Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Cool Cool (Score 1) 51

Trump could waive student debt and the republicans would stand up with tears in the eyes yelling bravo sir! Biden tried it and was immediately stopped by the courts.

Well, I think Trump would be immediately stopped by the courts, too. Probably faster than they stopped Biden, since they've very reasonably gotten intensely skeptical of almost everything this administration does.

Partisanship aside, presidents really should obey the law. If the law is bad, the solution is to change it, not to break it. Yes, that means we need a functioning Congress, something we haven't had for quite some time, but that's still no reason to break the law.

Comment Re: this sure reminds me of a time (Score 1) 63

I am late to the party and I was just going to read rather than comment, but your comment brought home the whole conversation here. Even when trashing people that have no respect for the truth or for you, it is of importance to you that the trashing is an accurate and fair comment. It so epitomises the difference we are talking about between people here. Sadly the Internet is not kind to people who enforce truth.

Indeed, truth and accuracy is important to me, and I think it should be important to everyone. It baffles me that so many people don't seem to care about whether what they believe or say is true. I recognize that those people who care are often in the minority, but that just makes it harder to understand, not easier.

Comment Re:this sure reminds me of a time (Score 1) 63

Had to look up his name to confirm this actually happened as I remembered it, but this reminds me of that time former Arizona Senator John Shadegg asked during a late 90s tour of a NOAA facility "Why do we need NOAA when I get my weather from the internet?"

Is that true? I can't find any reference to it, and it seems like the kind of thing that would be documented, if only to make fun of it.

Comment Re:And Broadcom doesn't really care. (Score 1) 65

Broadcom's strategy all along has been;

1. Buy VMWare.
2. Squeeze maximum short-term money out of it to earn back the purchase price plus a big profit.
3. Kill VMWare dead in five years because they'll have their money and they don't want to be bothered with it anymore.

And because they knew the product was going to die anyway. Open source alternatives have caught up and there's nothing to keep customers from switching.

This isn't a justification, but it's an explanation. If they thought VMWare would be a long-term cash cow, they would keep it going. They know that won't happen, so they've opted to squeeze as much cash from it as possible, as quickly as possible. They recognize that will accelerate its demise, but apparently believe it will make them more money, since they won't have to invest anything in maintaining or marketing it.

I'm surprised they aren't more worried about legal action, though. It seems like it would be safer to continue complying with the contracts, perhaps with far inferior (and far cheaper) support quality until those ended. As for the perpetual licenses, it would seem safest to just shrug and say "Yeah, you can keep using it, and we'll keep giving you every update we release", while cutting the engineering team down to nothing. The aggressive approach they're taking seems likely to net them some ugly fines after some uglier legal fees.

Comment Re:This is why "responsible disclosure" isn't (Score 1) 38

This isn't the first, or the tenth, or the hundredth time this has happened to some security researcher dealing with some company.

It's absolutely not even the thousandth time a researcher has submitted an invalid report, then whined about not getting paid for it.

Comment Re:We want to keep the backdoor a bit longer (Score 1) 38

Google Non-Specialist: Nice Catch!
Actual Engineering Team: It's not a bug. Proxied access through a Service Account is the whole point of what this product does. Maybe our docs should have more warnings or we should put in another layer like the competing tool if people are going to get confused and shoot themselves in the foot.
Google Non-Specialist: Invalid, but we'll keep a case open to idiot-proof already acceptable behavior.

This is correct. Mod parent up.

Comment Re:Seems defensible. (Score 1) 38

How would it have damaged Google to (a) give credit where it's due and (b) cut a $50,000 check?

For a report that isn't a vulnerability? Well, it would have cost them $50k, and they'd have gotten nothing for that money -- other than to encourage researchers to submit invalid reports.

Comment news, why ? (Score 1) 54

There are plenty of cities in western countries where drones are entirely prohibited and you need to drive to the countryside to fly it, observing various nature reserves and restricted airspaces.

It is also very common that training, a test or license, insurance, etc. are required.

The odd thing is that buying is restricted. Does that include ordering online?

Comment Re:Dictators (Score 3, Informative) 54

The restrictions are a mix of reasonable nuisance management and paranoia about who is flying drones, what they can do, and chain of custody.

Beijing proper is a city with a population density of over 21,000 / km^2 -- so you can imagine the chaos if any tech enthusiast resident could fly a drone without a permit. Except for a couple of free zones in the outer boroughs, New York City restricts drone launcing and landings within the city to flights with a permit and flight plan, because otherwise the sky would be black with drones. Many cities -- both red and blue -- have zone restrictions for drone flights, and those currently hosting World Cup matches have tightened them for the duration of the tournament.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Indecision is the basis of flexibility" -- button at a Science Fiction convention.

Working...