Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
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! ×

Comment Re:Sledgehammer approach. (Score 5, Insightful) 163

I can break into your house because it's not secure enough. Is that OK too?

If the house has already been taken over by a criminal gang, it's a different matter. That's a better analogy with a lot of these insecure IoT devices. They aren't just sitting there innocently; if they're vulnerable to being shut down by this malware, they're also vulnerable to being taken over by botnets. This is not just a theoretical worry; some of the big recent DDOS attacks have been by IoT device botnets.

Comment Re:Sometimes (Score 3, Insightful) 421

Even if the customer is legitimately throwing a tantrum, there are still better and worse ways of responding. The company in this case could have continued trying to help in the hopes of fixing the problem and getting the guy to change his review. Or it could have been polite about offering a refund, waiving restocking fees, etc. Throwing its own tantrum in response to a customer tantrum is neither productive nor likely to generate good publicity. Instead, it's likely to make people think the customer may have been on to something with his complaints about poor support.

Comment Re:Brave and bold is fine... (Score 1) 240

And maybe expandable. It's neat when they can package everything into a nice tiny case, but the whole elegance factor is ruined when the only way to add stuff is in clunky external boxes. How about making sure there's plenty of free expansion slots and hard drive spaces so people can add stuff inside the original case?

Comment Re:Poor business (Score 3, Insightful) 395

Of course this shows another important point with reviewers: it's important to read the actual review rather than just the star rating. A good reviewer will explain not just whether they like a given movie (or book, album, etc.) but also why they feel that way. Even if your tastes differ from theirs, you can often get a good idea of whether you'll like something if you can see what they like and dislike about it in detail. Sites like Rotten Tomatoes give you the advantage of aggregating multiple reviews, but that comes at the expense of eliminating everything but the bottom line number.

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 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:Some Solar, with a gravity battery? (Score 3, Insightful) 270

There is no reason to do that.

Sure there is. Farmers, especially ones in areas where water is the limiting factor in how much they can grow, are worried about losses to evaporation. Those losses can be minimized by irrigating at night, when it's cooler and water evaporates more slowly. Depending on the economics and the water supply, it may make sense to adopt a more expensive irrigation strategy if it conserves water.

Comment Re:I'm not surprised. (Score 1) 917

Why does this kind of culture crop up again and again in human history?

It's a very common way for insecure people to protect their positions. A person at the top is worried about being replaced by their subordinates, so they set their subordinates against each other. That way, the subordinates spend all their time on infighting rather than trying to replace the boss. You'll see this kind of thing all the time in dictatorships, but it shows up regularly with dictatorial managers of all stripes, too. It's one more variant on the old "divide and rule" strategy.

Comment Re:I'm not surprised. (Score 5, Informative) 917

the HR person (if they were being honest) did the right thing.

At least according to the article, the HR person was not being honest. They said that it was the boss's first offense and they didn't want to put it on his record because it would hurt him. But the author spoke to other women who had complained about him before she did, so it wasn't his first offense. The most generous interpretation is that they were basing the claim of first offense on his blank official record, so that he could get an infinite number of "first" offenses left off.

It goes to show why that approach is a bad one. If you don't want people to get in trouble for a first offense, make that the policy. Put the offense in their record, but give them a free pass for it when it comes time to evaluate them. But leaving something out of the record makes it possible for somebody to get an indefinite number of "first offenses". Of course it seems far more likely that there was an informal policy of protecting offenders who were otherwise high performing, and the whole thing about it being a first offense was a ruse.

Comment No more connectors (Score 1) 153

Apple should just give up on connectors for the iPhone completely. They've already removed the headphone jack in favor of wireless headphones. They should remove the lightning connector and go to wireless charging and WiFi/Wireless only for data. That would remove the last remaining open connector on the phone and make it much easier to make it really waterproof.

Slashdot Top Deals

A list is only as strong as its weakest link. -- Don Knuth

Working...