Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


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

Comment Re:Brick 'em (Score 1) 43

And this is how people are, they don't care that they are a danger to the whole internet and them being knocked off is a service to the world. What they care about is their stupid little gimmicky toy.

How people really are is that they don't know what the Internet is so they don't know that their "stupid little gimmicky toy" could possibly be a problem because of some distant and unknown infrastructure issue. It's not a deliberate decision to cause harm, and it's not selfish.

What you think is a "gimmicky toy" may be a security cam they use to keep track of the house while they're gone because they've had issues before. It certainly is NOT something that was sold with a big warning notice that attaching it to the network in their house, behind a cable router that stops everything else from getting in, will cause death and destruction, or problems of any kind to anyone. They certainly did NOT say "fuck you" to any idea of trouble and forge ahead maliciously.

And I'd hate to think that maybe they are thinking that YOUR use of the Internet is for "gimmicky toys" like "why do you need to run your own mail server when Gmail does it for free"?

So, maybe notch the venom down a bit and accept that the problem is not the fault of the people who buy the devices and use them as instructed. People don't need to be, and shouldn't have to be, leet haxor neckbeards with in-depth knowledge of the Internet to use a network-connected device. This is why the idea of having white-hat hackers brick the devices is so tragically wrong. As soon as they start doing that to protect their turf they lose any ethical high ground because they are hurting innocent people and not the ones who produced the faulty devices.

But they'll all call the manufacturer and complain, right? Probably not. They'll take the thing back to the store they bought it from (also not network experts) and get a new one. When it stops working again, they'll get their money back. They won't search out the manufacturer, and are unlikely to find who actually built and programmed it anyway considering it is probably a Chinese company to start with. For example, I have some internet power switches that I caught sending data off to China. Don't know who, and I have no idea who built them. I know the store I bought them from. That's where the trail to the culprits ends.

Comment Re:Reality (Score 1) 68

A year ago, my Comcast service would often drop out dozens of times a day (confirmed by my modem logs). Calls to Comcast service got me nowhere.

Did you call your local franchise authority to complain and ask for their help?

When I was fighting Comcast about a cableCard and what they wanted to charge (after saying it would be free), I called my local franchise specialist. HE called Comcast, and in about half an hour I got a call from Comcast Customer Resolution (or whatever it is they call the office where this kind of thing gets resolved) with a solution. (It's free.)

They expected legal action, and they still overwhelmingly told the Metro Council that they wanted Google Fiber.

If Comcast fails to meet the terms of their existing contract, sue them. The correct answer is not to unilaterally change the rules out from under the contract. Letting "other guys" just move your stuff because they want to put their's on the pole, too, is also not the right answer. Do you WANT service to drop out on a regular basis caused by people who move Comcast's stuff, or do you want to be able to keep pointing the finger at Comcast when it does? Be careful -- this finger pointing exercise was a major downside to telecom divestiture. It was no longer "call the phone company" to come fix your broken phone service. It became "that's a long distance problem, call your long distance carrier", or "that's a local loop problem, call them". Getting a bad line fixed was a major nightmare.

Comment Easy Scan?!? (Score 0) 72

Ain't no easy scan there pal, hack that device and you have a bomb strapped to you and I can assure the scan you receive will not be easy at all. One thing I will never want is a M$ device scanning me and letting other people know whether or not they should open fire on me, real world BSOD, definitely not something to ever trust M$ with or any slimy off shoots of it.

Comment Re: But..... (Score 1) 172

So what you are saying is M$ can basically shove it where you wont allow their probe to go ;). The brand damage they are doing is mind boggling, so perverse, so uncool, just plain nasty. They are going to have real trouble selling anything into the retail market and it will only get worse. They are going to have to buy another company, in order to use their name for retail sales, to try to get the MS stank off anything they sell, what is going through their minds, I do not know, the sheer unmitigated arrogance.

Comment Re:and if I shoplift a rack full of CD's it's just (Score 1) 88

Woah there pardner. I went to an outlet, they said we own this and watch this commercial and you can have it, exchange of labour for the product. So I provided them with the use of my time, something I consider to be of valuable worth and in turn they let me download the free copy they promised me in return for my time. Consider anyone, absolutely any can buy a copy of that content and should they so choose sell it by what ever means possible and to whom ever possible, keep in mind the actual real value of that content as an individual copy, say a $1 (most of the other costs being advertising, distribution, retail premises, sales staff, profit margin, profit margin, profit margin - more than one bite at that particular cherry, which they in fact claim to be avoiding and hence only one profit margin instead of three, making it cheaper so they claim).

So they can not charge for theft or even copyright infringement (well not you, the other individual definitely), just the very slightest bit of tax evasion, you did not pay income tax for IRS percentage of the revenue earned, the worth of the content provided. Well you really did not get paid, as you copy is infringing and worthless and you can not sell it.

Comment Re:Why shouldn't they? (Score 2) 68

More accurately, a truck with a crew of four, hiding around the corner, travels half an hour, sets up for 20 minutes, works for 5 minutes and then charges for an hour and promptly drives off, to hide around the corner again. How many thousands of dollars do you think it cost and how many thousands of dollars do you thing they will charge and never forget it's you that pays for that bullshit.

Comment Re:will they pay for that? even if there are high (Score 0) 81

Will they pay for the psychological damage of those texts. Consider they are not taking into account the specific psychological health of the people in question, just, meh fuck em, make it easier for us and will get is that promotion. So mentally challenged person, someone was just murdered near you, oh my god, it could have been you and by the by, yes we are watching you, we know were you were and we know where you are. So morons, how much damage do you think that message would do to a mentally ill individually under going therapy. How much damage would it do to normal people just minding their own business. Seriously, what the fuck.

Comment Re:Hmm (Score 1) 893

That's indeed the kind of ideas that is now floating around. I rank it in the category of Iraq coming to kill us all, with the same combination of inflating the threat and at the same time regarding the opponent as a pushover. I think Colin Powell has made some sensible comments on that. Russia is paranoid about us, about NATO. We scare them. They are a small power, we're a big one that is surrounding them more and more, and then sabre rattling is a sensible response.

That doesn't explain why they weren't rattling their sabers a few years ago. The Economist has a recent article that does offer an explanation that covers that as well The thesis is basically that domestic troubles caused by a weak economy have motivated Putin to seek ways to distract his people from domestic concerns. Specifically, he's tried to recapture the superpower position of the Soviet Union. He can't, really, because Russia isn't the Soviet Union. Without the central planning structure to force the massive overproduction of military resources, the Soviet Union wouldn't have been the Soviet Union, either.

But his people don't really realize this and, frankly, the rest of the world tends not to realize it much, either. So Putin can rattle his rusted and broken saber and the rest of the world reacts as though he was the mighty Soviet Union. Except... there is one area in which is military isn't so rusted or broken: nuclear weapons. Oh, his nuclear armament is aging and dilapidated, but it's still very real and Russia has the technological wherewithal to build highly functional nukes and missiles to carry them. Russia can't afford to build very many of them, but it doesn't really take all that many.

So, as it becomes more and more apparent that Putin doesn't really have the conventional forces to make the world treat Russia with the fear and respect that the Soviet Union got, he's almost certainly going to be making more and more use of the nuclear threat that the world can't ignore. And that will help to keep his people feeling like they're a major world power again, which will keep him in power.

Is this true? I don't know. Makes sense to me.

Comment Re:What kind of inhuman piece of shit (Score 1) 893

Your link article is confusing, they seem to be use "expired" and "Withdraws" interchangeably, are you saying that not voluntarily being bond by an expired treaty is cheating?

The United States withdrew from the landmark 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty on June 13. .... President George W. Bush, who had announced the U.S. pullout six months earlier, issued a short written statement the day the treaty expired.

Comment Re:Reality (Score 4, Insightful) 68

It's not nice to mess with another utility's stuff.

  "permits third parties to move, alter, or rearrange components of Comcast's communications network attached to utility poles without Comcast's consent, authorization, or oversight, and with far less notice than is required by federal law and by an existing Comcast contract with Metro Nashville,"

That's just not done in the utility business. You simply don't "move, alter, or rearrange" another utility's lines. If you cut a line of any kind or interrupt service without calling first, you pay. Google needs to learn how to get along with everybody else. They have to play by the rules, too.

Comment Re:Am I missing something? (Score 1) 140

Hangouts used to have seamless SMS/Hangouts.

No, it was never seamless in the sense that iMessage is. The seams were harder to see, and that was exactly the problem that motivated the clear separation; the failure modes of the combined messaging were subtle, hard to understand and opaque to users. The upshot is that the combination made Hangouts messaging appear to be unreliable.

Actually, iMessage isn't really seamless either. It breaks badly if iMessage thinks the destination device is an iPhone but it isn't. It's very good in a pure-Apple world, though.

Slashdot Top Deals

There are two kinds of egotists: 1) Those who admit it 2) The rest of us