Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


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

Comment Re:The only way this will get fixed (Score 1) 164

I didn't say anything about government licensing, registration or inspection. Only about mandatory fines. Inspection could be done privately, similarly to voluntarily getting a UL sticker -- which says a lot about your product.

If you product causes a fire, your company is to blame. It should be similarly for IoT devices used for hacking. If you make a device that is hacked and used to cause damage, your company is to blame just as much as if your device caused the building to burn down. What is so difficult to understand about this? Companies should make unsafe products. If you can't, then get out of the way for the next guy who can.

Comment Re:The only way this will get fixed (Score 5, Interesting) 164

Maybe the cost needs to be a government fine. That way it has a guarantee of financial impact. No uncertainty about whether a lawsuit will be filed, or whether it will be won. And a private party does not have to bear the cost of initiating the lawsuit.

Simply have a statutory damages for manufacturing an IoT device that has been used in an attack. The device you made was used in an attack. You have to pay the fine. Simple as that.

Now to make devices more secure there could be something like a process of getting an "Underwriter's Laboratories" type seal of approval. The seal doesn't mean an appliance won't burn your house down, just that it is very, very unlikely. Unlikely enough to suit the insurance underwriters. Which raises the subject of insurance -- for liability of getting fined for building an unsafe device.

It seems like this would work. Just like electrical devices are pretty safe -- even though manufacturers have a built in incentive to build them as cheaply and unsafely as possible.

Comment Re:Another go at smartphones? (Score 1) 49

Consider. Last time, Microsoft friggin' bought Nokia, and the black hole of Windows Phone completely destroyed Nokia in its wake. Nokia made only Windows phones, because, Microsoft. Thousands of people lost their jobs. But if it's not in America, then who notices. But many companies have been destroyed in the wake of Microsoft over the decades. And not because they couldn't build something better, but rather, because they could.

Comment Re:Another go at smartphones? (Score 0, Troll) 49

I for one very much want to see Microsoft take another go at phones.

And lose even more money than they did last time.

Last time they poured billions and billions of dollars down this black hole. Ballmer brilliantly laughed at iPhone and Android and waited until it was way, waaay too late. Then they introduced Win Phony 7. Then obsoleted it with Win Phony 8. And just for fun made it incompatible with the Win Phone 7 apps, because they love developers.

The Surface itself was Ballmer's master stroke of genius. In one single step, he alienated all OEMs, App Developers and Customers. OEMs because he back stabbed them by competing with them on hardware. App developers because of app store conditions, and the fact that without a customer base you can't actually expect to sell any apps. And without apps you won't get a customer base. (Welcome to not being the dominant player, the position you put everyone else into back in the 80's and 90's) And back stabbed customers because, well, it sucked. No apps. Very fast obsolescence. How good the initial hardware is is IRRELEVANT.

Comment Re:Movie theaters (Score 1) 342

I mentioned Amazon, and a Rental fee. That rental fee could be about the portion of what the studio would get from a theater ticket sale. It seems they would make their money back. Maybe even more.

Are more people likely to watch it online or endure the "movie magic" experience? Especially of the streaming "rental" Amazon price is less than a theater ticket?

Comment Re:Movie theaters (Score 4, Funny) 342

But screaming kids, people getting up and squeezing out through the row of seats, and then back again later, and cell phones, and people talking, and telling their life story, along with narrating the film, people kicking the back of your seat, throwing popcorn . . .

It's all part of the movie magic! The theater experience. You wouldn't want to get less than you paid for.

And let's not forget being treated like a criminal before admission into the dignity of the theater experience. And 45 minutes of ads.

Comment Re:Movie theaters (Score 1) 342

One more thing I'll add. Tell the theater owners that due to release windows, the movie must first show on Amazon for 90 days before it can be released to theaters. See how they like the shoe on the other foot.

I remember something about the Goose and the Gander having compatible ports, where no adapter is required to use the same cable on either one. Or something like that.

Comment Re:Movie theaters (Score 4, Interesting) 342

But according to TFA (the friendly article), . . .

> Each movie studio would like to "break the oligopoly" of the theaters,

Yeah, right. If that were true, then the studios would EMBRACE online streaming instead of trying to hold it back in every conceivable way.

Hey dinosaur studios, here's an innovative idea: Try releasing one of your good films to online streaming FIRST -- even with a rental price, like on Amazon. And maybe several of you do the same. Then let's see if the theater owners come begging to you to show at their theaters first. Choosing where to release your movies first is not anti-trust, it's just good business. Getting with the modern age. Advancing into the 1990's, etc.

Slashdot Top Deals

I'm still waiting for the advent of the computer science groupie.