Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Why don't browsers clean it up? (Score 2) 160

No, I don't think he did. He was suggesting that browsers truly act on that option selection in a useful way. You misunderstood his post.

The Do Not Track option is defined in the RFC draft as not doing anything except sending the DNT: 1 header to a remote server. Having it do more goes against the specification.
Of course, browsers can implement other functionality to thwart tracking, but not as part of Do Not Track, which has a very specific meaning.

Comment Re:AdBlock's useless (Score 1) 160

Pray tell us how to use hosts files through a proxy server.
It's the proxy server that looks up the host names, not your local resolver.

Also, how well does it work with wildcards? There are ad companies that use thousands of random hosts, of the form 47db.adcompany.com, 1a74.adcompany.com, 357f.adcompany.com. With a hosts file, you have to fill out every single possible entry ahead of time, because it doesn't take a wildcard like *.adcompany.com.

Nor does it block IP addresses. How would you use a hosts file to block http://61.174.51.194/ ?

Never mind that big hosts files slow down the system, because it is traversed linearly, not through a hash like better resolve (and blocking) mechanisms.

Using hosts files was viable up until the late 80s, but now it is a joke.

Comment Re:Fuck You (Score 1) 1051

Humanity is as successful as it is today because we take care of our weak, not because we destroy them. You are confusing evolution through natural selection with eugenics...

This deserves its own reply. No, it's you who are confusing the two.

Eugenics is when people choose who should live and who should die. This is abhorrent, for a variety of good reasons. It's not only morally repugnant, but from an objective point of view, it is detrimental to the species because when you kill those who are different from you, you also kill the good mutations, i.e. those who are fitter than you.

Natural selection is when those who survive due to their own abilities have more viable offspring, causing a propagation of successful genes and mutations, not selected genes.

If anything, vaccination is more like eugenics than anti-vaccination is. Money and culture controls who gets vaccinated and who doesn't, and most people want their own children to have an advantage, even if unfair.

Comment Re:Fuck You (Score 1) 1051

There is no reason to belive that Stephen Hawking would not have made it into adulthood. ALS isn't a disease that decreases resistances in any great way, and it is also a progressive disease, and most of his childhood he was doing pretty well.

But even if some of the brightest would not have made it, those would be compensated for by the increased number of children born to replace those who didn't make it. By chopping off the tail on the left hand side and increasing the magnitude of the Gauss curve, you cause an increase in the long tail on the right hand side.

And I have never said anything about it being the strongest that survive - of course it is the fittest. Those who are less fit get reaped by predation in species that maintain a healthy base. Whether it's because they can't see the predators coming, can't run away, don't have a immune system fighting off diseases, or otherwise. Those with detrimental mutations are less fit than average, and thus less likely to live to propagate their detrimental mutations, and the culling of the herd leads to the average herd member being fitter than otherwise, especially over multiple generations.

Comment Re:Why don't browsers clean it up? (Score 1) 160

Especially if "Do Not Track" is set to on - why don't they limit the data to send back?

You have misunderstood what "Do Not Track" means.

It turns on a flag always telling remote websites "this user does not want to be tracked". It has nothing to do with telling your browser to change its behavior, it gives remote sites a piece of information about your wishes.

Whoever came up with the idea was a dumb shit, and whoever let it become implemented as a browser option was even dumber - it was blindingly obvious from the star that in real life, it's just sending the remote site one more bit of information they can use to track users with.

Even worse was the idiot who decided to make it default in some browsers. That changes the request from "This user has chosen to ask you to please do not track him", which conceivably a few sites might choose to honor, to "This user has not changed his defaults for this setting", which pretty much ensures that it won't be honored. As it is, it's a waste of a few bytes of transmission.

Comment Re:Not impressed (Score 2) 160

The only thing I found interesting was this:

Use of AdBlock 49.28%

But that probably says more about the people who would visit the site than it does of AdBlock users.
Especially with the sample size so small at is is. https://panopticlick.eff.org/ has a much much higher sample base.

Other things that could be checked but which aren't include whether the browser allows SSL2, SSL3, TLS1.0, TLS1.1, and what kind of encryption.
Also, the ballpark speed at which it evaluates Javascript.

Comment Re:I'm a special snowflake apparently. (Score 4, Informative) 160

Fonts seems to be what does it. With many programs coming with extra/special fonts, it quickly narrows the users down based on what they have installed.

Of course, for fonts that only come as part of a software package but install fonts as system fonts (why?), it also tells remote sites what you have installed, which is an additional privacy concern.

Comment Re:Durable parts. (Score 1) 175

If i could see a reasonable use for one at home, I might consider buying one, but I don't, so I don't.

3D printer owners: What is the most useful thing you've printed, how long did it take, and how much did it cost (factoring in the purchase price of the printer divided by how many successful prints you have actually done)?

Comment Re:Fuck You (Score 1) 1051

Moreover, we've spent a LONG time letting children die of diseases, so we're probably about as strong in that way as we're likely to get.

I don't think you understand how evolution work. It's not a synonym to evolving. How strong we are now does not say anything about how strong our descendants are going to be unless we have predation.
Each generation introduces new mutations - a small number of mildly beneficial, somewhat more mildly detrimental, and most of all highly detrimental. The latter are usually not carried to term. The mildly detrimental, on the other hand, are those that are of concern. Unless they get culled, they will propagate, and accumulate with more mildly detrimental mutations from the next generation, and even more from the next, and so on. The net result is a population evolving into degeneration.
How strong we are as a species now does not ensure that the following generations will be as strong. They will be adapted to a life with reliance on medical technology and medicines to counter that they are unable to survive on their own. A few massive solar flares, and we are back to the stone age. Except that we may not have a population that can survive those conditions, because there has not been any predation, and detrimental genetic mutations have been allowed and encouraged to spread through the population.
Much unnecessary suffering in the future is the result of avoiding it now. What we're doing is peeing our pants to keep warm. It feels good right now.

Comment Re:Great. More touchscreens. (Score 3, Informative) 233

buttons are expensive and can't be reconfigured on the fly.

Someone better tell BMW that, then.
Mine has a row of buttons 1-6 that can be reassigned to whatever is on the screen by holding it in for a couple of seconds. So for me, 1 means "Take me home" and 3 means "NIght view on/off". Handy, and especially so because they're physical buttons, right next to my fingertips on the gear shift.
Operating a touch screen, on the other hand, requires you actually looking and stretching. Not good.

Comment Re:Riiiiight. (Score 2) 233

Not really, the actual requirement is that nothing can block a real time process, which I believe the linux real time patches do in fact achieve quite reliably.

And there is where "play ball" comes in.
For example, xfs is, as far as I can tell, the only file system for Linux that supports realtime, and even that took about a decade to be ported from SGI to Linux. If you need to have your commit done within a certain time span, it doesn't help much if the OS can't fulfill that because it has to do a callout to a device that isn't rt capable.
Similar for IO devices - Serial and Firewire can play ball, but USB cannot. Most HDDs with a fixed rotational speed can, and while SSDs theoretically can, in practice they do not (an infrequent shuffling of blocks and re-initializing a sector can take a second or more, so even though the average speed is immensely faster than a HDD, most of them are unusable for rt unless placed behind a battery backed disk controller.)

Yeah, I would like to see more effort going in to LinuxRT. For now, I think QNX is probably the best bet, but I hope LinuxRT would gain more traction. What we do not need is even more non-predictable behavior (pulseaudio, anyone?), but consistency. Let Moore's law and good programming take care of speed, not tweaks that increases the average speed at the cost of even less predictable worst case.

Comment Re:Riiiiight. (Score 4, Insightful) 233

Yes, QNX has been around for a long time.
\What most people don't get is what a realtime OS is, and why it matters. Other multitasking OSes are generally "best-effort" OSes, but in a realtime OS, the whole scheduling system is based on giving guarantees, making sure that things happen within a certain time frame or a certain order.
The overhead is huge, which is why you don't se RT on any normal desktops or servers, but in something like a car, airplane or hospital device, you would rather know that 100% of the requests get served in 100 ms, than having an average time of 10 ms, but a worst case time of 1000+ ms.
If you know the worst case, you can program your systems to operate within them.

Linux does have a RT version, in part supported by Ingo Molnar and Theodore Ts'o, but it does not see heavy use. In part, this has been because for a realtime OS to be successful, all the parts have to play ball, not just some. And in part it is because a realtime OS is quite a bit slower on average, and most regular users would rather have improved average speeds than improved worst-case.

But for a car? Give me a realtime OS any day. I don't want traction control to cut in a tenth of a second too late because the kernel was busy doing garbage collection, time synchronization, and handling an urgent warning that the oil temperature was too high.

Comment Re:Fuck You (Score -1, Troll) 1051

Non-vaccinated kids kill and cripple other kids.

You're saying that as if it's purely a bad thing. Sure, it's a tragedy when a parent loses a child, but it's a boon to the herd when the weakest is culled, and their genes leave the gene pool before they get to procreate.
If we allowed diseases to cull, say, 10% of children, future generations would be stronger.

As it is, vaccination is a means to allow more bad mutations to survive and cause pain and suffering in the future. I think everyone who do give their children vaccines are selfish bastards who wants to increase the odds of their own children surviving even if it means that their children or grandchildren might suffer. People are concerned about the here and now, and refuse to think generations ahead.

Think of future children, not just the present ones. Let predation happen, to ensure that the good mutations are rewarded and the bad ones are not.

Slashdot Top Deals

Beware of Programmers who carry screwdrivers. -- Leonard Brandwein

Working...