Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


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

Comment you're an idiot if you believe this (Score 1) 201

I don't mean if you believed the drill guy, I mean if you believe this story about other people believing him is real.

People like to tell a good story, to be seen on youtube, etc. Even if you think everyone is dumber than you you have to be a bit smarter than to fall for this.

Comment people always do this (Score 3, Insightful) 106

People are idiots. Some want attention. Some want ad revenue. Some just are bored or something. This kind of thing always happens. It surely happens to Samsung's competitors too. It definitely happened to Toyota during the Prius acceleration scare (and surely Audi too so long ago).

You shouldn't take all reports as gospel. This shouldn't make you think, you should always be thinking.

In the end what really matters is whether Note 7s were experiencing battery fires at a higher rate than normal. And the answer still appears to be yes, clearly yes. So Samsung did the right thing with the recall.

Comment this isn't an external brute force attack (Score 4, Informative) 66

This attack is still done on device. It just clones the NAND back to "0 strikes" after each 6 attempts.

This attack doesn't extract the memory and doesn't decode externally. It just copies NANDs.

Why is this significant? Because it means you can't do extraction in parallel, you still have to go through all the codes sequentially on the device.

It defeats the significant portions of the backoff. It defeats the erase after n failures. It's a very significant attack.

But no one said this type of attack was impossible. I personally read about variants on this attack while the controversy was going on. I even posited it myself. I believe Apple even addressed it claiming that this attack wasn't possible on later iPhones due to a change in how the failure count is stored.

Comment okay Netflix, then why do you have stream limits? (Score 1) 160

Why does Netflix have a limit of concurrent streams and they charge more for more streams? If Netflix is serious about having various levels of service at different prices is unacceptable Netflix should lead the way by going to a single fixed price for all customers.

4K or not, any number of concurrent streams, etc. It all could be the same price.

The reason why it isn't is the same reason ISPs don't charge everyone the same price. You can make more money by offering differentiated services at different prices.

Comment their upsell system sucks (Score 1) 341

This happens over and over at companies who incentivize their customer service people to push services and accounts. If you ever go to Wells Fargo they always try to shift you into a new kind of account or something. And so I'm sure if not enough people walk in they just resort to making up fake people or changing account signups for people who didn't even show up.

Creating this kind of structure is bad business and leads to dumb things like this.. Companies shouldn't be so stupid as to make this mistake over and over.

Comment VCs didn't get rich sharing money (Score 0) 43

They don't get rich by sharing their returns with non-investors.

He likely has either been diluted or owns a class of shares which will be diluted.

They didn't give out those shares because they actually wanted to make someone rich, but as a promotional effort. Once the promotion was accomplished they immediately had plenty of reason to begin cutting the guy out of the deal.

It's weird that the original (fusion) article switches between saying they are options and they are shares.

Comment Re:the CO2 improvements are minor at best (Score 1) 64

> False. This fix does not substantially affect mileage.

What fix? This is not a fix. It doesn't actually bring the car into compliance. If gas cars were allowed to exceed emissions then they also would be more efficient.

> Gassers make just as much particulate, but it's of the most hazardous type, which means their particulate emissions are actually worse than diesel.

That's only true of direct injected gas engines. This is why I said "depending on the car you compare to". Either way, gas cars, even DI ones, are within the legal limits. These Diesels are not, even after the fix.

> Gasoline also has to be refined more than diesel

This isn't true anymore. Diesel is a highly refined product now also. Clean emissions requires clean and homogeneous input fuel and that means more processing.

> Gasoline engines are shit for the environment.

As are Diesels.

> You know that battery electrolyte isn't recycled, right? It's just disposed of and then replaced.

When? Look at the study on 15 year old Priuses, they virtually all have their original batteries. The battery isn't highly recyclable (yet), but the savings on fuel more than makes up for it. You're barking up the wrong tree here. Hybrids are a net win, even with the material of the battery accounted for.

> But I live in the boonies, so I would still have to do most of my driving on liquid fuel. And they are also quite expensive, to boot.

Not everyone is you. And in the US (which this article is about) Diesels aren't cheap either. Oh yeah, and they've been cheating too. They're not going to get cheaper when they add the equipment needed to conform to emissions regulations.

> My prior car was a 300SD, which was a bit better on mileage and which ran on a more environmentally-friendly fuel.

That car is a rolling smog bank and you are trying to talk about how your input fuel was renewable? Seriously, have you looked at the emissions standards it was required to conform? They were a joke in the US and a double joke in Europe. It's far filthier than its contemporary gas cars and really bad compares to any modern car of any sort.

Slashdot Top Deals

If in any problem you find yourself doing an immense amount of work, the answer can be obtained by simple inspection.