Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
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:IMO, it trends whichever way the wind blows.... (Score 1) 294

Even Google embraced the open floor-plan concept,

I think that the difference is that Google seems to do it correctly. I've worked in both Google offices and in other companies that did "open floor-plan", and I noticed a few things that Google does right:

  • It's open within small groups (~12-15) of desks with higher walls separating the groups. This generally means that you have a team sitting together with open communication and you don't have to worry about noise/distractions from other teams.
  • They have meeting rooms of various sizes, from non-bookable phone rooms (often used for personal calls) up to larger meeting rooms. People are encouraged to grab a meeting room if they're having an in-depth discussion with multiple folks.
  • Common areas (kitchen, cafeteria) are separated from work areas. This means that visual/auditory/olfactory distractions from those areas are minimized, while still providing a place for people to get together and chat informally.
  • There are quiet areas for people to focus. Most office have quieter "library" style areas, as well as "wellness" rooms with comfortable chairs/dimmable lighting. I have migraine issues, so the wellness areas were invaluable to me.

Comment Re:I've noticed here in the UK... (Score 1) 551

Perhaps it's just a more permanent way of indicating that it's a handicapped spot? Wheelchair symbols painted onto the pavement like they have here in Canada can fade with time making it unclear that it is/was a spot. It's a bit harder to not notice when you've got a big orange thing sticking up from the pavement.

Comment Re:Kind of early to predict that (Score 1) 305

Don't see how the security is any better than a direct https link between Exchage and your phone.

I honestly am not familiar with Androids/iPhones - do they have the option for remote lockdown/wiping of the device? I know this has been used a few times where I work when someone has managed to lose their BlackBerry or has decided to not return it after being let go from the company.


Your Browser History Is Showing 174

tiffanydanica writes "For a lot of us our browser history is something we consider private, or at least not something we want to expose to every website we visit. Web2.0collage is showing just how easy it is (with code!) for sites to determine what sites you visit. When you visit the site it sniffs your browser history, and creates a collage of the (safe for work) sites that you visit. It is an interesting application of potentially scary technology (imagine a job application site using this to screen candidates). You can jump right into having your history sniffed if you so desire. While the collages are cool on their own merit, they also serve as an illustration of the privacy implications of browser history sniffing."

Comment Re:QuestHelper (Score 1) 344

I think that may run afoul of the new policies as well:

All add-ons must be distributed free of charge. Developers may not create "premium"; versions of add-ons with additional for-pay features, charge money to download an add-on, charge for services related to the add-on, or otherwise require some form of monetary compensation to download or access an add-on.


Submission + - Blizzard asserts rights over independent addons

bugnuts writes: Blizzard announced a policy change to Addons for the popular game World of Warcraft which asserts requirements on UI programmers, such as charging for the program, obfuscation, soliciting donations, etc. Addons are voluntarily-installed UI programs that add functionality to the game, programmed in Lua, which can do various tasks that hook into the WoW engine. The new policy has some obvious requirements such as not loading the servers or spamming users, and it looks like an attempt to make things more accessible and free for the end user. But unlike FOSS, it adds other requirements that assert control over these independently coded programs, such as distribution and fees.

Blizzard can already control the ultimate functionality of Addons by changing the hooks into the WoW engine. They have exercised this ability in the past, e.g. to disable addons that automate movement and "one-button" combat. Should they be able to make demands on independent programmers' copyrighted works, such as download fees or advertising, who are not under contract to code for Blizzard? Is this like Microsoft asserting control over what programmers may code for Windows?

Submission + - Blizzard Dissallows WoW AddOn Donation (

An anonymous reader writes: Blizzard Entertainment today has posted a new World of Warcraft User Interface Add-On Development Policy that among other things asserts that user written game modifications must be free and cannot solicit for donations in game. Previously if Blizzard didn't want an addon to be able to do something they would disable the functionality. Now it seems they are out to legally assert their control over the game environment by prohibiting addon behavior that they have no way programmatic to police. Such radical behavior seems to be in response to or at least will curtail a popular addon that recently released a version with in game advertising. Up till now many other addons have had in game donation urls.

Is it legal/moral to require derivative works of a paid software to be free? Most addons are free, but not all addons are equal. If you spent years maintaining and developing a complex addon how would you feel about Blizzard now telling that you can't even ask for donations? Obviously Blizzard wants to keep addons in the realm of hobby, but do they have the right to tell people how they can use their UI API?

Slashdot Top Deals

Have you reconsidered a computer career?