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: Yeah but there's a whole world out there (Score 1) 867

No, my assumptions were almost as narrow as the parent's worldview.

Saying something doesn't make it so. And you can't just say what you wish were true. You have to review the facts and see if what you're saying is actually true or not... For example:

and the typical American who makes broad assumptions about the rest of the world without actually ENGAGING with it

You're making a pretty broad statement there. Assuming anything to be true about the "typical American" is, almost by definition, a broad assumption.

So, no, your assumptions were not narrow by any stretch of the imagination no matter how much you'd like to believe they were.

Oh, I do so enjoy engaging with the rest of the world.

Comment Re: Driving yes, but charging? (Score 1) 990

Given that this is /., that isn't going to be an option for about 90% of the people here...

I remember when that used to be funny. Actually, I got a little snicker out of it even now.

But I'm surprised to say that it's not actually funny anymore. And not because it's true. No, poking at stuff that's true is funny; that's part of clever humor. And I guarantee you that it was once true that 90% of guys on Slashdot couldn't even speak to a female much less marry one.

It's not funny anymore because the underlying presumption just isn't true any more. I'm shocked but it really seems like having strong computer-foo is actually attractive these days.

So when I read your comment I snickered for a second because that seemed like what I should do and it was always funny in the past. But then I just sorta stopped and said to myself, "Wait, that's really not the case these days." What a great realization.

Comment Re:Air gap or hardware interlock critical systems (Score 5, Insightful) 85

I understand what you're getting at and mostly agree. My only comment is that once you design these big in-vehicle fully-connected systems to do stuff like report on steering angle and live fuel pressure or whatever else, it's awfully tempting to turn around and implement the PUT or POST to go along with those GET APIs so that all your dealer diagnostics and datalogging tools just hook into the same point everything else does. It reduces the number of different systems and interfaces you have to design, implement and debug.

I have no data on this, but I suspect cost cutting measures have to be insane at auto makers. I recall buying a nice turbo AWD Eclipse in the mid-90s for nearly $30k. Twenty years later and I can still buy a nice turbo AWD car for just a little more than that and this new car will have VASTLY superior features all around. The cost difference barely accounts for inflation. How they also crammed so much new tech and new hardware into it for what's effectively the same price today as it was 20 years ago boggles my mind.

So I suspect this all comes down to trying to push more stuff through that new system to save a few bucks somewhere and then skipping that whole "security" check in the process.

Comment Re:It is Their Site (Score 2) 293

So what? Because they're a business acting in their self-interest that makes it proper and ethical and we're not supposed to discuss or criticize them?

Sure you are. And he is doing just that. His statement that they can do whatever they want does not imply that you can't discuss it. That's just his position on the matter. Don't like it? Offer an alternative viewpoint.

Comment Re:Based on past experiences (Score 1) 220

Dead-on. We've owned Fords since 1989. Sync hasn't ruined it that completely for us, but I will most certainly be looking for alternatives to the media component of our next Ford.

Now...if Microsoft digs deeper into the power or drive train management of things, we're screwed. It'll be off to Chevy we go. :)

Comment Re:What I think? (Score 1) 1052

Often with disincentives to people bettering themselves because then they could end up off one system or another, and almost always with huge bureaucratic overhead costs.

I'm confused on this point. What are the huge bureaucratic overhead costs associated with someone leaving the unemployment/welfare system? Honestly, I don't know. It seems simpler to me in terms of overhead for someone to simply take up a job and stop the requests for welfare payments. The overhead would seem to be in their continuing to submit requests for payments at ever renewal stage, providing documentation that they've been out looking, etc., etc.

you probably want something extra for each dependent a family has

Everybody sees the problem with this, right? We all know full well what happens when you incentivize having dependents.

Comment Re:Based on past experiences (Score 1) 220

Anyone who has been stuck with a Ford Sync (sadly I am in that group) or MyFord Touch radio running the crap software MS built knows how bad of an idea this is.

This. Exactly this.

I've posted my frustrations with Sync before. In fact, the very first words out of my mouth when we got into that F150 for our first test drive was "Oh, wait, why does that say Microsoft next to my radio? That's going to be nothing but trouble." And guess what? I have to routinely stop the engine, remove the key and open the door to give that lovely Microsoft Sync product a second chance at connecting to my phone that it was just happily connected only a few minutes prior. It's probably not even a 50/50 chance that it'll work! The $15 bluetooth-to-FM transmitter I bought off Amazon, however, works like a freaking charm. I NEVER have failed connections with that thing. Ever.

If I get into another car for a test drive and I see a Microsoft logo anywhere on it, I will exit said vehicle immediately and demand a credit for the 5 minutes of my time they just wasted.

Comment Re:Login is hard to understand (Score 1) 260

Because as stated in another thread, MS/W devs do `char path[MAX_PATH];` So if MS removes the limit most programs will stack overflow.

You may mean buffer overflow here.

The declaration you've quoted would be resolved at compile time, not run time. So if MAX_PATH was 260 at compile time and then run on a system where the runtime behavior allowed for longer paths, I could certainly see a buffer overflow condition happening. But the program will only ever allocated 260 bytes off the stack in that case, so stack usage would remain the same.

And I assume if MAX_PATH were _UI64_MAX (or whatever) at compile time, the compiler would complain.

Comment What's fake about it? (Score 2) 51

Sounds real to me.

Lame, perhaps, but certainly real to the extent that someone is (at least temporarily) locked out of their system and has to take steps to restore it or pay the ransom.

From the fine article, it didn't bother encrypting anything so that certainly bumps it way up on the lame scale. But it's not like people received notices in their inbox demanding ransom for something that never got installed.

Comment Re:Archive its DNA (Score 3, Funny) 287

For the love of Dog, compress it! tar cvfz / tar xvfz, how hard can it be ?

I've found the bzip2 algorithm far more effective in compressing DNA-based tarballs. And I find the verbose option to be particularly annoying while creating or restoring jigawatt-sized tarballs.

So allow me to suggest tar cjf / tar xjf as an alternative.

Slashdot Top Deals

Put not your trust in money, but put your money in trust.