because those chips are pure security theater, protecting only against the (quite rare) 'skimming' devices
Chip and PIN also protects you against having your card stolen and used in store, because the only verification is the signature - which is conveniently already on the back of the card for the thief to copy (and usually checked by a singularly uninterested human).
Secondly, how rare is "quite rare"?
How the authors conclude that this has anything to do with ATM bombings is a complete mystery.
Yes, that bit confuses me as well. The link that the Slashdot editors have added goes to a story about card data being hacked to allow unlimited withdrawals, and the like - not nicking someone's card and taking out their money.
The iPad Is 5 Years Old This Week, But You Still Don't Need One
Who are you, Mr Headline, to tell me I don't need an iPad? I think most Slashdot readers are more than capable of making up their own minds on this one.
Are these mega-scopes just PR exercises or are they necessary instruments?
It's just a proposal at this stage, which is coincidentally generating a bit of PR by getting people reading and talking about NASA. As to "necessary," well, none of it's necessary, but the thought of getting 1000x Hubble resolution has got to be at least worth costing up.
I thought radio astronomy surpassed narrow-band subjective Galilean astronomy decades ago.
They're complimentary. You might be able to see "more" in most objective terms from the ground in radio than visible light, but that doesn't mean visible light can't provide information you can't get from radio.
Smithers: [over intercom] Principal Skinner, this is your secretary. There is one last student here to see you. Skinner: That's odd. I don't have a secretary...or an intercom. But send him in.
[Burns enters dressed like Jimbo] Burns: Ahoy, there, Dean. I understand you're taking suggestions from students, eh?
[sits on desk; groans as his knee bends painfully]
Well, me and my fourth form chums think it would be quite corking if you'd sign over your oil well to the local energy concern. Skinner: [clears throat] Mr. Burns? Burns: Buh! Skinner: It was naive of you to think I would mistake this town's most prominent 104-year-old man for one of my elementary school students.
Not necessarily. It makes it easier for speeders to avoid being caught. It might reduce speeding at the specific location that a speed trap has been reported, but it's not going to make any difference to other locations (and might just, in fact, lead to more speeding there since drivers will know that at least some of the cops are engaged elsewhere).
Not that I think the practice should be banned - that's going way too far. Discouraged, perhaps, but if you can't report a publicly visible fact to another human being then I don't know what the world's coming to. "There's a government official performing an official duty at location X" is certainly not stalking in the same category of reporting on Facebook that "I followed my ex to the supermarket and she bought panties." *
I disagree that it was clear, and your belligerent tone certainly doesn't help matters (and is the main reason for me replying in the first place).
Attributes like "bullshit" or "nonsense" clearly mark opinions, not statements of fact.
I disagree. Both are synonyms for "false," as in "this is false."
You seem to have some rather serious problem interpreting what people say.
And if I said that was "bullshit" I don't see how anyone could interpret that other than as an absolute denial of your impression. You seem to me to have a problem with other people differing with you - I don't know whether that's actually true or not, but you certainly come across that way.
When you declared the proposed - admittedly unlikely - scenario to be first "nonsense" and then "bullshit." And also when you stated as apparent fact that "[t]his is some kid that lost control of their toy" which I would otherwise dismiss as mere emphasis if it wasn't for your generally churlish attitude.
But now you're saying you could - however unlikely that may be - be wrong?
If people with your antagonistic style of rebuttal were to try crying "bullshit" less often and replacing it something along the lines of "that's extremely unlikely and here's why," people might actually pay a bit more attention to their arguments.
Any halfway competent engineer would have though of all that and made sure it does not happen.
I guess the guys behind SpaceX's last landing attempt weren't halfway competent, then? Obviously they should have made sure a crash couldn't happen before attempting a landing. What a bunch of idiots.
You can't make sure that absolutely nothing will go wrong. That's the only certainty. Any halfway competent engineer would know that.
A "less than halfway competent" attempt is no danger.
There isn't some magical line of competency below which all plans are automatically doomed to failure. You seem to think only in binary terms, or at least you phrase your comments in that way.
Not to mention that the "good guys" in this case have shown themselves to be less than competent on more than one recent occasion.
Really, stop being stupid. Stop spreading fear.
Actually what I'm mainly trying to do is provide a little counterpoint to your somewhat arrogant insistence that you are definitely 100% correct.
Any halfway professional attempt of testing things would not have lost the drone
How can you be so sure? Perhaps they pushed the range too far and/or there was some unexpected interference. The point of a test, after all, is to check for the kind of things you haven't predicted.
That aside, why couldn't it be a less than halfway professional proof of concept attempt?
Lastly, maybe ascertaining/provoking the security response to a drone on the lawn was the point.
Which law enshrines the sanctity of a "promise"? Does the law even recognise such a thing as a promise in such broad (non-contractual) terms?
Obviously, if you provably made the promise and then break it by going around suing, that's going to strongly count against you in (civil?) court. But that doesn't mean that the breaking of the promise was illegal.
The company confirmed that Windows 10 will also include Internet Explorer for enterprise sites
Are they including it to support outdated sites that require older versions of IE? Because that's not limited to "enterprise" sites, nor are all "enterprise" sites out of date.
Slashdot Mirror
Free prostate exam: Room 11
Bionic eye implants: Room 1!
because those chips are pure security theater, protecting only against the (quite rare) 'skimming' devices
Chip and PIN also protects you against having your card stolen and used in store, because the only verification is the signature - which is conveniently already on the back of the card for the thief to copy (and usually checked by a singularly uninterested human).
Secondly, how rare is "quite rare"?
How the authors conclude that this has anything to do with ATM bombings is a complete mystery.
Yes, that bit confuses me as well. The link that the Slashdot editors have added goes to a story about card data being hacked to allow unlimited withdrawals, and the like - not nicking someone's card and taking out their money.
you can bet your bottom someone will be doing it by the end of the week.
Not sure whether you a word or not...
I'm not sure it's that ironic, since carlsbergite is named after the Carlsberg Foundation, which was set up by Carlsberg's founder.
The iPad Is 5 Years Old This Week, But You Still Don't Need One
Who are you, Mr Headline, to tell me I don't need an iPad? I think most Slashdot readers are more than capable of making up their own minds on this one.
Here is one Slashdotter who does need his iPad.
Less op-ed clickbait, more actual news, please.
Then don't present your opinions in such absolute terms!
What's uncertain about the fact that we don't see billion-year-old civilizations around us?
The Fermi Paradox - that we don't see billion-year-old civilizations around us and we're not sure why - is a fact.
Are these mega-scopes just PR exercises or are they necessary instruments?
It's just a proposal at this stage, which is coincidentally generating a bit of PR by getting people reading and talking about NASA. As to "necessary," well, none of it's necessary, but the thought of getting 1000x Hubble resolution has got to be at least worth costing up.
I thought radio astronomy surpassed narrow-band subjective Galilean astronomy decades ago.
They're complimentary. You might be able to see "more" in most objective terms from the ground in radio than visible light, but that doesn't mean visible light can't provide information you can't get from radio.
their hunt for suspects.
Is that the hunt for people already under suspicion, or a hunt for new names to add to the list?
Young Cubans Set Up Mini-Internet
So this story's real? I thought someone was Havana laugh.
Thank you, thank you.
Smithers: [over intercom] Principal Skinner, this is your secretary. There is one last student here to see you.
Skinner: That's odd. I don't have a secretary...or an intercom. But send him in.
[Burns enters dressed like Jimbo]
Burns: Ahoy, there, Dean. I understand you're taking suggestions from students, eh?
[sits on desk; groans as his knee bends painfully]
Well, me and my fourth form chums think it would be quite corking if you'd sign over your oil well to the local energy concern.
Skinner: [clears throat] Mr. Burns?
Burns: Buh!
Skinner: It was naive of you to think I would mistake this town's most prominent 104-year-old man for one of my elementary school students.
Why Coding Are Not the New Literacy
FTFY.
It's not causing more speeding but less.
Not necessarily. It makes it easier for speeders to avoid being caught. It might reduce speeding at the specific location that a speed trap has been reported, but it's not going to make any difference to other locations (and might just, in fact, lead to more speeding there since drivers will know that at least some of the cops are engaged elsewhere).
Not that I think the practice should be banned - that's going way too far. Discouraged, perhaps, but if you can't report a publicly visible fact to another human being then I don't know what the world's coming to. "There's a government official performing an official duty at location X" is certainly not stalking in the same category of reporting on Facebook that "I followed my ex to the supermarket and she bought panties." *
* totally made up example.
Clearly I was voicing _opinions_!
I disagree that it was clear, and your belligerent tone certainly doesn't help matters (and is the main reason for me replying in the first place).
Attributes like "bullshit" or "nonsense" clearly mark opinions, not statements of fact.
I disagree. Both are synonyms for "false," as in "this is false."
You seem to have some rather serious problem interpreting what people say.
And if I said that was "bullshit" I don't see how anyone could interpret that other than as an absolute denial of your impression. You seem to me to have a problem with other people differing with you - I don't know whether that's actually true or not, but you certainly come across that way.
Oh? And where did I claim that?
When you declared the proposed - admittedly unlikely - scenario to be first "nonsense" and then "bullshit." And also when you stated as apparent fact that "[t]his is some kid that lost control of their toy" which I would otherwise dismiss as mere emphasis if it wasn't for your generally churlish attitude.
But now you're saying you could - however unlikely that may be - be wrong?
If people with your antagonistic style of rebuttal were to try crying "bullshit" less often and replacing it something along the lines of "that's extremely unlikely and here's why," people might actually pay a bit more attention to their arguments.
Any halfway competent engineer would have though of all that and made sure it does not happen.
I guess the guys behind SpaceX's last landing attempt weren't halfway competent, then? Obviously they should have made sure a crash couldn't happen before attempting a landing. What a bunch of idiots.
You can't make sure that absolutely nothing will go wrong. That's the only certainty. Any halfway competent engineer would know that.
A "less than halfway competent" attempt is no danger.
There isn't some magical line of competency below which all plans are automatically doomed to failure. You seem to think only in binary terms, or at least you phrase your comments in that way.
Not to mention that the "good guys" in this case have shown themselves to be less than competent on more than one recent occasion.
Really, stop being stupid. Stop spreading fear.
Actually what I'm mainly trying to do is provide a little counterpoint to your somewhat arrogant insistence that you are definitely 100% correct.
Any halfway professional attempt of testing things would not have lost the drone
How can you be so sure? Perhaps they pushed the range too far and/or there was some unexpected interference. The point of a test, after all, is to check for the kind of things you haven't predicted.
That aside, why couldn't it be a less than halfway professional proof of concept attempt?
Lastly, maybe ascertaining/provoking the security response to a drone on the lawn was the point.
Which law enshrines the sanctity of a "promise"? Does the law even recognise such a thing as a promise in such broad (non-contractual) terms?
Obviously, if you provably made the promise and then break it by going around suing, that's going to strongly count against you in (civil?) court. But that doesn't mean that the breaking of the promise was illegal.
Because otherwise they'd be called "fsh."
The company confirmed that Windows 10 will also include Internet Explorer for enterprise sites
Are they including it to support outdated sites that require older versions of IE? Because that's not limited to "enterprise" sites, nor are all "enterprise" sites out of date.
(4K does not count)
And why not?
- He's headed for that small porygon!
- That's no porygon. It's a duck.
- It's too angular to be a duck.
- I have a bad feeling about this...
Thanks for that. I do hope you'll let us know what other products you don't need. And if you don't own a TV, we'd love to hear about that, too.
over the internet ... access to the serial port ...
Those two snippets sound contradictory, but only because the summary has not included the most pertinent fact:
many operators use a TCP/IP card or a third-party serial port server to map the ATG serial interface to an internet-facing TCP port.