This is so very true. I've even sat there and explained to people(in simple terms) how email comes in to the server and then out to them and then the reverse when sending. A number of them still didn't get it and assumed the mail just goes directly to that single computer.
Offering a service people want is a no-brainer, offering a service people want but are unwilling to pay for is a non-starter. Motorola learned this with their "Iridium" Satellite phone service...
The reality is that the major providers have realized they make more money by charging more for less. Instead of building out the network to improve speeds and handle more customers, they just cap them and call it good. There will always be people willing to pay objectively reasonable prices for higher speeds.
As much as I hate using iDevices personally, I would hands down rather support them over any of the others. Put me in front of just about any device and I can figure it out. Put THEM in front of any other device and try to tell them where to go..... ugh. Having a unified experience helps in those cases.
I think you might be slightly confused as to where the title "douchewaffle" belongs in this situation. Take your pick of any multitude of situation where upon you have to chose between something potentially catastrophic and not nearly as catastrophic. A gun to the head is just an obvious one. So, Fucktard, get your head out of your ass.
Why does any group of people identify themselves as part of said group? They want to. In this case, it doesn't sound like a tag being forced on them. It's a name to identify as a gay gamer. No reason to think too hard.
He got thanked for finding the flaw. He got expelled for pen testing someone else's system. Two different acts, two different issues.
It's obvious that the testing was done for the right reasons, he just went about it in the wrong manner. He was smart enough to find the flaw, and morally sound enough to report the flaw. It doesn't fit to make the punishment so extreme in such a case.
The right to bear arms in the US isn't just about defending against a random individual. It's also about retaining the ability to defend against potential invasion, or to defend against a tyrannical government. As it already stands, the US government is capable of bringing to bear much greater firepower than the citizen. By that virtue alone, we're too strict with our gun control. I'm not advocating making all guns available to everyone, but complete lockdown isn't the way to go either.
It was a design choice by Google. As it became more common to include memory on the device itself, it made more sense to simplify it and make it all part of the same FS. They decided to lead by example and just not include an SD card, somewhat forcing devs to design for the internal storage primarily. The OS still supports the card and I think it's better to have one, but it's good to get away from them being mandatory from a software design perspective.
The people that claim everything is an iPhone clone obviously aren't capable of rational thought. I'm willing to accept arguments to specific claims, but it's a joke to blanket statement. As for Apple redefining the smartphones, they just happened to hit at the right time. We'd still be where we're at without them.
I have the questionable pleasure of experiencing a deluge of backscatter since the rise of the Festi botnet, and I must say that I find the lack of sanity checks on automated replies appalling. It is not a courtesy to autorespond to spam by sending the spam "back" to a person who didn't send it in the first place and gave you all the information you need to clearly and easily establish that fact (Domainkeys / SPF).
There is only one place for automatically sending a message back to the original sender, and that's before accepting the mail in the first place. The sender sends the address information first. Reject the email then and there and include your out of office information with the bounce. Once you've accepted the mail, don't autorespond.
I agree about companies needing to push SPF and the like more. Sure, it still can cause some headache supporting.. but it helps address the problem.
As for the second bit, you've got to be joking. First, putting the out of office in the bounceback does nothing to mitigate the issue. You're still receiving an email for each and every bounced email. Second, millions of people have email that is hosted through another company. They realistically cannot set up individual bouncebacks for every single customer.
The difference is downloading isn't providing copyrighted materials to others. Where as uploading is. Legality of downloading could be argued, but would only be one count per download. The illegality of uploading copyrighted material is known, and get one count per upload. So, yes. The damages should be different. Now, that doesn't mean I agree with the way the system is currently set up.
In one breath you are labelling people who use IM "passive aggressive" (are they really?) and in the next you seem to be advocating getting rid of the phone for other methods of communication (including IM). That doesn't make much sense at all. Also, why does using IM mean or imply as person is passive aggressive. Do you actually know what passive aggressive is, or is it just a buzzword for you? I ask because if someone were truly passive aggressive they probably wouldn't include you in the IM at all.
I can't speak for the poster, but he said his passive aggressive co-workers use IM. He didn't actually call IM users passive aggressive. There is a distinct difference between those two statements.
No offense, but the act of healing very much should draw aggro. You're telling me you wouldn't take out the guy keeping the rest of them alive? It's only logical.
Emulation can do anything with enough development time and raw computer power. But, it's a joke to consider it a valid solution to this problem. Your newer computer has 2-4 cores at 3-5ghz. Sure, it's possible to get near there with ARM. But, you have to also consider the loss in performance based on virtualization. Porting to ARM would be a much better choice.
I'm a gamer, so I'll admit some bias here. But, I don't see all the game studios (and most likely a lot of the other developers for software) switching over to ARM in the near future. It's much the same reason they don't develop for Linux, or even OSX to some extent.
They'll probably ban the person specifically, if it became an actual issue for them. One could argue how successful enforcing it would be, but nothing says they have to let them attend the games. For what it's worth, I understand both sides of this issue. However, I don't give a crap about either side.
He seems to be an idiot to me. The authenticators were created to protect a community that is targeted regularly from their own stupidity. Basically, it's to protect from phishing and keylogging. Blizzard is just offering them an additional method to secure them, for a negligible cost. As for the issue with the hack on their servers, they made sure to alert their users via their registered accounts. Any legal requirements, anything else in regards to their quality of security... I can't speak for.
In the US, virtually all hospitals are required to treat actual emergency cases. Those costs are absorbed by the hospital if/when they are unable to recover costs from the patient.
Slashdot Mirror
This is so very true. I've even sat there and explained to people(in simple terms) how email comes in to the server and then out to them and then the reverse when sending. A number of them still didn't get it and assumed the mail just goes directly to that single computer.
Just because there are bigger problems, doesn't mean you have to ignore the smaller problems.
Offering a service people want is a no-brainer, offering a service people want but are unwilling to pay for is a non-starter. Motorola learned this with their "Iridium" Satellite phone service...
The reality is that the major providers have realized they make more money by charging more for less. Instead of building out the network to improve speeds and handle more customers, they just cap them and call it good. There will always be people willing to pay objectively reasonable prices for higher speeds.
As much as I hate using iDevices personally, I would hands down rather support them over any of the others. Put me in front of just about any device and I can figure it out. Put THEM in front of any other device and try to tell them where to go..... ugh. Having a unified experience helps in those cases.
I think you might be slightly confused as to where the title "douchewaffle" belongs in this situation. Take your pick of any multitude of situation where upon you have to chose between something potentially catastrophic and not nearly as catastrophic. A gun to the head is just an obvious one. So, Fucktard, get your head out of your ass.
So, if someone places a gun to your head and tells you to [whatever] you don't think you've been forced into it? I mean, you still have a choice.
Why does any group of people identify themselves as part of said group? They want to. In this case, it doesn't sound like a tag being forced on them. It's a name to identify as a gay gamer. No reason to think too hard.
He got thanked for finding the flaw. He got expelled for pen testing someone else's system. Two different acts, two different issues.
It's obvious that the testing was done for the right reasons, he just went about it in the wrong manner. He was smart enough to find the flaw, and morally sound enough to report the flaw. It doesn't fit to make the punishment so extreme in such a case.
The right to bear arms in the US isn't just about defending against a random individual. It's also about retaining the ability to defend against potential invasion, or to defend against a tyrannical government. As it already stands, the US government is capable of bringing to bear much greater firepower than the citizen. By that virtue alone, we're too strict with our gun control. I'm not advocating making all guns available to everyone, but complete lockdown isn't the way to go either.
It was a design choice by Google. As it became more common to include memory on the device itself, it made more sense to simplify it and make it all part of the same FS. They decided to lead by example and just not include an SD card, somewhat forcing devs to design for the internal storage primarily. The OS still supports the card and I think it's better to have one, but it's good to get away from them being mandatory from a software design perspective.
The people that claim everything is an iPhone clone obviously aren't capable of rational thought. I'm willing to accept arguments to specific claims, but it's a joke to blanket statement. As for Apple redefining the smartphones, they just happened to hit at the right time. We'd still be where we're at without them.
I have the questionable pleasure of experiencing a deluge of backscatter since the rise of the Festi botnet, and I must say that I find the lack of sanity checks on automated replies appalling. It is not a courtesy to autorespond to spam by sending the spam "back" to a person who didn't send it in the first place and gave you all the information you need to clearly and easily establish that fact (Domainkeys / SPF).
There is only one place for automatically sending a message back to the original sender, and that's before accepting the mail in the first place. The sender sends the address information first. Reject the email then and there and include your out of office information with the bounce. Once you've accepted the mail, don't autorespond.
I agree about companies needing to push SPF and the like more. Sure, it still can cause some headache supporting.. but it helps address the problem.
As for the second bit, you've got to be joking. First, putting the out of office in the bounceback does nothing to mitigate the issue. You're still receiving an email for each and every bounced email. Second, millions of people have email that is hosted through another company. They realistically cannot set up individual bouncebacks for every single customer.
The difference is downloading isn't providing copyrighted materials to others. Where as uploading is. Legality of downloading could be argued, but would only be one count per download. The illegality of uploading copyrighted material is known, and get one count per upload. So, yes. The damages should be different. Now, that doesn't mean I agree with the way the system is currently set up.
Err.. Apple wanted to call it the Jobs patent, but were denied. How is it Slashdot's fault for actually referring to it as the Jobs patent?
In one breath you are labelling people who use IM "passive aggressive" (are they really?) and in the next you seem to be advocating getting rid of the phone for other methods of communication (including IM). That doesn't make much sense at all. Also, why does using IM mean or imply as person is passive aggressive. Do you actually know what passive aggressive is, or is it just a buzzword for you? I ask because if someone were truly passive aggressive they probably wouldn't include you in the IM at all.
I can't speak for the poster, but he said his passive aggressive co-workers use IM. He didn't actually call IM users passive aggressive. There is a distinct difference between those two statements.
No offense, but the act of healing very much should draw aggro. You're telling me you wouldn't take out the guy keeping the rest of them alive? It's only logical.
Emulation can do anything with enough development time and raw computer power. But, it's a joke to consider it a valid solution to this problem. Your newer computer has 2-4 cores at 3-5ghz. Sure, it's possible to get near there with ARM. But, you have to also consider the loss in performance based on virtualization. Porting to ARM would be a much better choice.
I'm a gamer, so I'll admit some bias here. But, I don't see all the game studios (and most likely a lot of the other developers for software) switching over to ARM in the near future. It's much the same reason they don't develop for Linux, or even OSX to some extent.
Sure, if you want to go with a completely new set of ARM apps. Doesn't matter if Linux, Windows RT, or whatever. You can't run x86 apps.
I can't see how one can reasonably include overhead that's suffered only on the first hop into the "traffic" measurement.
It's easier to see if you're getting paid more for it.
They'll probably ban the person specifically, if it became an actual issue for them. One could argue how successful enforcing it would be, but nothing says they have to let them attend the games. For what it's worth, I understand both sides of this issue. However, I don't give a crap about either side.
So he ends up with a bit over AUD $425k (USD $441) for his trouble.
I find the lack of "k" in the USD humorous.. completely untrue, but humorous.
There are legitimate business reasons for all caps. Only one I know of is tax returns, but wouldn't be surprised for there to be others.
He seems to be an idiot to me. The authenticators were created to protect a community that is targeted regularly from their own stupidity. Basically, it's to protect from phishing and keylogging. Blizzard is just offering them an additional method to secure them, for a negligible cost. As for the issue with the hack on their servers, they made sure to alert their users via their registered accounts. Any legal requirements, anything else in regards to their quality of security... I can't speak for.
I can definitely think of some better hobbies..
In the US, virtually all hospitals are required to treat actual emergency cases. Those costs are absorbed by the hospital if/when they are unable to recover costs from the patient.