped up on the counter (while washing dishes), etc...I don't hold it 12" from my face, but it's highly portable so I can keep watching as I move around.

Slashdot Top Deals

Enzymes are things invented by biologists that explain things which otherwise require harder thinking. -- Jerome Lettvin

Working...