Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Get HideMyAss! VPN, PC Mag's Top 10 VPNs of 2016 for 55% off for a Limited Time ×

Comment Do not look into laser with remaining eye (Score 1) 21

A pupil's response can be imitated with a video in response to the flash. I work with several types of eye trackers fairly frequently, the eye is relatively slow in responding to stimuli, it's definitely within the realm of a cell phone to play back the image of an eye and it's iris in response, in time to one of these flashes.

The problem with biometric is that it is considered the end-all of security system whereas it should be considered only part of something (who you are, what you know, ...)

Comment Re:Communism spreads the poverty (Score 1) 325

It does somewhat work as long as there are resources that are easily produced and exported to capitalistic countries. Once production halts, people will fight for their own and those with the power will win. It would require the entire world economy to go communist and it stops when one faction goes capitalist (saving up a single resource to drive prices up and starve out their neighbors creating an inequality of resources, poor and wealthy).

Comment Several problems (Score 1) 325

Consumers wanting to consume whatever they want; to sustain this model I need to always earn more than my neighbor. In effect the equation calls for an infinite source of money on the bottom end to sustain the consumer consuming what the upper classes produce. Only in that case can the middle class maintain being richer than the consumer. Middle classers are also human, if I could spend every day with my kids or toys and not worry about either time or money, I'd be very wealthy and not go to work even though my job is very good.

Comment Re:Code doesn't need punctuation (Score 1) 196

The problem is and remains readability, not testability. You can perfectly test minified JavaScript (all the superfluous is removed). Additionally, your code may test correctly but still not give the results expected, especially when you're doing things like write mathematical code or image processing (you can't test for correctness if you don't know the result yet). Manually scrolling and looping through a program in your head is not easy with everything is in superfluous functions. And that is precisely the code where you'll easily go 5 loops or more deep and left spinning, dazed and confused with a beginner language like Python.

Comment Code doesn't need punctuation (Score 2, Insightful) 196

In effect most punctuation, indented blocks etc is superfluous to a computer. Is your code more or less readable with whatever construct you include? What if you add more code between eg your declaration and your use, would it still be obvious?

That's why languages without those construct are a pain to work with, you add a bunch of code and suddenly you've lost whether you're 4 or 5 tabs deep when the tabulation decreases. I like to add comments to the end brackets of regular code myself and add brackets to all if statements. It's superfluous but it's harder to rewrite a conditional one liner into a multiline code after the fact.

Comment Re:Reaching the limits of the unlimited (Score 1) 409

a) Most of these things fall under contract law. If I have to sign up a 2y contract, they shouldn't be able to just change it halfway through. That's what's happening here though, they have a contract which they're failing to abide by.

b) These carriers are virtual monopolies and all are colluding together to keep prices up. Many areas only have 1 provider and even if you have a choice, all providers do these rate hikes and service downgrades at the same time. They actually have the FCC colluding for them on their behalf (by limiting spectrum only to the big carriers). If the market would work (no colluding on spectrum, BYOD networks and no locks on either devices or contracts) we would see providers competing for your business.

Comment Re:If they didn't want unlimited use (Score 1) 409

This is more akin to having a contract with an $8 Chinese buffet so you can get all you can eat for $120/mo. You then go to eat there every day so you end up eating there for $4 every day. The restaurant can't just break the contract because they didn't expect you needed to eat every day.

Verizon didn't expect people to go for online video every day. These contracts are pre-iPhone or ways of getting people to switch from their competitors, they bet that they could delay 3G development another decade and resell the spectrum they bought up at a profit, instead they now need to lay out 3G (which they market as 4G) as promised when they bought the spectrum.

Comment Re:So basically... (Score 1) 409

If you sell something, expect it to be used. If you sell unlimited, people will use all they can and you should provide it. Those contracts have a minimum bandwidth requirement from the provider so as long as the provider provides these "abusers" with 256k (or whatever) they aren't rate limiting and everyone will be happy. Verizon simply wants more revenue from their subscribers, they don't care how, this is just an excuse. They want to artificially limit bandwidth usage so they don't have to pay up to actually develop their 3G network.

Comment Re:Reaching the limits of the unlimited (Score 1) 409

No, unlimited means just that: unlimited. Real data communication networks come with only 1 limited resource: bandwidth which is measured in packets per second and their inherit delay so you can get from one end to the other. The data is not artificially limited on any time basis beyond a few milliseconds as long as you keep the connections going. The spectrum and hardware doesn't give a rats ass how many 0s or 1s go over a line per month or if they even make sense (corruption is handled higher up).

What Verizon is doing is trying to get people to pay more by using an artificial (virtual) limit of how much data you can transfer from point a to point b on a monthly basis. They don't care if you actually exhaust the local area's bandwidth by consuming your quota in the first few hours of your billing cycle, they just want you to keep paying more.

Comment Re:Who is losing whom? (Score 1) 334

You get what you pay for. I regularly (every week) order things from Amazon for a variety of electronics and components, their search is fast and consistent. I stay away from lower stars and if I want guaranteed quality (after prototyping), I happily pay 20% more at Mouser or other retailers. I like that when I don't get the quality I need, I ship it back for a full refund where most retailers will charge you a restocking fee even though they shipped you garbage.

Slashdot Top Deals

Five is a sufficiently close approximation to infinity. -- Robert Firth "One, two, five." -- Monty Python and the Holy Grail