Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Compare cell phone plans using Wirefly's innovative plan comparison tool ×

Comment Re:Hyper-linking was invented in the 60's .... (Score 1) 70

3-4 years prior to RoboBoard was a system called FirstClass (originally macintosh only) that was started to be a groupware 'learning management system' but was heavily utilized as BBS software as well.

It provided email and forums (even with fidonet support, although mainly via 3rd party software as FCs remained pretty lacking), voice/fax, file transfer, etc and the protocol was multithreaded so you could be doing all of those things at the same time, and all over a 1200 baud modem.

It was primary used with a GUI client, although had options in the server to provide a crappy text interface for dialup users in a terminal app. This text interface had nothing on wwiv but did at least provide a simple way to download the mac or windows GUI client for the advanced features.

They later added appletalk networking and finally tcp/ip as well in the early 90s, but by 94/95 the BBS era was pretty well dead and everyone moved on to the Internet.

At least around these parts the transition was a fairly obvious one.
First you offered a BBS.
Then you offered a BBS with Internet.
Then you offered Internet with a BBS.
Finally you just offered Internet.

Between Eternal September in '93 and the web just being invented shortly before, that is when Internet usage exploded and was the beginning of the end for the entire BBS world.

Comment Re:The console advantage. (Score 1) 85

Because there were a ton of 2600 machines out there that would not be compatible, while the 5200 was compatible with 2600 games.

Just a tech-nit, but it was actually the 7800 that was the "next gen" 2600 that had backwards compatibility with games and utilized the same controllers.

The 5200 was a totally different and unique beast that wasn't forward or backward compatible with anything, used completely different shaped cartridges, and a different controller protocol and connector (it was analog input with a keypad of buttons and the new pause from the controller function)

Comment Interesting idea (Score 1) 442

We need the 'I'm not in business, I facilitate micro business" model to exist.

But at the same time, we have to admit that those micro businesses avoid the regulation that normal small (and large) businesses have to do. This is an unfair advantage. As such, it makes a good compromise to allow them to exist, but have them pay a tax to equalize things out. They avoid the business regulations, but have to pay to do it.

Ideally, this will allow the innovation - such as getting clients via apps - but prevent the major abuses.

We should use this same model for the other 'facilitating micro businesses" such as AirBnB.

Comment Stupidity to follow: (Score 4, Insightful) 209

"What's your password or you go to jail?"

"I don't remember what's my password."

"He's lying, throw him in jail!"

Five years later, released from jail because they crack the password, finding embarrassing porn, but nothing illegal.

But no compensation for throwing a man in jail for the 'crime' of a poor memory.

Comment Re:Uh, no (Score 1) 250

We cannot create intelligent machines with personalities of humans.

What you claim is impossible is a thing we humans do many thousands of times every single day.

It's called having babies. You are not a special snowflake, your body is just a machine made of billions of cells working together in a very (Very) complex system.
The fact we do not fully understand that complex system does not change the nature of what it is.

The question isn't if it is possible to do the thing we do multiple times a day.

The question is only one of engineering, if we can learn the knowledge and ability to gain much more control over the existing process we have for making intelligent machines, in order to build more resilient and stronger components to the machines we are.

However traveling faster than light speed currently really does look like it is a physical impossibility.
Which presents yet another significant obstacle we would need to work within the limits of, and you may very well be correct that the traveling fast enough problem turns out to be insurmountable.
(Which would be very sad indeed, but unfortunately that currently appears to be the case.)

Submission + - One in Five Vehicle Software Vulnerabilities are 'Hair on Fire' Critical (

chicksdaddy writes: One of every five software vulnerabilities discovered in vehicles in the last three years are rated “critical” and are unlikely to be resolved through after the fact security fixes, according to an analysis by the firm IOActive, The Security Ledger reports. (

“These are the high priority ‘hair on fire’ vulnerabilities that are easily discovered and exploited and can cause major impacts to the system or component,” the firm said in its report (, which it released last week. The report was based on an analysis of more than 150 vehicle security flaws identified over three years by IOActive or publicly disclosed by way of third-party firms.

The report studied a wide range of flaws, most discovered in IOActive’s work with automakers and suppliers to auto manufacturers, said Corey Thuen, a Senior Security Consultant with IOActive. Thuen and his colleagues considered what kinds of vulnerabilities most commonly affect connect vehicles, what types of attacks are most often used to compromise vehicles and what kinds of vulnerabilities might be mitigated using common security techniques and tactics.

The results, while not dire, are not encouraging. The bulk of vulnerabilities that were identified stemmed from a failure by automakers and suppliers to follow security best practices including designing in security or applying secure development lifecycle (SDL) practices to software creation. “These are all great things that the software industry learned as it has progressed in the last 20 years. But (automakers) are not doing them.”

Comment Re:Not understanding the issue (Score 4, Insightful) 195

The real problem with your philosophy is that so much of that information is secretly personably identifiable.

It is like the extra data a browser gives - things like versions, addons, etc. There is enough variability that you can determine the exact person.

It may not be good enough in a court of law, but it is good enough for a private investigator.

Submission + - American Bar Association votes to DRM the law, put it behind a EULA (

schwit1 writes: Rogue archivist Carl Malamud writes, "I just got back from the big debate on is free law like free beer that has been brewing for months at the American Bar Association over the question of who gets to read public safety codes and on what terms."

In my remarks I made the point that this resolution was perhaps well-intentioned, but bought into a really dangerous idea that somehow DRM-based access to the law from an exclusive private provider is "good enough." I was actually joined by the standards establishment in arguing strenuously that "read only access" simply doesn't exist and DRM is futile. A law is either public or it isn't. (And if a law isn't public, it isn't a law!)

Slashdot Top Deals

Time is nature's way of making sure that everything doesn't happen at once. Space is nature's way of making sure that everything doesn't happen to you.