Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Comments

top

Malaysian Passenger Plane Reportedly Shot Down Over Ukraine

RedWizzard Re:Seems like old times (752 comments)

Commercial airliners have no business overflying warzones

"Warzones" as defined by who? The FAA didn't include this area in the area they warned US carriers to avoid in April. Should the airlines monitor the media for reports of SAM installation sightings?

about two weeks ago
top

Malaysian Passenger Plane Reportedly Shot Down Over Ukraine

RedWizzard Re:Wait for it... (752 comments)

Too much of a coincidence for a plane to crash in a war zone where a fighter was shot down just the other day and a transport aircraft An-26 was shot down by a missile at 25,000ft couple of days ago. And by the way, why would a commercial airliner fly through such an airspace anyway?

No U.S. carrier has been allowed to fly over certain parts of Ukraine since the end of April, due to an FAA order.

Certain parts, apparently not including the area this plane was flying over.

about two weeks ago
top

Predicting a Future Free of Dollar Bills

RedWizzard Re:Cashless can't happen, here is why ... (753 comments)

Yet TradeMe still exists and people use direct bank transfers than any other payment method on the site. If your claim (that business this way is not practical) was true then people would not use direct bank transfers. But they do. Ipso facto your claim can't be true.

My claim was and still is that using cash eliminates many of the scams - your claim was that scamming was too infrequent to matter. I provided evidence that it was frequent enough that the marketplace warned you against handing over money via bank transfers (other than their own special bank transfer that still had no guarantees). Please read those links I posted - they actually specifically warn against bank transfers.

I did read those links and they did not warn against bank transfers except overseas (and overseas transfers are quite different anyway - I can't simply entering an overseas bank account number in online banking to initiate a transfer as I can with domestic accounts). In fact both links are primarily concerned with phishing, not the sort of fraud we've been talking about. Obviously that is because the scamming you've been claiming is such an issue is not actually significant - it is phishing that catches people. My bank also warns me against phishing, yet they don't warn me against using direct transfers. What does that tell you?

If your claim is as minor as you're now saying, my response is "so what?" You might as well say that you can't be scammed in a transaction if you don't enter into private transactions at all. It's true, but it's irrelevant. Of course I concede that cash is less vulnerable to certain types of fraud than other payment methods. But the theoretically higher incidence of scamming with direct bank transfers is still so low that it doesn't matter. The fact remains that if scamming was as widespread as you make out then people would not use TradeMe or similar markets. Those markets exist, and are massive, ergo scamming is not the problem you think it is.

But the system still works. You haven't provided any evidence that it doesn't. You haven't even provided evidence that the incidence of fraud is higher with direct bank transfers.

I don't need to provide evidence that it doesn't work because I never made the claim that it does not work. I claimed that untrusted transactions are best with payment and possession taking place at the same time, hence cash works best for this. The sites you pointed me to warn specifically about doing bank transfers.

Cash doesn't work best for this because it is only practical for transactions in a limited geographic area. How far are you prepared to travel to gain this protection you rate so highly for a $20 transaction? $100? $1000?

Again, those links you provided do not warn against direct bank transfers. Did you actually read them?

about two weeks ago
top

Predicting a Future Free of Dollar Bills

RedWizzard Re:Cashless can't happen, here is why ... (753 comments)

You're saying "it can't possibly work, because scams". I'm telling you it does actually work here.

You're claiming "It works, because there are no scams", and I'm telling you, right now and right here, there are scams in all the classifieds. You're relying on the fact that people are honest; I'm comfortable being skeptical. You're asking me to trust "because it doesn't happen", and I'm saying that over here it's a daily occurrence. I actually don't know how to make it any clearer - if you're buying something off of craigslist, or whichever classifieds, the damn site itself warns you to be skeptical! Even the marketplace itself is telling you that there are scammers out there!

No, you're misrepresenting my position. I never claimed there were no scams. I said it was not a significant problem in practice. Perhaps that is due to a difference in the cultures of our countries. But the fact remains that the system works here. When you claim that a system that is in widespread use doesn't work, that's not skepticism. It's simply denial.

From the trademe site, they warn about this specifically: http://www.trademe.co.nz/trust... So, they themselves think that if you hand over money you could lose it. Let me emphasise that for you: Trademe themselves think that you should use any protection you can when paying money and you should not rely on trust!

So the trust issue is not an insignificant problem, but it is one that is painlessly solved by using cash.

Yet TradeMe still exists and people use direct bank transfers than any other payment method on the site. If your claim (that business this way is not practical) was true then people would not use direct bank transfers. But they do. Ipso facto your claim can't be true.

Again, the system is widely used here. So the onus is on you to back up your claim that it can't possibly work with evidence.

I refer you to the trademe trust and safety blog (yes, it really is called that): http://www.trademe.co.nz/trust...

But the system still works. You haven't provided any evidence that it doesn't. You haven't even provided evidence that the incidence of fraud is higher with direct bank transfers.

about two weeks ago
top

Predicting a Future Free of Dollar Bills

RedWizzard Re:Cashless can't happen, here is why ... (753 comments)

You're saying "it can't possibly work, because scams". I'm telling you it does actually work here.

You're claiming "It works, because there are no scams", and I'm telling you, right now and right here, there are scams in all the classifieds. You're relying on the fact that people are honest; I'm comfortable being skeptical. You're asking me to trust "because it doesn't happen", and I'm saying that over here it's a daily occurrence. I actually don't know how to make it any clearer - if you're buying something off of craigslist, or whichever classifieds, the damn site itself warns you to be skeptical! Even the marketplace itself is telling you that there are scammers out there!

No, you're misrepresenting my position. I never claimed there were no scams. I said it was not a significant problem in practice. Perhaps that is due to a difference in the cultures of our countries. But the fact remains that the system works here. When you claim that a system that is in widespread use doesn't work, that's not skepticism. It's simply denial. Again, I am not talking theoretically - if you believe I'm wrong you can track down the crime statistics for New Zealand and prove that there is significant fraud on TradeMe. But you'd be wasting your time because there isn't. There are isolated cases, but not to the point where it's seen as riskier than any other private transaction, and certainly not to the point where the system doesn't work.

Again, the system is widely used here. So the onus is on you to back up your claim that it can't possibly work with evidence.

Someone dealing in cash can just as easily be robbed by the seller.

True, but if you're going to mug someone, why post on the classifieds first? You're just as likely to be mugged leaving a bank after all.

Your position is that direct bank transfers aren't safe essentially because the seller is not so easy catch if they decide to commit a crime. This is exactly the same as the difference between mugging someone in a public place ("leaving a bank") and luring them to some place private before mugging them.

about two weeks ago
top

Predicting a Future Free of Dollar Bills

RedWizzard Re:Cashless can't happen, here is why ... (753 comments)

And then you have scams arising where you pay your money and the "seller" vanishes. The only safe way to deal with a potential scam when trading through the classifieds is to hand over payment and take possession of the item at the same time. Not possible if one party has to wait to verify payment.

You're arguing hypotheticals against reality.

What are you talking about? What's not a reality?

You're saying "it can't possibly work, because scams". I'm telling you it does actually work here. The concerns you have raised are simply not a significant problem in actual fact. The system I've described is not some theoretical idea, it is how actual business is actually conducted in the country I live in. Not sure how I can say this any more plainly.

It's simply not a problem here. If it were it could be solved simply by requiring sufficient proof of identity to post the classified in the first place. A marketplace which gets a reputation for allowing sellers to get away with fraud is not going to last long.

Once again it comes down to trust - you trust that the marketplace has identified the scammer. What if you're the first person to respond to the ad? Regardless, you're still asking two parties who are unknown to each other to trust each other with no real evidence that the trust is warranted. My point still stands in this reality - transactions need to be completed when there is a lack of trust. Cash works for this. Waiting doesn't (hence the reason bitcoin is still less traded than actual toy money).

Someone dealing in cash can just as easily be robbed by the seller.

about two weeks ago
top

Predicting a Future Free of Dollar Bills

RedWizzard Re:Cashless can't happen, here is why ... (753 comments)

And then you have scams arising where you pay your money and the "seller" vanishes. The only safe way to deal with a potential scam when trading through the classifieds is to hand over payment and take possession of the item at the same time. Not possible if one party has to wait to verify payment.

You're arguing hypotheticals against reality. It's simply not a problem here. If it were it could be solved simply by requiring sufficient proof of identity to post the classified in the first place. A marketplace which gets a reputation for allowing sellers to get away with fraud is not going to last long.

about two weeks ago
top

Predicting a Future Free of Dollar Bills

RedWizzard Re:Cashless can't happen, here is why ... (753 comments)

give them your bank account number

What could possibly go wrong?

Actually very little. If your bank lets someone else fraudulently withdrawal from your account they are on the hook for the money. The main problem is if they get the account number wrong and the typo corresponds to a real account (which would require two digits wrong). In that case it can be difficult to get your money back from the unintended recipient (if they've already taken it out of the account). So not much risk for the seller.

about two weeks ago
top

Predicting a Future Free of Dollar Bills

RedWizzard Re:Cashless can't happen, here is why ... (753 comments)

And then there's the personal sale angle. I'm not going to take paypal or have the ability to process credit cards for a yard sale or some crap that I'm selling through the classifieds or craigslist. Given how I'm mainly just trying to recoup something in the process of a sale, adding more hoops or steps will just result in my not bothering to sell junk anymore.

In this country direct bank transactions are used for a lot of this. It's not quite as easy as taking cash when you hand over the item but it's not much harder: give them your bank account number when they agree to the sale and then check that the money is there before handing over the item. If you're going to bank the money anyway it's actually easier. Obviously it's not practical for yard sales but it works pretty well for classifieds and online sales.

about two weeks ago
top

IEEE Spectrum Ranks the Top Programming Languages

RedWizzard Re:Java is the new COBOL (197 comments)

You use it at work but nobody gets excited to use Java at home.

I use it at home. It's not appropriate for everything but I find Java + Eclipse to be a very pleasant and productive environment so it's often the option I prefer.

about three weeks ago
top

IEEE Spectrum Ranks the Top Programming Languages

RedWizzard Re:GIGO (197 comments)

Whether with programming languages or with studies it's the same: Garbage In, Garbage Out.

Select mobile, and you'll find Objective-C listed 16th, 6 places after MATLAB, and two places after Visual Basic. Which is clearly nonsense.

We already have tried and tested (back to 1989!) rankings for this. http://www.tiobe.com/index.php... And Objective-C is currently number three across the board, never mind just mobile.

The filters are meaningless because they just hide the languages that are not classed as being used in that space, they don't actually measure usage in that space. When you hide all but mobile they're still ranking the languages by overall use, not use in the mobile space. So C# is at 4th despite it having almost no use in the mobile space.

about three weeks ago
top

4K Monitors: Not Now, But Soon

RedWizzard Re:Occulus Rift (186 comments)

And 3D movies have been around since the 70's using of anaglyph 3D glasses. The implementation matters!

about a month and a half ago
top

4K Monitors: Not Now, But Soon

RedWizzard Re:Occulus Rift (186 comments)

You understand that a plane can exist in a 3D space, right?

about a month and a half ago
top

4K Monitors: Not Now, But Soon

RedWizzard Re:Occulus Rift (186 comments)

It's not entirely clear that VR is going to displace PC gaming to that significant of a degree.

As a fairly avid gamer, most games I play are not in the first person perspective and I don't want them to be. I don't like FPS, and that's a huge portion of all first-person games... and VR almost implies a first person perspective.

Only if you've got no imagination. What this iteration of VR is bringing is head tracking and that allows massive virtual screens. I think Rift and similar products are going to break into non-gaming market as cost effective way of getting giant flat displays.

about a month and a half ago
top

Is LG's New Ultra Widescreen Display Better Than "Normal" 4K?

RedWizzard Re:4k at viewing distance isn't that special (304 comments)

Because it's approximately true. Nominal resolution of the human eye is 1 arc-minute (1/60 of a degree), therefore a 1920 pixel wide display will subtend 32 degrees horizontally at the resolution limit. At 9 feet (108 inches), a 62 inch wide screen will subtend 32 degrees horizontally. Since screen sizes are measured on the diagonal, that equates to a 71 inch diagonal.

If that resolution is correct then you shouldn't be able to tell the difference between a 150dpi display and a 300dpi display at 2 feet but I certainly can. I'm not sure the 0.3-0.4 arc-minute figure I quoted in my other reply is really typical but I think most people's vision is better than 1 arc-minute.

about 2 months ago
top

Is LG's New Ultra Widescreen Display Better Than "Normal" 4K?

RedWizzard Re:4k at viewing distance isn't that special (304 comments)

Nominal resolution of the human eye is 1 arc-minute (1/60 of a degree)

That is too low. See, e.g. this, which states that the resolvable pixel size is about 0.3-0.4 arc-minutes. Using 0.4 means that at 9 feet any 16:9 1080p screen larger than 28" has resolvable pixels. A 4k screen could be as large as 55" before the pixels are resolvable.

about 2 months ago
top

Should Tesla Make Batteries Instead of Electric Cars?

RedWizzard Re:They've been pushing this angle for a while (362 comments)

I don't know why Jeffrey Gundlach is, but see no a priori reason to assume he *isn't* as smart, or smarter, than Elon Musk.

Well for a start he's a bond manager. The great minds of our world create, discover, invent. They don't manage bonds. The fact that he is not seeking out the sorts of intellectual challenges that Musk is, IMHO, evidence that he's not as smart as Musk. Regardless of the business success of Musk's companies, they've managed to solve engineering problems that no one else seems to have done. But, of course, that's irrelevant because he may well have more knowledge/experience/wisdom in the area he's giving advice. I think he could well be right in saying that the battery tech is the real point of difference for Tesla and that they should focus on that exclusively. But I suspect that Musk feels that if he doesn't prove there is a market then other car manufacturers will not take it seriously.

about 2 months ago
top

Apple's Revenge: iMessage Might Eat Your Texts If You Switch To Android

RedWizzard Re:Auto switches (415 comments)

Hm. Failed to enable. Is this a new feature?

I'm pretty sure it's been there since iMessage was first released.

about 2 months ago
top

Figuring Out the iPad's Place

RedWizzard Re:Safari for iOS lacks support for all these (333 comments)

The post I replied to claimed you couldn't write *any* software for iOS without a dev subscription. That's false. Of course there are limitations with HTML5, just as there are limitations with any platform. I contend that the limitations are unlikely to be an issue for 95% of people who want to develop something for their phone/tablet but won't pay $100 per year to do it.

about 3 months ago

Submissions

RedWizzard hasn't submitted any stories.

Journals

RedWizzard has no journal entries.

Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>