Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


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! ×

Submission + - SPAM: Quicken Bill Pay is No Longer Safe to Use 1

Bruce Perens writes: I don't usually make security calls, but when a company makes egregious and really clueless security mistakes, it's often the case that the only way to attract their attention and get the issue fixed is to publicize it. This one is with Quicken Bill Pay, a product of Metavante (not Intuit). It's from personal observation rather than an expert witness case, and the company has been unresponsive through their customer support channel.
Link to Original Source

Comment Abandoning Time-Worn Processes Leads to Atrophy (Score 5, Insightful) 156

Scientists determined that those people who made use of machine washing rather than hand washing had diminished hand strength and neurological motor communication necessary for fine motor control. Seamstresses who bought thread rather than using the spinning jenny were similarly impaired. But worst off were teamsters who used the internal combustion trucks rather than teams of horses and used forklifts and other mechanical devices rather than loading their vehicles by hand. Their overall body strength was much reduced.

Comment It was staff at Gallaudet University who sued (Score 1) 337

Gallaudet University is a school for the deaf. They (Glenn Lockhart and Stacy Nowak) wanted to use the content for their coursework, but couldn't use it as is, so instead of providing closed captioning themselves or work something out for the specific material they were interested in they decided to sue Berkeley.

Sadly this is not made clear in the submissions to slashdot, so speculations run amok about ambulance chasing attorneys and some deaf students suing.

I hope Glenn and Stacy are happy with their result.

Comment Re:In other words... (Score 3, Insightful) 93

Just make sure that hub isn't plugged into a computer, since the stick could have a malicious data payload. Note, though, that the same company that makes the USB Kill Stick also makes a plug in surge suppressor that protects USB ports against the Kill Stick. I'm sure they're planning on selling them to people like law enforcement who have to worry about malicious hardware.

Just remember, the only people who win in an arms race are arms manufacturers.

Comment Let me get this straight... (Score 1) 124

You bought a device from a company that makes most of it's money from ads and you're surprised when it said device suddenly has ads... I'm not shocked about this and I'm surprised it took this long...

I'm just surprised it wasn't like "Hey, I've checked your schedule and you've got a couple free hours tonight, based on your movie preferences you'll like Beauty and the Beast! It's showing at a theater that's 1.5 miles away from you! Would you like to purchase advanced tickets?"

Comment Re:There can only be one response. Get a Rope (Score 1) 542

I challenge anyone here to name a remake that was better than the original.

Ben Hur (1959) springs immediately to mind. A number of movies in various comic book franchises would probably also qualify. Does anyone really think the Adam West Batman movie was better than the Tim Burton version? (I can get that some people might prefer the Tim Burton version to the Christopher Nolan version, though that would be more of a judgment call.)

It's also good to remember that the whole reason people tend to do remakes is because the original was good enough to be worth copying. With the possible exception of movies based on an original work in another medium (book, play, graphic novel, etc.), nobody is going to bother making a remake of a stinker. They're going to pick the stuff that was great and successful to copy, which inherently disadvantages the remake because it's being compared to something good.

Comment Re:"Human Colleague"... Nope, You Just Don't Get I (Score 1) 407

Clarke did very little writing on robot brains.

Um, I'll have to assume that you weren't around for April, 1968, when the leading AI in popular culture for a long, long, time was introduced in a Kubrick and Clarke screenplay and what probably should have been attributed as a Clarke and Kubrick novel. And a key element of that screenplay was a priority conflict in the AI.

Comment Re:"Human Colleague"... Nope, You Just Don't Get I (Score 1) 407

Well, you've just given up the argument, and have basically agreed that strong AI is impossible

Not at all. Strong AI is not necessary to the argument. It is perfectly possible for an unconscious machine not considered "strong AI" to act upon Asimov's Laws. They're just rules for a program to act upon.

In addition, it is not necessary for Artificial General Intelligence to be conscious.

Mind is a phenomenon of healthy living brain and is seen no where else.

We have a lot to learn of consciousness yet. But what we have learned so far seems to indicate that consciousness is a story that the brain tells itself, and is not particularly related to how the brain actually works. Descartes self-referential attempt aside, it would be difficult for any of us to actually prove that we are conscious.

Slashdot Top Deals

Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (5) All right, who's the wiseguy who stuck this trigraph stuff in here?