Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


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

Comment Re:Until Data Collection is 100% Removed... (Score 1) 202

I'm not defending MS, as an IT guy I lay the blame for this crap at their feet. But if I were paying someone to manage my IT for me, I'd expect them to prevent this stuff rather than clean up after it. Out of interest, how were you handling updates and upgrades before MS forced them upon you in Windows 10?

Comment Re:Until Data Collection is 100% Removed... (Score 1) 202

Microsoft shouldn't be forcing these updates by default, sure. But they did, and it was hardly a secret so you could have taken action beforehand and disabled the updates before they caused disaster. By the way, removing programs only happens on major updates of Windows, which should be treated as any major upgrade: with tests, rollback plans, and contacting the vendors of mission critical software about known compatibility issues. Those updates certainly should not be automatic... or be allowed by an administrator to proceed automatically.

Comment Re: Not sure what to think.... (Score 2) 760

It's not as clear cut as all that; not all muslims interpret their texts in tbe same way. For instance last year a bunch of top Islamic leaders and scholars in Pakistan issued a fatwa to the effect that post-op transgenders are to be afforded full marriage and inheritance rights according to their "reassigned" gender. They do not recognise or allow gay marriage, but a man-turned-woman can marry a man and the other way around.

Comment Re:Not sure what to think.... (Score 1) 760

I interpreted that as meaning that he was not able to do that, rather than just being unwilling.

Which was probably exactly what he intended. Either Obama didn't know the law allowed a pardon before a conviction, which I find very hard to believe, or he intended to say he wouldn't while giving the impression that he couldn't. Technically correct (the best kind of correct), but rather sleazy. Then again, he did study law...

Comment Re:If irreversible, why not let it continue natura (Score 1) 458

That tax break is not for the 1% but for middle class people who could not afford an electric car without it, or wouldn't otherwise want to spend the full amount on such a vehicle. That in turn has made the market for electric cars an attractive one, where it is economically viable to design, manufacture and sell EVs in larger numbers. With the market (and infrastructure) for EVs reaching a certain critical mass, there's a huge incentive to research technologies to further drive down prices and/or increase range and efficiency. Some believe that the critical mass has already been reached, which makes further electrification "an irreversible trend." This would probably have happened without subsidies as well, but a lot later. And once the market takes off, subsidies can be decreased. In my country this is already happening; the Luxury/Pollution Tax on EVs is still 0% I believe (this tax exceeds the factory price for the more ridiculous SUVs), but companies no longer get the Small Scale Environmental Investment subsidy when they buy an EV, and the income tax payable on company cars is no longer 0% either.

Comment Re:Emergency response (Score 1) 139

Helicopters? Expensive to run and they certainly cannot land everywhere. This vehicle looks like it can land in most places where there are no overhead obstructions, and if the cost can drop to where it becomes a viable mode of public transport, hospitals could replace their one helicopter with a whole fleet of these.

Comment Re:Emergency response (Score 1) 139

Self driving cars will also help alleviate congestion, when there are enough of them. They can drive bumper to bumper. At intersections they can just keep going at speed, passing each other after a short negotiation and small speed adjustment to create and time the right gaps in the flow of traffic, with the traffic lights turned off. (The traffic light would need to be smart as well; it would turn on again when a manually driven vehicle approaches)

Comment Re:Should have gone with blackberry... (Score 1) 70

BYOD isn't a cost-saver, it's a matter of convenience. And playing on private phones has nothing to do with it (so sick and tired of that old "Blackberry is a business tool; iPhone / Android is a toy"-line).

Most employees prefer using their private phones for work stuff over having to carry a second phone, and BYOD can also be offered to employees who formerly did not qualify for a company phone. For a while, having a BB was something of a status symbol, but as soon as companies figured out how to make BYOD secure enough, most people got rid of them even if they didn't have to. The hold-outs who kept their BBs were seen as dinosaurs. The "current state of affairs" at places that did BYOD the right way is just fine and dandy.

Comment Re:In other news (Score 1) 70

Most of my clients that implemented this saw BYOD as a win-win: they no longer have to provide company phones, and most employees seem to prefer using their private phone for business stuff (and bearing the costs as well) over having to carry 2 phones. In case where the employee had a choice between a company phone or BYOD, almost everyone ditched their Blackberry and used their personal device instead. And it certainly was seen as a win by employees who did not qualify for a company phone, but now have access to their work email, agenda, directory and IM service.

Comment Re:This is starting to happen in a lot of places.. (Score 1) 70

Nope, this have nothing to do with private chats or calls during work hours. They cannot ban Whatsapp from private phones, only require that they are removed from private phones that are enrolled in their BYOD infrastructure (on Android and iOS, you can enforce this too). Instead of having a policy that requires employees to only use business-approved channels for business-related communications (and perhaps reinforce that policy with a short mandatory CYA* E-learning course), they opt for the easiest way to comply. As always.

*) CYA = Cover Your Arse.

Comment Re:Triphenyl phosphate (Score 2) 71

Free market economies give us a choice... of course "us" means that sometimes others will do the choosing for you. Phone manufacturers prefer batteries with higher energy densities that are (usually) safe enough, over more expensive batteries that might let the owners of those phones keep theirs a little but longer. And if this flame retardant makes the battery (and the phone) a little bit bulkier, then manufacturers will not use it either. Especially Apple, since they need to placate the growing mob of belligerent protesters outside their HQ screaming for even thinner phones. Because above all we want thinner phones. Right?

Slashdot Top Deals

Don't tell me how hard you work. Tell me how much you get done. -- James J. Ling