Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:and that's how we got the world of FIREFLY (Score 1) 265

GDP comparisons:

Major pro-sanctions players:
US: 16,8T
EU: 17,5T
Japan: 4,9T

Major anti-sanctions players:
Russia: 2,1T
China: 9,5T

Just ignoring the whole fiat currency issue and controlling the global banking system which act as large multipliers, China is simply not comparable to the economic pressure being levied against Russia.

Comment Re:Morons should read some economic history (Score 4, Interesting) 265

China's in this thing with Russia for precisely one thing: China. They're taking advantage of a weakened Russia to strike deals that they never would have gotten before. A good example is the "Power of Siberia" gas pipeline deal that they signed for a few years back. China's been trying for years to get Russia to bite at bargain-basement prices that leave almost no profit for Gazprom (perhaps even a slight negative that would have to be somewhat subsidized by the government's gas royalties), and Russia had been refusing. Then they sign the exact same deal they'd been refusing a few months ago and herald it as a great victory.

China has Russia in an excellent position and is going to squeeze every drop of potential profit out of their bad situation that they can. And Russia will herald it as a glorious blow to the west all the way down.

That said - even China's GDP doesn't compare to the sanction imposers (US + Europe + Japan + misc), all the leverage multipliers of global banking and fiat currency that the sanction imposers have aside. Even if China's goal was to break sanctions - which it's not - it's just not big enough, it's a third their size. And Russia a trivial fraction of that. And the multipliers of controlling the banking system and a fiat currency are very real. Throw trade into the picture, forget it - Moscow is closer to Newfoundland and Liberia than it is to Beijing. There's a giant barren wasteland between the two. They have a border but it's more of a barrier than a facilitator for trade.

As the very article linked by Slashdot put it:

"In the current conditions, any help is very welcome," Vladimir Miklashevsky, a strategist at Danske Bank A/S, said by e-mail. "Yet, it can't substitute the losses of the Russian banking system and economy from western sanctions."

Comment Re:Action movies are boring. (Score 1) 332

Maybe an animated series would be the best option. Not to mix Star Wars into a Star Trek thread, but I'm really liking what they're doing with Star Wars: Rebels. It's an animated series set just before the Rebellion began. The heroes are a group of "criminals" (as branded by the Empire) performing some shady actions while trying to do good and hurt the Empire. We know the big picture of where this Universe will head (Star Wars 4 - 6) and we know some big things that won't happen (our heroes won't bring down the Empire at all), but we don't know where the characters in this show are going which ads suspense. Any of the characters could die in any episode. Probably not (at least not so early in the series), but they could.

Imagine a similar Star Trek series that told the story of a crew of space pirates, smugglers, or something. A group that's morally ambiguous at best. A group that does good according to their view and who disagree with the Federation. You could vary stories from Them Vs. Federation tales (where each side could win the mini-conflict), visiting strange new worlds (but not with Federation rules in play), etc. This could be a very interesting series. (Not that I'm holding my breath as the current direction of Star Trek seems to be Big Stuff Blowing Up In Space.)

Comment Re:Security and Performance? (Score 1) 293

I don't think all attempts to educate the users will be successful. However, if $HOTEL posted signs saying "To connect to our Wi-Fi network, connect to $OFFICIAL_HOTEL_WI_FI_NETWORK_NAME. Connecting to other networks could leave you vulnerable to $SCARY_SOUNDING_CONSEQUENCES", then they should be liable for users connecting to the wrong Wi-Fi network and having passwords/credit card numbers/etc stolen. The hotel chain doesn't need to take proactive measures of blocking all other Wi-Fi networks just in case those are malicious (and including the ones that the guests set up themselves using their cell phones). This a clearly a money grab with a security front analogous to a cheap Halloween costume.

Comment Security and Performance? (Score 5, Interesting) 293

Looks like the hotels are claiming this is security and performance related.

Mobile hotspots can be used to “launch an attack against [a hotel] operator’s network or threaten its guests’ privacy” by gaining access to credit card numbers or other personal data, the hotel group said in its petition.

Maybe. If the mobile hotspot is called "Marriot Free Wi-Fi" but is operated by someone collecting information on anyone who connects. Then again, this could happen anywhere. This is why you don't connect to strange wi-fi networks. If you must connect to your hotel's wi-fi network, make sure you're connecting to the right one, not just one with the same name. The solution here is guest education (post signs about which Wi-Fi network to connect to, etc), not running a jammer to block everyone else's Wi-Fi signals.

Multiple outside Wi-Fi hotspots operating in a meeting room or convention center can hurt the performance of a hotel’s Wi-Fi network, the group said.

My off-the-shelf router handles multiple wi-fi networks just fine. I connect to my Wi-Fi and my performance isn't degraded because my neighbors run Wi-Fi networks of their own. A hotel should be able to invest in the infrastructure to provide their own Wi-Fi that will work regardless of whether or not I turn my phone's Wi-Fi hotspot on.

The "security" and "performance" claims are garbage. The real reason is that they want to be able to sell you their Wi-Fi service for a ton of cash and it's hard to do this when you can bring your own Wi-Fi network in with you. As gurps_npc pointed out, if we let them do this, how long until they block all cell phone signals because it interferes with the "security and performance" of their phone system?

Comment Re:Metadata (Score 1) 36

I don't know if many people remember this, but you used to (and probably still can) send and receive twitter messages by SMS. This was the original rule for limiting Twitter messages to 140 characters. That gave you enough space to send the twitter handle and the message within the 150 characters allowed by SMS. Before the days of smart phones and data plans people used to regularly send out tweets by sending text messages to 21212.

Comment Filters (Score 3, Insightful) 294

I don't have a filter on my bookcase.
I don't have a filter on my movie collection.
I don't have a filter on my video game collection.

Why do I need one on my Internet connection?

I work in schools. Nobody's ever really given me a satisfactory answer that doesn't include pushing parental responsibility to a third party.

I'm with Virgin. They haven't asked me yet. The only time I've ever been asked such things is when I signed up to a mobile network and they asked me if I wanted to turn off the filter on the connection. Given that I work IT, the answer was yes. I want as few third parties between me and my service providers as possible, thanks. But the number of times I'll be using 4G to go looking for anything is going to be slim.

By all means ask... but it would have been so much easier to not ask and let those who worry about it fix it for themselves.

Slashdot Top Deals

Life is a healthy respect for mother nature laced with greed.

Working...