and justifiably so...Linux is still considered the cheapskate OS.
Development of FF for Linux takes resources. There are only 3,000 Linux Firefox users out there when, every year, FF Windows browser crashes affect over 40,000 people. They should drop Linux support and instead focus their development on the Windows version, a lot more people would be saved!
Actually, this kind of thing has happened repeatedly. For example, there have been several jailbreaks for iOS devices simply by surfing to a specific website. And since this system, as described, involves the cars actively communicating with one another, it certainly is possible.
Not really. The reason it worked on iOS is that it had a malformed file (PDF I think?) that the USER had to DIRECT the phone to go open. How are you going to get two cars, that are talking to each other automatically, to do that? Are cars even going to have PDF support? Okay I'm being facetious, but there's no indication in the article that these cars are sending anything binary to each other. In fact, they go into numbers about what these things send to each other and it's comically small . You'd have to break their encryption and find an exploit in their software to trigger the, for lack of a better term, jail break. Then you've gotta get this car to reboot, download a new package to install, execute it, activate again, and finally tell its human that it should crater the car all without raising suspicion.
Not a very plausible scenario.
For example, altering the system of your own car to provide false data may cause the other car to give false warnings.
That depends on being able to even know how to malform the data (not easy on several fronts), getting the car to transmit it, and on the message being of one that is trollish in nature. Again, not plausible. These cars aren't going to send, for example, data on an imminent collision you're going to have. Since these cars won't ever send it, they won't have a way to receive it with a case that'd alert the driver.
This is not 'drivers surfing the net', it's cars sending a swarm of small packets to each other. The two main ingredients you need, a human making the requests and a broad enough range of packages to deliver, aren't there.
But, do you mean to claim that if I take that patent, word-for-word, and just append "...on a phone." at the end, I'll have a new patent I can then hold over Apple?
A belief in the impeccability of the company charter as well as well the company's adherence to it over decades?
What really muddies this topic is sensationalism. Slashdot, in particular, is not very trustworthy when it comes to the facts behind its headlines and/or summaries. After enough cries of wolf, combined with a habit of NOT reading the FA, you're going to get those that'll post their knee-jerk reaction.
That distinction, though much maligned here, is actually good. Otherwise the patent would be absurdly broad instead of very specific. Then again, Im saying this to people who think patents are just six words long.
1) My original reply started with "I think if if you can hack the system"
Speaking of whoosh, you're not just talking about hacking the system, you're talking about completely pwning it in a way that, so far, hasn't even been managed with cell phones in the way you're describing. So were you inspired by Eureka or Smallville?
3) The software industry does not have a great record of producing software that cannot be hacked.
I think if if you can hack the system so it says to another driver: "Vehicle approaching from left...change lanes to avoid vehicle...warning...collision warning...turn left now to avoid collision...turn left now to avoid collision..." you will get a fair number of people who would turn left regardless of whether there is someplace to turn left to or there is something in the way.
A simpler explanation is that people love to argue and arguments are easier to fight when you're actually knowledgeable about the topic you're debating. At least this explains why people bring up Android and iOS in threads that have nothing to do with either.
Is there any research into what turns affinity for a product into to the need to be a dick about it?
It often starts when a bunch of people start bitching about a product. Sooner or later people check it out on their own, realize that the hate for it has been sensationalized, and they take the opposite view.
I'm talking about actual fanboyism, though. Most of the time on Slashdot people are labeled 'fanboys' when they actually come up with a good argument and a good rebuttal is not immediately forthcoming. This is often followed by an accusation of being on said company's payroll.
Slashdot Mirror
and justifiably so...Linux is still considered the cheapskate OS.
Development of FF for Linux takes resources. There are only 3,000 Linux Firefox users out there when, every year, FF Windows browser crashes affect over 40,000 people. They should drop Linux support and instead focus their development on the Windows version, a lot more people would be saved!
Actually, this kind of thing has happened repeatedly. For example, there have been several jailbreaks for iOS devices simply by surfing to a specific website. And since this system, as described, involves the cars actively communicating with one another, it certainly is possible.
Not really. The reason it worked on iOS is that it had a malformed file (PDF I think?) that the USER had to DIRECT the phone to go open. How are you going to get two cars, that are talking to each other automatically, to do that? Are cars even going to have PDF support? Okay I'm being facetious, but there's no indication in the article that these cars are sending anything binary to each other. In fact, they go into numbers about what these things send to each other and it's comically small . You'd have to break their encryption and find an exploit in their software to trigger the, for lack of a better term, jail break. Then you've gotta get this car to reboot, download a new package to install, execute it, activate again, and finally tell its human that it should crater the car all without raising suspicion.
Not a very plausible scenario.
For example, altering the system of your own car to provide false data may cause the other car to give false warnings.
That depends on being able to even know how to malform the data (not easy on several fronts), getting the car to transmit it, and on the message being of one that is trollish in nature. Again, not plausible. These cars aren't going to send, for example, data on an imminent collision you're going to have. Since these cars won't ever send it, they won't have a way to receive it with a case that'd alert the driver.
This is not 'drivers surfing the net', it's cars sending a swarm of small packets to each other. The two main ingredients you need, a human making the requests and a broad enough range of packages to deliver, aren't there.
Conceded, my bad.
But, do you mean to claim that if I take that patent, word-for-word, and just append "...on a phone." at the end, I'll have a new patent I can then hold over Apple?
If you had beaten Apple to using it, possibly.
A belief in the impeccability of the company charter as well as well the company's adherence to it over decades?
What really muddies this topic is sensationalism. Slashdot, in particular, is not very trustworthy when it comes to the facts behind its headlines and/or summaries. After enough cries of wolf, combined with a habit of NOT reading the FA, you're going to get those that'll post their knee-jerk reaction.
And by your own post you are as much a Bigot if not more.
Try holding yourself to the same standard you demand of others.
Mod parent up.
Heh. Im guessing you dream of one day posting at +2? And they say ths site has a low signal-to-noise-ratio.
BBS != phone.
That distinction, though much maligned here, is actually good. Otherwise the patent would be absurdly broad instead of very specific. Then again, Im saying this to people who think patents are just six words long.
1) My original reply started with "I think if if you can hack the system"
Speaking of whoosh, you're not just talking about hacking the system, you're talking about completely pwning it in a way that, so far, hasn't even been managed with cell phones in the way you're describing. So were you inspired by Eureka or Smallville?
3) The software industry does not have a great record of producing software that cannot be hacked.
Enhance!!!
Yes. News reports of people following directions from their GPS navigators turning into ditches, going the wrong way down one-ways, etc...
Not due to hacking.
I think if if you can hack the system so it says to another driver:
"Vehicle approaching from left...change lanes to avoid vehicle...warning...collision warning...turn left now to avoid collision...turn left now to avoid collision..."
you will get a fair number of people who would turn left regardless of whether there is someplace to turn left to or there is something in the way.
You watch too much TV.
It sounds like hacking this means you don't get warned, how is that creating collisions?
It doesn't. He's mugging for an 'Insightful' mod.
Not only that, but you'll be aware of the people spoofing police in order to get everyone else out of their way.
Why? Are you going to drive around with the blast shields down?
Thank you. :)
Right, but until that quake happens their competitors are on equal footing.
On the other hand, the same manufacturer must not have any business with any of Apple's competitors...
Not quite. It's not about having any business at all with any of Apple's competitors, it's about Samsung themselves being a direct competitor.
First of all, having only one supplier for a critical component is risky...
That risk is offset by tying up that supplier so they're the only one that can use them.
Or maybe they see the value in having a supplier that doesn't represent a conflict of interest.
Thanks for taking the time to answer. Quick question: In GIMP, can you have it auto-generate a drop-shadow or glow?
Also, have you run across any tools or effects not present in Photoshop?
Yes, I've seen fish out of water before.
Gee, did you just now spot the pattern after 15 years of sharks with frickin laser beams jokes?
Never memorize what you can look up in books. --Albert_Einstein
I'm inclined to agree. What's more valuable: Knowing how to solve problems or memorizing the solutions to a bunch of problems?
Thankfully, I don't work the sort of job you do and can use Skype and WebEx, but this really isn't a rebuttal.
FTFY.
Lewis and Clark didn't have a 40+ hours x 50 weeks job to pay their mortgages.
You're mistaking convenience for impossibility.
You're mistaken in thinking you have a proper perspective on this topic.
A simpler explanation is that people love to argue and arguments are easier to fight when you're actually knowledgeable about the topic you're debating. At least this explains why people bring up Android and iOS in threads that have nothing to do with either.
Is there any research into what turns affinity for a product into to the need to be a dick about it?
It often starts when a bunch of people start bitching about a product. Sooner or later people check it out on their own, realize that the hate for it has been sensationalized, and they take the opposite view.
I'm talking about actual fanboyism, though. Most of the time on Slashdot people are labeled 'fanboys' when they actually come up with a good argument and a good rebuttal is not immediately forthcoming. This is often followed by an accusation of being on said company's payroll.