Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



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

Comment Re:not limitless (Score 4, Interesting) 170

$200 per head seems about right on price, if I had to hire some consultants to throw together a network for 3 days, then tear it all down, seems like a bargain

I dunno what prices you've been conned into paying, but that parses as gouging to me.

Consultants aren't necessary; Hofstra already has an IT infrastructure and staff in place. At worst, they'd have to deploy a couple dozen more WAPs and maybe a 24-port switch if you don't already have the ports free -- maybe USD$4000.00 worth of HW. Set up a new SSID for the reporters with a WPA2 login, which lands you on a temporary VLAN and subnet that routes directly to the Internet and nowhere else. Takes maybe a day to set up, and most of that is CS interns/undergrads pulling Cat.6 and placing WAPs/antennas.

After the debate, turn off the SSID, VLAN, and subnet -- you can pull out the WAPs (if you must) at your leisure. Put the HW away; save it for the next big event, or when an endowment arrives for the next building.

How does this justify $200/head? (Seriously; what am I not figuring here?)

Comment Mediacom Are Full of Shit (Score 1) 227

Once again, we have an entrenched, meritlessly entitled incumbent trying to get you to pay attention to the wrong thing. In this case, it's an insultingly laughable analogy that any moderately aware shopper will see right through.

To illustrate this, here's a tray of regular Oreos(TM), and here's a similarly sized tray of double-stuf(TM) Oreos(TM). And if you were to consider the per-cookie cost, as Mediacom is clearly hoping you will, then yes, double-stuf(TM) Oreos(TM) cost more than regular Oreos(TM).

But foodstuffs such as cookies are not sold by the cookie. They're sold by unit weight (or unit mass if you want to be pedantic). Considered this way, the per-ounce cost of the regular and double-stuf(TM) Oreos(TM) is virtually identical (in this case, about $0.26/oz from this retailer). So if Nabisco(TM) has no reason to charge a premium simply because you consume the cookies in larger units, Mediacom has no such reason, either.

So Mediacom are full of shit.

Comment I Knew There Was Something Fishy... (Score 5, Insightful) 165

A couple years ago, I set up a FreeNAS box to solve the problem of, "the file I want to work with is not on the machine in front of me." Once set up, I also wanted a media server so I could watch stuff on the TV in the living room. Many of the comments in the FreeNAS discussion fora spoke well of Plex, which is available for FreeNAS as a plugin jail. So I installed it and gave it a spin.

I immediately knew something was fishy when I tried to connect to the local server, and the login page didn't work. I run Firefox with NoScript installed. I had the local server IP whitelisted, but the page ignored all button clicks. I click on the NoScript icon... And discover that it's trying to pull in boatloads of JavaScript from Plex.tv.

"WRONG!" exclaimed I. The whole point of a local media server such as Plex is for all media-serving code and resources to be hosted locally on my server hardware. The moment you start reaching outside the LAN to do anything, you are no longer a local server.

This discovery basically shattered any alleged positive value Plex may have had, since its primary function -- the basis on which it was sold to me -- turned out to be a lie. I promptly uninstalled it.

Now, it seems Plex has dropped the pretense altogether, and are just another disk farm outside my control. Good luck with that, guys; I'm sure you'll be able to beat Apple, Google, and Amazon at that game.

Submission + - OpenSSL Patches Bug Created by Patch From Last Week

Trailrunner7 writes: Four days after releasing a new version that fixed several security problems, the OpenSSL maintainers have rushed out another version that patches a vulnerability introduced in version 1.1.0a on Sept. 22.

Last week, OpenSSL patched 14 security flaws in various versions of the software, which is the most widely used toolkit for implementing TLS. One of the vulnerabilities fixed in that release was a low-risk bug related to memory allocation in tls_get_message_header.

The problem is, the patch for that vulnerability actually introduced a separate critical bug. The new vulnerability, which is fixed in version 1.1.0b, only affected version 1.1.0a, but it can lead to arbitrary code execution.

Comment Re:Obligatory Mandy Rice-Davies (Score 1) 97

your OP made it clear that you were intending your comment as disparagement towards Apple

If you view the accusation of Apple's advice being self-serving as "disparagement", then this was already clearly implied in the original comment, then clearly (and explicitly) spelled out for you in my previous comments!

And you ad hominem attack against me, based on my username, confirms exactly that

Your original comment already smacked of defensive fanboyism before I'd even noticed your username or taken a look at any of your other comments (#); that simply confirmed it for me.

If you'd come across as an otherwise neutral observer with an Apple-related username, you'd have had a point; but this wasn't the case.

You seem to think that "ad hominem" is a universal retort to anyone noting your username; it's not. If it was being used to shut down an unarguably true and factually correct point, you might have a case. However, if one is simply using it as evidence that you're an Apple fan and that this may be reflected in matters of judgement and viewpoint, it's quite legitimate.

Now you claim that makes Apple no better than other OEMs. Conversely, however, it makes them no worse.

Don't think I was suggesting otherwise. If Sony had done something similar and we'd been discussing that, I'd have been equally happy to accuse them of being self-serving in the same manner.

Your problem is (I'm guessing) that- like a lot of fans of anything- you view everything in terms of pro- or anti- your favourite whatever, and assume that everyone else is arguing in terms of that mentality. Hence, criticism of Apple is attack specifically on Apple.

Nope. As far as the point being discussed here is concerned, they're just another corporation- albeit one that is both financially successful and good at getting talked about- exhibiting typical corporate behaviour.

(#) And having done that, I suspected that you might accuse me too of an "ad hominem" attack. I was correct.

Comment Re:Obligatory Mandy Rice-Davies (Score 1) 97

What would you expect them, or indeed any OEM, to say?

Er, I think you missed the point being made. That's precisely what I *would* have expected them to say, because it was in their own interest. Hence the quote.

Or perhaps your problem was with my implication that the motive was driven by their own self-interest, rather than pure, selfless concern for their users? Well, yeah.

Of course, by adding "or indeed any OEM", you're implying that this is an attack/persecution specifically towards Apple and that I'm biased. Nope; doubt I'm any more partisan than someone with the username "macs4all", and I'm sure that most similar corporations in Apple's position would have come up with a similarly self-serving answer. Doesn't make Apple any better than them, though.

Comment Okay, I'm lost now... (Score 2) 57

Am I the only person who's starting to lose track of who owns the rights to what after Nokia sold off its phone business to Microsoft?

I was under the impression that the right to use the "Nokia" name (which MS got the right to after buying the phone division) was due to expire after some time (#) and that was why MS were phasing it out.

The previous story linked in the summary seems to imply that MS sold off the ex-Nokia feature phone business to FIH, but they're still apparently making feature phones as "new Nokia phones" [my emphasis]

Yet Nokia itself announced it was licensing its name to a (different) manufactuer- HMD Global for similar purposes.

So what's going on? Does MS still own the name- or have a license to it- for smartphone and tablet use. Or has Nokia got it back? I can't see either party signing an agreement that would let them both use it for competing products in the same field (i.e. phones and tablets) at the same time; that sounds unworkable.

(#) This seems to be fairly typical when another company Y buys out X's widget division; they get the right to use X's name for a while (and presumably a non-compete from X, not that X is usually concerned with re-entering the field they've just left). I assume (for example) this is why the "Samsung" M3 external USB hard drives have been rebranded as "Maxtor" but remained otherwise identical- Seagate (who have long owned the Maxtor brand) bought out Samsung's HDD business a while back.

Comment Re:Smeg (Score 1) 153

It's one of dozens of cheap Coronation Street crossover shows and they've all done that. The Doctor Who one from way back was unwatchable despite the cast.

Are you thinking of the Doctor Who / EastEnders crossover they did to "celebrate" the 30th anniversary in 1993? That was eye-gougingly bad.

Slashdot Top Deals

A penny saved is a penny to squander. -- Ambrose Bierce

Working...