Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:The TOR Project was well aware of this a while (Score 1) 83

you have to be actively monitoring a specific target to de-anonimize them, you can't do it to everyone. If the NSA actually got warrants when they did that to Americans [pause for laughter] I think it's a fine system.

You laugh, but at what point in an investigation would you be aware of the target's nationality?
Do you know the nationalities of the Lizard Squad members, for example? When would you, before or after this process?
Am I an American citizen? I can't get a driver's license without something like three forms of proof I live here, so tell me how does this work on the Internet?

Warrants for de-anonimizing Americans on the Internet... explain that paradox.
IP addresses are not people, the Internet has no borders, information wants to be free, etc.

IMO, there are no rights on the Internet UNTIL it has borders.

Comment Re:DRM... (Score 1) 43

... by another name.

It's called renting. That is literally what this service is marketed as and used for.
It's not as easy to drive down to Hollywood Video or Blockbuster as it used to be, so what's your problem with streamed renting?

I don't like the rental periods/price points yet, and I think it's all PS3 games right now, but the concept is solid.

In the future, game streaming could be used for promotions like XYZ 2 on sale tomorrow, play XYZ 1 free for a day, or you could try a fully functional demo for a few hours before plunking down $60 for the whole thing.

Tell me what's wrong with any of that.

Comment Re:They're assholes. (Score 1) 336

The point he was making is that they could just be playing on PC. You have a very freedom-minded, open source (if you want it), gaming platform that has a huge library of games to go along with it. Oh, main game servers taken down? Get on something like GameRanger to play online without the official servers. The point, I think you missed it.

Next time your Internet is out remember there is someone out there saying you could be playing golf instead.

Comment Re:Weak Society (Score 1) 153

America has turned into a very weak society. Lets all run around with our panties in a bunch and do what we are told.

Theater chains don't want to run the movie because of liability concerns, Sony does't want to launch the movie in a limited number of theaters. It all comes down to dollars and lawyers in the end.

"very weak society" because movie premier was delayed == entitlement syndrome

If you want to see Americans not giving a fuck, give businesses legal immunity for anything bad that happens.
(LoL @ ^, like you ever need to look very hard)

Now excuse me, I'm going to put in Team America and draw silly cartoons of Kim Dot Ill John whatever his name is.

Comment Re:Why bother? (Score 2, Insightful) 421

but if the Apple model had prevailed, I think technology would not be as far along. But it's impossible to say what if.

That's a silly thing to say. If Apple wasn't around, what would desktop PC makers have looked up to the past fifteen years?

We'd have had PS2 connectors, floppy drives, beige boxes, flaky suspend/resume, x86 BIOS, 32-bit processors, no built-in 3D acceleration, no built-in WiFi, 100mb ethernet, etc. for even LONGER than we did. Do you remember having to buy PCI-USB cards, PCI WiFi adaptors, unaccelerated desktop interfaces, rolling the dice on resume from sleep, PS2/USB converters?? I do.

What exactly is this technology-retarding "Apple model" in your mind? Sorry man, it's just silly to hear something along the lines of "if Apple prevailed, we wouldn't have nice things" when they have been the lead in most of the nice things PCs have. If Apple prevailed... IDK, MAYBE Dell would have made nice computers sooner and we'd still be where we are at today?

Comment Re:"3d printer" (Score 2) 26

The point is that the technology has advanced to the point that people can help a dog. This in itself is not much of an advance, but it demonstrates some of the potential of the advances that are being made. Oncethe cost of technology is reduced and it becomes more readlily available people do cool stuff and sometimes help someone or something else. Sometimes people just do cool stuff with technology. Now turn in your geek card since you cannot simply enjoy something cool that is also helpful for a dog.

Advanced to what point? 3D prototyping isn't new. Animal prosthetics isn't new. Deciding a single hunk of extruded plastic is good enough to strap directly on a dog isn't a huge accomplishment. Dogs don't complaint about lack of comfort...

This story bugs me, not the tech.
It skips the whole development and production cost angle of 3D proto^H^H^H^H^Hmanufacturing, which in my opinion is the most important part.

The pet owner didn't call up Pet Legs R' Us and order an affordable custom prostheses which was promptly delivered. THAT would be a story worth telling, how 3D printing enabled a business and service like that. Such a business would, we should hope, understand each animal's range of motion well, and the bigger picture, quality of life. How good are new legs if we screw up their spine in a year?

This story is more about some goodwill from people running a 3D fab shop. They should get some presents from Santa this year, but it's a really crappy tech story.
While we're just giving things away, an even better story would be a shop milling a prosthesis out of solid titanium - because that is more difficult, expensive, and awesome than plastic. Could we run that story as "How a CNC mill Let a Dog Run for the First Time"?

Comment Re:Riiiiight. (Score 1) 233

That is why Android auto and CarPlay both run atop of QNX. Something Apple and Google downplay.

I was under the impression CarPlay was something like an X server for your iPhone. As in it runs on whatever your infotainment system happens to be.

Why is it notable what that system is? The whole point of these is to offload infotainment functions to your mobile devices, and turn the car hardware into a dumb terminal.

Heh, I bet most _remote_ X servers run on Windows... but who gives a crap, we don't think about it that way, we think about the apps.

Comment Re:Hiding evidence (Score 1) 192

If you are a US citizen, I don't think you could get out of producing a document the court ordered you to supply by airmailing it to a confederate in another country. Similarly, if the data in question are related to Microsoft's US operations, then MS, being a corporation incorporated in the US, should be required to produce them.

And what do you think of MS's rebuttal of that position?

"Imagine this scenario. Officers of the local Stadtpolizei investigating a suspected leak to the press descend on Deutsche Bank headquarters in Frankfurt, Germany," Microsoft said. "They serve a warrant to seize a bundle of private letters that a New York Times reporter is storing in a safe deposit box at a Deutsche Bank USA branch in Manhattan. The bank complies by ordering the New York branch manager to open the reporter's box with a master key, rummage through it, and fax the private letters to the Stadtpolizei."

Allowing things like this is going down a similar road to "well if the CIA wants to torture foreign nationals, then they can't complain about foreign s[y agencies torturing US citizens"

Comparing an email account to a safe deposit box seems more than a little disingenuous because any free email service provider will make it clear as day that "your" information is theirs to do what they please with.

Anything in this privacy statement that the law does not require is just a PROMISE, and they can change their terms on a whim. They SAY "your content" but what puts them in the position to dictate the terms? Read "We may" and "We will not" as "We can"

http://www.microsoft.com/priva...
"We may share or disclose personal information with other Microsoft controlled subsidiaries and affiliates, and with vendors or agents working on our behalf. For example, companies we've hired to provide customer service support or assist in protecting and securing our systems and services may need access to personal information in order to provide those functions. In such cases, these companies must abide by our data privacy requirements and are not allowed to use the information for any other purpose. We may also disclose personal information as part of a corporate transaction such as a merger or sale of assets.
Finally, we may access, disclose and preserve your personal information, including your private content (such as the content of your emails, other private communications or files in private folders), when we have a good faith belief that doing so is necessary to:
comply with applicable law or respond to valid legal process from competent authorities, including from law enforcement or other government agencies;
protect our customers, for example to prevent spam or attempts to defraud users of the services, or to help prevent the loss of life or serious injury of anyone;
operate and maintain the security of our services, including to prevent or stop an attack on our computer systems or networks; or
protect the rights or property of Microsoft, including enforcing the terms governing the use of the services – however, if we receive information indicating that someone is using our services to traffic in stolen intellectual or physical property of Microsoft, we will not inspect a customer’s private content ourselves, but we may refer the matter to law enforcement."

Yes I KNOW Microsoft (and Apple, Google, Yahoo, etc.) are TRYING to make the claim this is not their information to give away when it's inconvenient to do so, but they sure are hanging onto their right to do it aren't they all?

Comment Re:This is news.... because? (Score 1) 89

The issue is that Apple claims that each app is vetted for potential security issues. By most definitions of the term, "fraud" falls under the category "security issue". Consequently, the discovery of even one fraud app means that Apple is not vetting apps in a manner consistent with what they claim.

That's what I've been saying, Apple just isn't popular enough to attract the number of hackers for real security issues. One day some hackers might take notice of them, but they are lucky it's only one or two for now!

Comment Re: I would buy... (Score 1) 284

LTO6 is $40/6TB compressed.

So that's really $40/2.5TB in the real world. Who has large amounts of data that is compressible? NOBODY.

Unless you're sitting on a mountain of pictures or video, you probably do.

Now I understand picture and video archives exist, but that's not the norm.

Comment Re:Tape Culture Fallacy (Score 1) 284

I'm a fan of tape backup when managed responsibly, but there's a fallacy that goes with recommending tape for backups: because you can train semitechnical users to dutifully change tapes and carry them offsite (e.g. on a bank run to a safe deposit box), tape gets recommended for businesses who don't have dedicated IT. But the duty of of maintaining the backup gets delegated from the original trained user, and changing the tapes becomes the whole of the backup maintenance: no one actually verifies that the backup job is running properly. I've been on calls to clients who've diligently changes their tapes nightly, but the backup software has been crashed for months...

This is not a tape problem, it's a very common backup system problem, regardless of the design. Backups are an insurance policy people let lapse and try to make claims on later.

Comment Re:Shyeah, right. (Score 1) 284

For about the last decade, tape has lagged so far behind hard drives that this hasn't been the case. You couldn't back up a high-capacity hard drive on last-generation tape. In fact, the current-generation LTO-6 only holds 2.5 TB uncompressed, so in the worst case, you can back up any hard drive built before 2010 (when the first 3 TB hard drives came out). And that tape technology didn't come out until 2012.

And you'll spend almost $3k on the drive, plus $45 per tape, or $18 per terabyte. Hard drives are currently running at $30 per TB. So ignoring differences in risk between a hard drive on a shelf and a tape, the break-even point is at a whopping 250 TB—almost an order of magnitude more than is reasonable for most businesses, much less consumers. Unless you're doing data warehousing, this break-even point is simply too high to be practical.

By your own logic, 250 TB would be quickly reached by merely a hundred old workstations and servers from 2010 - that's silly.
Also, we use raw storage in the context of _individual_ incompressible backup sets, not backup data at scale, because very few places backup a high ratio of incompressible data overall.

What's the cost of doubling your storage capacity with either technology, for a few iterations? It's buy more tapes vs. $2&%fhqwgads!!1
You'll buy a jukebox and few drives at some point but be on your n'th storage array on the other end.

You can't just toss a couple more hard drives into a full DataDomain, but you CAN rotate tapes out of a my-first-tape-system-jr.

Comment Re:n00b! (Score 1) 224

NO.

The correct way to identify a cheater is by what they DON'T do.

Cheaters don't:
1) Check common hiding spots.
2) Hop.
3) Dive.
4) Dodge / strafe.
5) Voice or text chat.
6) Reload until they're out.
7) Do anything with thrown weapons (knives, grenades, etc).
8) Go into the center of the map (they stay on edge where no one can get behind them and thus not be seen by the wall hack).

Statements like cheaters trace you through walls is ridiculous. I can trace you through walls because I have 7.1 sound and hear you.

EASY TO MAINTAIN LOW-TECH SOLUTIONS
IMHO, the best way to deal with cheaters is every game should have a "weapon" like Modern Warfare's shield. Aimbot cheats focus on the center mass where you are invulnerable using shield. I love using shield to pwn cheaters and mocking them for having hacks and still dying. They go away very quickly.

Your list is all wrong, are you talking about a straight up BOT? Cheaters make a lumpy bell curve, and most are not bots. Most cheats are MUCH more subtle. They make the average player feel like the deck is stacked against them.

Listening for footsteps, THANK YOU! An old school cheat from the Quake 1 era is replacing footstep and grenade priming sounds with LOUDER versions. Is it as bad as a radar hack, NO, is it cheating, YES. Another example of subtle cheating was a proxy that automatically recorded the time quad damage/weapons got picked up and warned you when each were about to respawn so you could magically get to the right place at the right time.

There is nothing easy about catching these. By the way, the open source Quake 1 auto aim hack had toggles to aim for the feet, center, or head, back in late 90's, so don't count on that center of mass thing for much.

Also, for forced matched games like Modern Warfare 2 & 3, there should be a "I never want to play with this person again" button. Kind of an "anti-friend" button. Once their client can't find anyone to match with they won't be back.

THAT is the first good idea I've read here. They could even network these with your friends like Slashdot's foe-of-a-friend thing.

Comment Re:How about we hackers? (Score 1, Flamebait) 863

When I first saw SMF break I had absolutely no clue why I couldnt ssh into the machine nor where to start looking. It was when I discovered that sshd startup was dependent on utmp being available which depended on filesystem mounting being successful that I knew for sure that systemd style init was nothing I wanted.

So if SSH still has that dependency but not enforced, and it starts up before utmp is mounted, and you fix the filesystem problem and move on...
As experienced admins, I don't think either of us know what state SSH is actually in at that point, and we shouldn't be guessing. Is it working, but not logging logins? Do you happen to troll all your daemon logs for random errors... provided this condition is even logged in a sensible manner?

As inconvenient as it is (yes, I know), this feature is to prevent us entering unknown state as much as possible.
If I can make an educated guess, the real problem in that scenario was likely /etc/fstab configuration vs. reality, an unknown state puss-wound.

WAAAAAAY too often in Unix-land people gloss over things like this in favor of the simpler olden days when we just ignored these problems. If those services are designed to be up in a certain order, why take it any other way? Should remote login be available with fewer dependencies - YES! What does that have to do with Init enforcing the ones it does have - NOTHING.

Different subject, but related to what I just said... I saw someone above say they don't have to reboot because they can "restart a daemon". /facepalm
Use "lsof" next time you patch guys, it's just not that simple, and if you have to take services offline anyway, you may as well reboot just so you know things like fstab are actually correct...

Comment Re:Honestly. (Score 1) 235

"unless it's being done by a 14yo who installed VNC on your machine and is just fucking with you"

Which is probably what it was. My guess is: Some 14yo didn't like her political views and decided to fuck with her, and used some social engineering tricks to make her think it was the big bad gubmint.

Betcha the classified documents came from Wikileaks or were forgeries.

Teenagers don't give a crap about political views, they'd do it just for fun.

Slashdot Top Deals

Thus spake the master programmer: "After three days without programming, life becomes meaningless." -- Geoffrey James, "The Tao of Programming"

Working...