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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:No shit (Score 1) 577

Nope. I find none of that stuff helps. All I do is:

1) Run a good AV scanner (NOD32) as a last line of defense to make sure I don't get malware.

2) Uninstall shit when I don't need it.

3) Have normal maintenance shit like have trim run on the drives at regular intervals and such.

Comment Re:This wont work because... (Score 1) 482

It probably will work to some degree, but I could imagine the following scenario: A woman sets up her profile and her picture is hidden. She expresses herself well in writing, and men are forced to take the time to read her profile, which is enticing. After striking up a good rapport, she reveals her picture. Uh oh. She is, shall we say, not too impressive. The guy drops her like a hot potato. That's not easy for anybody. So, in those cases, it's not going to work well.

Feed Techdirt: Sheriff Slams EFF As 'Not Credible,' Insists ComputerCOP Isn't Malware & Wou (google.com)

Okay, so we thought the response from San Diego's District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis was pretty bad to the revelations about ComputerCOP. After all, she was responding to the news that she had purchased and distributed dangerous spyware masquerading as software to "protect the children" -- and the best she could come up with was that her "security" people still thought it would protect kids? But apparently Damanis has nothing on Sheriff Mike Blakely of Limestone County, Alabama.

Blakely, in a bit of unfortunate timing, just announced that his department had purchased 5,000 copies of the spyware earlier this week, so perhaps it's understandable that this "perfect election and fundraising tool" might actually turn into something of a liability. But Blakely's not going down without a fight. When presented with the news that he's proudly handing out tools that are making the children he's supposed to be protecting less safe, Blakely went with an ad hom the messenger approach, attacking EFF's credibility, and calling them "liberals."

Blakely referred to the EFF criticism politics as an "Ultra-liberal organization that is not in any way credible on this. They're more interested in protecting predators and pedophiles than in protecting our children."
Anyone even remotely familiar with EFF recognizes that basically every word in that statement is ridiculous, but what are you going to do? The idea that EFF isn't credible on security issues is laugh out loud funny (and, indeed, despite attending a conference and being in a room full of people, I literally laughed out loud upon reading it). However, Blakely insists his IT people are sure the software's fine:

"We have had the key logger checked out with our IT people. They have run it on our computer system." He said. "There is no malware."
Reread that a few times. "We had the key logger checked out... there is no malware." Dude. A keylogger is malware. That's what it does. From the description here, it sounds like his "IT people" ran some anti-malware software on the computer they installed ComputerCOP on, and because it didn't flag it, they insist it's not malware. But a keylogger is malware by definition. And the fact that this malware happens to pass unencrypted text, including passwords and credit card numbers, over the internet makes it really, really bad.

But don't tell that to Sheriff Blakely. He insists that ComputerCOP might have stopped Columbine. I'm not joking.

On the phone Wednesday he added "There are some parents out in Columbine Colorado, if they had this kind of software, things would have turned out differently."
That comment is so off it defies a coherent response.

Meanwhile, I'm sure that Sheriff Blakely's "IT People" are trustworthy, given that his website looks like it was designed in 1997 and hasn't been touched since. It even has a visitor counter and a "this site best viewed in Internet Explorer" badge. I'm not joking. And a scroll. The only thing it's missing is an under construction gif and the blink tag: And, uh, note that text there:

You are not permitted to copy, broadcast, download, store (in any medium), transmit, show or play in public, adapt or change in any way, the content of these web pages for any other purpose whatsoever without the prior written permission of the site webmaster.
And there's a copyright notice below it. Of course, anyone who views the website has copied, downloaded, stored and transmitted the webpage in some manner -- so, I'm not quite sure what to do other than to say, that most of those demands are completely bogus and not based on any actual law. As for the copyright -- well, while technically only federal government works are exempt from copyright, and state and local governments can get a copyright in some fashion, it's generally not considered the appropriate role of government officials to be copyrighting official government works. Furthermore, in such cases, there would likely be a very strong presumption of fair use for a whole host of reasons.

Oh, but it gets worse. Not only are you not supposed to copy any of the text on Sheriff Blakely's website, the terms of service on his website say he might put you in jail if you do:

The unauthorized use, copy, or reproduction of any content of this site inclusive, may be punishable by both fine and imprisonment.
Under what legal theory is that happening? As a sheriff, aren't you supposed to, you know, actually know what the law is? Maybe work on that before slamming the good folks at EFF while distributing dangerous spyware that makes kids less safe. And find someone who's built a website in the last decade.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story








Comment Treat people like people (Score 5, Interesting) 482

I haven't been on a dating site for some time since having found someone (not on a dating site, BTW) and taking myself out of the game. But several years ago I was on a couple of dating sites geared specifically towards Christians. I was in my 40's and looking for age-appropriate matches. I try to be as well mannered online as I am face to face, especially on a dating site. I had very little problems getting responses, and what I learned from many of the women I talked to surprised me. A lot of them told me about how lewd and creepy the men were -- and this was supposed to be a Christian dating site! In contrast I always behaved as a gentleman, and in fact, I had to hide my online status sometimes because when I logged on I would get inundated with chat requests.

Unfortunately I never found anyone who was a great match. Distance was usually a problem. I met someone the traditional way.

It seems to me that a lot of people cannot handle the anonymity that an online presence provides. This is true, not just of dating sites, but everywhere. There is a tendency to objectify everyone. Men are particularly bad at it, but I've seen women do it too. The thing is, people like to be treated like people. A good rule of thumb is to not say anything to anyone that you wouldn't say within arm's reach.
     

Social Networks

Online Creeps Inspire a Dating App That Hides Women's Pictures 482

HughPickens.com (3830033) writes "Tricia Romano reports at the Seattle Times that Susie Lee and Katrina Hess have developed Siren, a new online dating app designed to protect against men inundating women with messages that are by turns gross, hilarious, objectifying and just plain sad. A 2012 experiment by Jon Millward, a data journalist, found that women were messaged 17 times more than men; the best-looking woman received 536 messages in four months, while the best-looking guy received only 38. Lee hopes to change the nature of the messages and put women in the driver's seat. As online dating options have grown, Lee noticed that her friends' frustration did, too: With every good introduction often came a slew of lewd ones. "I just started looking (at online dating options) and very quickly realized how many things are out there and how immediately my 'creepy meter' went up," Lee says. The free iPhone app, currently launched to a select market in Seattle in August, allows women to peruse men's pictures and their answers to the "Question of the Day" ("You found a magic lamp and get three wishes. What are they?") and view their Video Challenges ("Show us a hidden gem in Seattle"). If a woman is suitably impressed by a man's answers, she can make herself visible to him. Only then can he see what she looks like. "It's a far more thoughtful — and cautious — approach than the one taken by the dating app of the moment, Tinder, which is effectively a "hot or not" game, with little information beyond a few photos, age and volunteered biographical tidbits," writes Romano. "And the implicit notion that it's a "hookup" app can be uncomfortable for some women." OK Cupid's stats as illustrated by co-founder Christian Rudder give another example of how steep the curve is, when it comes to physical attractiveness vs. messages received on online dating sites.

Comment Re:Is the immune system working? (Score 1) 724

Actually 4chan has been executed.

All the old mods were mass-fired and replaced with new ones, one who have absolutely no connection with the community there.

Word on the street is that Moot has a new group of friends now and is trying to get into the SV startup scene.

New friends didn't approve of 4chan, so handng the site over to executioners was part of his initation ritual.

Networking

Ask Slashdot: Is It Worth Being Grandfathered On Verizon's Unlimited Data Plan? 209

An anonymous reader writes I understand a lot of people dislike Verizon in general, but assuming for a moment that they were your only option for a cellular service provider, is staying on their grandfathered unlimited data plan still worth it? Their recent announcement to not throttle traffic is inpiring, but I just don't know the long-term benefits of staying on this plan. I fear there is a tipping point where enough people will swap over to a metered plan and Verizon will ultimately abandon the unlimited altogether and assume the risk of losing a percentage of those remaining folks, at which point all of us who bought unsubsidized phones will have wasted the money doing so. Does anyone have any insight on this? Useful answers to this should take into account the problem with the question of "How long is a piece of string?" Give some context about how much you pay, and how much you use -- and how much that would change if the price were different.

Submission + - The extensive security behind Apple Pay (tuaw.com)

An anonymous reader writes: With Apple Pay slated to go live later this month, one can soon expect to see an avalanche of fear mongering from pundits who, like PayPal, will question the wisdom of trusting Apple with user credit card information.

The reality, though, is that Apple Pay is an exceedingly secure mobile payment platform. In fact, it may very well be the safest way to make any type of credit card payment.

Apple Pay relies on an emerging tokenization standard whereby merchants never touch a user's credit card data. What's more, credit card information is never stored on the iPhone nor on Apple's servers. Additionally, Apple, along with banks and credit card networks, have implemented multiple layers of security and encryption mechanisms to ensure that Apple Pay transactions remain free from prying eyes.

Here's how the whole system works.

Submission + - Satellites reveal hidden features at the bottom of Earth's seas (sciencemag.org)

sciencehabit writes: Oceanographers have a saying: Scientists know more about the surface of Mars than they do about the landscape at the bottom of our oceans. But that may soon change. Using data from satellites that measure variations in Earth’s gravitational field, researchers have found a new and more accurate way to map the sea floor. The improved resolution has already allowed them to identify previously hidden features—including thousands of extinct volcanoes more than 1000 meters tall—as well as piece together some lingering uncertainties in Earth’s ancient history.

Comment Re:This is what happens.... (Score 1) 274

All of our criminal code in the US with regards to sex crimes needs to be scrapped and rewritten by people from another planet who haven't been influenced by religion and/or tradition.

You should think that through a little more. Extraterrestrials might breed like spiders where the males get cannibalized after mating. Can you imagine "To Catch a Predator" on another planet?

CHRIS HANSEN: Tonight, we're waiting for NudeSpiderMan as he crawls up... he thinks he's just here for sex. Little does he know that he's about to get trapped in our web.
NudeSpiderMan: Hi, are you "Charolette"?
DECOY: Wow, you look cute! Hold on while I finish spinning this orb around the lunch I just caught for us!
NudeSpiderMan: Sure babe, take your time...
CHRIS HANSEN: Hi! How are you doin'?
NudeSpiderMan: Oh no! All the way here I wanted to turn around! I knew I was being stupid!
CHRIS HANSEN: well, NudeSpiderMan, I don't understand. You knew she was going to rip your head off, but you came here anyway...?
NudeSpiderMan: Yeah, yeah... sigh... I knew I was stupid... I kept telling myself to turn around... Now I'm losing everything!
DECOY: Oooh, yeah! SWIPE *munch* *munch*
NudeSpiderMan: Chris? Chris? Are you OK? Oh no... she went for him instead... I'm such a loser!
DECOY: You know, I might want seconds!
NudeSpiderMan: Well babe, I still want to stick my head in your mouth, even if I'm not your first...

Software

End of an Era: After a 30 Year Run, IBM Drops Support For Lotus 1-2-3 156

klubar writes Although it has been fading for years, the final death knell came recently for the iconic Lotus 1-2-3. In many ways, Lotus 1-2-3 launched the PC era (and ensured the Apple II success), and once was a serious competitor for Excel (and prior to that Multiplan and VisiCalc). Although I doubt if anyone is creating new Lotus 1-2-3 spreadsheets, I'm sure there are spreadsheets still being used who trace their origin to Lotus 1-2-3, and even Office 2013 still has some functions and key compatibility with Lotus 1-2-3. Oh, how far the mighty have fallen.

Submission + - Shellshock Proves It: CGI Must Die 1

snydeq writes: Remember that incredibly stupid thing you did a decade or two ago? You wouldn't want to live it down every day. Neither should the Internet, writes Andrew C. Oliver, putting CGI squarely in the cross hairs, thanks to Shellshock. 'Frankly, this nasty bug in Bash should not be a big deal — and wouldn’t be if it weren’t for CGI, one of the most widespread, terrible ideas ever invented. ... If not for CGI, this bug would be a minor privilege escalation path for users with permissions to kick off shell scripts as root (or other more privileged users). It would not be an “oh, did someone break the Internet again?”-level threat. The issue is that CGI exposes the HTTP headers as environment variables, and since Bash may be kicking off your shell script, anyone on the Internet can do it.'

Slashdot Top Deals

It is clear that the individual who persecutes a man, his brother, because he is not of the same opinion, is a monster. - Voltaire

Working...