Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Missing the point... there coming global villag (Score 1) 105

OK, you don't like jack-booted authoritarians. Me neither. What are you going to do about it?

Your example of such an interrogation room is an argument for more surveillance: of police, of government, and that that information be public. Watching the watchers can happen If everything done by police and government is public information that can be found easily, then the police state has a much tougher time of it. Are secrets really helpful to us, or only those in power? Is surveillance the problem, or is the problem only that if it is one-way? If it becomes possible to know everything about everyone, how do we decide who should know what ? How do we catch cheaters of those rules?

Besides, the surveillance is going to happen anyways, you aren't going to stop it. No-one can. Restricting surveillance is likely the worst case scenario that restricts those capabilities to only *authorities* for important reasons like *national security*... restricting surveillance leads to exactly the case you are worried about. I'm worried that the price of defending privacy is to be defenseless to authoritarians.

Comment Re:IPv6 is designed to break privacy (Score 1) 105

In theory, networking is best when it is entirely exposed and valid. I'm afraid that in the real world, it is constantly being adjusted and tuned, locally optimized for both cost savings and security. NAT is _supposed_ to break networking, to prevent reaching into an internal network from outside without specific designated service by the NAT gateway owner.

> The addresses used by IPv6 privacy extensions rotate more rapidly than IPv4 DHCP4,

I'm sad to say "so what"? The addresses are not exposed through random network scans. They're exposed by traffic sniffing, and logs collected on remote services. And the attackers do not care, and the home or small business user typically has no interest, nor capacity in skills, to enable the IPv6 "stateless addresses" And I'm afraid the addresses are not, by any means, "stateless"

You obviously have never used IPv6 from an ISP. The way people "enable stateless addresses" is to either tick a box on their router or do absolutely nothing, as the ISP will just give them a router with it configured by default, and modern OS's will *just work*. It is LESS complicated than NAT, as you don't even need an internal DHCP. *stateless* refers to the way addresses are negotiated WITHOUT NEEDING A CENTRAL SERVER. It's FAR MORE ANONYMOUS than NAT on DHCP. each host basically asks the network... uh hey guys? is this (randomly chosen) address taken? and if no one complains, it starts using it, for a day or so, when it repeats the process, so no address is used for more than a day or so. With NAT, your public IP address (assigned by the ISP) lasts for weeks.

This whole *IPv6 is a privacy problem* meme is really ignorant misinformation. Privacy is one of the biggest pros of IPv6. breaking networking makes it reliant on intervening parties. Expecting there to be intervening parties is, itself, the antithesis of privacy. You're just wrong. stop spouting nonsense.

Comment Re:IPv6 is designed to break privacy (Score 4, Interesting) 105

Please read up on Bellheads vs. netheads: https://www.wired.com/1996/10/... for networking to function best it needs to be end-to-end, and NAT breaks it. It's not a detail. It's not small kludge. It is fundamental breakage that prevents true peer-to-peer networking that happens, and forces people to use third parties to connect to one another. Hint: that's not a privacy feature.

IPv6 with RAD includes privacy extensions by default and dead easy to deploy (even easier than DHCP on a home router.) While with typical IPv4 nat, someone who wants to map your home network just has to find your subnet, then has 255 or fewer addresses to ping. In contrast, using bog standard IPv6 (the privacy extensions became standard fifteen odd years ago?), you need to search 2 billion internets worth of addresses to map each home network, which will, at least, take much longer, but really, it is practically infeasible.

The addresses used by IPv6 privacy extensions rotate more rapidly than IPv4 DHCP4, because they run multiple addresses at once. To argue that IPv4 is more privacy oriented than IPv6 is idiocy. Don't be an idiot.

Comment Missing the point... there coming global village (Score 3, Interesting) 105

Folks railing against government suveillance are completely missing the point. Facial/bio recognition and license plate reading tech are only going to get cheaper over time. At a mall chain in Canada, there was an small kerfuffle because they started analyzing data from a camera and mike to do demographics of people asking questions: https://globalnews.ca/news/437...

Small companies get security contractors to operate their cameras, cameras that film people going into many small stores in the same area. The shops will know who you are when you enter, what your credit rating is, and whether you are suspected of anything, and none of that will be government information, and none of will require some massive db operated by big, bad FAANG, or the government. FAANG are just the first to set a pattern that smaller actors can use going forward. The benefit for most people will be decent customer service, and security more focused on bad actors. Companies will have more bang/$ on security spend, and could improve their sales. Everybody wins, which is why it will happen.

Those bleating about personal information are the 21st century version of throwing clogs. It will be too cheap, and too easy to not happen. Information wants to be free, and that includes what you look like, and where you spend your money. I'm not advocating this, it's just that the economic incentives tilt the tables that way whether we want it or not. So go ahead and call yourself rabiddog43

The companies will tag rabiddog43 as the one that drives a 2013 vw jetta diesel with license place x1z 251, his credit card number, and the name on it. The malls and shops will have footage of your car, your walk, your face if you ever visit any of them. The phone company will have all your movements throughout the day, based on cell tower telemetry. if they're google, they will have lower time resolution data from routine GPS pings. This is all information that they have as the normal course of doing their legitimate business.

You want the cell phone not to track your location? Your phone needs to talk to a nearby tower. Want 911 to work, in a car accident? what about traffic congestion data? GPS& tower data is helpful... Want people to accept your credit card? (cash will die soon, too expensive to deal with.) As soon as you attempt any commercial transaction, you are toast.

In the future, everyone you deal with knows *who you are* in the sense of having some summary of your digital history, if you are making any kind of commercial transaction, just like the small villages we lived in for tens of thousands of years. Honour and reputation will again become hugely important as it was of old, because the entire world will track how you behave. Everyone will behave well, or else.

Who needs big brother if there are a thousand little brothers? If ten or fifteen little brothers have *got it wrong* about something is that actually easier to fix than having one big brother? The real question we have is not whether we will be surveilled, it's how fragmented we want that surveillance to be, and who watches the watchers.

Laws need to evolve to deal with pervasive personal information, where it is everywhere, held by companies large and small, and understand that personal information is helpful to governments in providing services, not just policing. It's a conversation we aren't having yet, with all the privacy commissioners and luddites trying to shove the genie back into the bottle. Valiant effort. won't work.

Comment You can't innovate doing a B.S job. (Score 1) 899

Basic income liberates people to do whatever they want. Doing whatever they want may lead to nothing, but it's the only thing that ever leads to anything. It also provides support for currently non-remunerated activities such as caring for others, or poetry & art.

If you guarantee people something that takes a great deal of time, they cannot use that time to improve themselves, or start innovative companies, or write the next Harry Potter.

Keeping people busy, is like daycare. The point of the robot society is that our basic needs can be met, so we don't need to base survival on labour. Everyone can live a life that in former times was of the upper class, in that they are free to pursue their interests. Having a larger group of people able to pursue their dreams has got to have a far higher upside than just keeping people busy.

Comment Re:military spec is only down to -32C? (Score 1) 68

My car was reporting "is a cold day, but not unheard of" ... try Edmonton (january 2018 extreme was -34.6, February minimum was -40.1 ( http://climate.weather.gc.ca/c... ) or Whitehorse, or Longyearbyen, or Murmansk, or Tuktoyaktuk, or... there are a lot places people live that are colder than Montreal is the point. -32C is not a minimum temp that makes much sense for people living near the poles or even in northerly cities or at some altitudes.

Another poster mentioned mil-spec as -55 which makes more sense. So they didn't test true mil spec, but mil-spec with a reduced temperature range... Makes more sense.

Comment military spec is only down to -32C? (Score 1) 68

> Celsius (159.8 degrees Fahrenheit) and as low as -32 degrees pfft... -32C is a cold day in Montreal, but not unheard of at all... Last winter the pleather case for my raybans shatterred when I got my sunglasses out of it in the morning. seems like *military specs* doesn't include the arctic (and Montreal is south of Seattle, not even close to arctic.) I would worry about such a display if it we ever left overnight in the car.

Comment Especially if the OEM won't repair it. (Score 1) 108

Not a dupe, but highly correlated issue. Where the lifespan of equipment that can be responsibly used is limited by it's software support lifespan: https://ask.slashdot.org/story... Someone builds a 100K$ piece of equipment using a windows 7 workstation as a front-end, and in 2020 it's a paperweight?

Comment Re:It's great.... (Score 1) 300

machines are big these days, and there is a lot of code that doesn't need performance, but say we take you at your word, it's still not python's fault: you designed it wrong. Python makes it as easy as possible to implement algorithms, and the result is readable, so they can be discussed and changed. If it doesn't go fast enough for your needs, then you did not figure out an appropriate solution. I have replaced C code with python, where the python ran 10x faster. This happens because people writing in more difficult languages spend a lot of time sweating the details, so they don't have as much time on the bigger picture. A nearly ideal way to approach a lot of problems is to figure out the algorithms in python, even while you keep C in the back of your head. Once you have something that works, you can replace the performance critical bits in C, but likely >90% of the code will still be OK in python.

Slashdot Top Deals

One way to make your old car run better is to look up the price of a new model.

Working...