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


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:computing device performs optimization for user (Score 1) 270

Proxy caches are going to have to go away anyway as the web moves to being encrypted by default. That was always on the cards and always the reason it was done.

Push is of little utility to advertisers. They prefer to use JavaScript to rotate ads. It is of immense use for apps though.

I really don't think you have an argument here.

Comment Re:Um... then don't go to sites (Score 1) 270

Consider what you are arguing for. Get rid of free news sites with paid journalists, except for those funded some other way like the BBC or other state agencies. Many people will have to go back to getting news from ad supported TV channels or ad supported newspapers, so won't escape the ads anyway.

One of the reasons why newspapers are declining is the democratization of news. I think that's a good thing, it makes it harder to end up getting most of your news from a single (biased) source.

Comment Re:Um... then don't go to sites (Score 1) 270

Buzzfeed has found an easy way to get around ad blockers. Every single article is an ad. They are all sponsored. People love it, Buzzfeel is immensely popular at a time when traditional news outlets are dying.

You can't have it both ways either. If you want quality journalism it has to be paid for, either by adverts or by subscription. Subscripts are okay but if we want a plurality of news outlets that we can get a variety of views from and easily link to then putting them all behind a paywall isn't going to work.

Comment Re:Lol, "guidelines" (Score 1) 270

That is the same attitude that lead to the horrendous ads you want to block. Advertisers felt that they could do what they liked, serve any content they wanted, and to hell with your bandwidth and performance. I mean, fuck you right, freeloading scum trying to get valuable content for free!

If major browser vendors start introducing blocking as standard with some guidelines to follow if you don't want your ads to be culled, it will cut down on a lot of bullshit. You and I will continue to use ad blockers anyway, but everyone else will benefit too and maybe the web will become a little less hostile, and we will spend a little less time dealing with this crap.

Comment Re:Don't RTFA (Score 2) 270

This is actually one of Google's proposals with AMP. They only allow pre-approved Javascript libraries, no custom code. It's part performance (can be optimized, cached and pre-compiled) and part safety (no arbitrary code).

While I'm sure people like yourself will continue to block anyway, it would be a big win to get this principal into the mainstream so that everyone can benefit from it.

Comment Re:No thanks (Score 1) 270

I suppose efforts like this and Google's AMP, because while I do use multiple blockers I'd like to see the baseline shittyness of web sites decrease. With AMP, for example, they don't allow any non-library Javascript, so you get useful and vetted functionality but Javascript laden ads and annoyances are removed.

Unfortunately I'm not sure Mozilla has quite the right idea here. Take this principal:

Content Neutrality: Content blocking software should focus on addressing potential user needs (such as on performance, security, and privacy) instead of blocking specific types of content (such as advertising).

Adverts are a category of content I want to block for my "user needs". They are distracting and annoying, waste my bandwidth and I never interact with them anyway. They almost all violate my privacy with tracking, and are a security risk. They reduce performance at no benefit to me.

Mozilla seem like they are trying to create rules that will get sites on-board by being fair to them, but I think in reality unless advertisers are willing to take a massive hit in terms of the tracking, the type of ads they use and the performance hit they create it won't work.


SIgn Of the Times: Calif. Privacy Protections Signed Into Law 40

The EFF reports a spot of bright news from California: Governor Jerry Brown today signed into law the California Electronic Communications Privacy Act. CalECPA, says the organization, "protects Californians by requiring a warrant for digital records, including emails and texts, as well as a user's geographical location. These protections apply not only to your devices, but to online services that store your data. Only two other states have so far offered these protections: Maine and Utah." The ACLU provides a fact sheet (PDF) about what the bill entails, which says: SB 178 will ensure that, in most cases, the police must obtain a warrant from a judge before accessing a person's private information, including data from personal electronic devices, email, digital documents, text messages, and location information. The bill also includes thoughtful exceptions to ensure that law enforcement can continue to effectively and efficiently protect public safety in emergency situations. Notice and enforcement provisions in the bill provide proper transparency and judicial oversight to ensure that the law is followed.

Comment Re:Why, oh, why.... (Score 1) 47

I knew this would be the reaction to this article. It's got the two things that trigger certain posters: nuclear and women.

The nuclear fans hate everything that suggests that the disasters were worse than their preferred statistics suggest. The misogynists need no explanation. Here we have a book about how terrible a nuclear accident was, written by a woman.

Comment Re:Don't worry, rasing the minimum wage will kill (Score -1) 355

What colour is the sky in your fantasy land?

The same argument was made when minimum wage was first introduced. The same argument is made every time it goes up. In every case it just creates more jobs and more prosperity. More money in people's pockets, to spend on the economy instead of being hoarded by corporations.

Comment Re:Too little, too late (Score 2) 249

The MacRumors tests are less realistic than the Geekbench tests. MacRumors ran videos, which are mostly decided by the GPU and fetched by the WiFi or cellular modems. The CPU does very little when playing YouTube videos.

The Geekbench tests are a mix of different real world activities, like browsing, games and app use. Unless all you do is watch YouTube on a tiny screen for hours on end Geekbench is the more realistic test.

"Conversion, fastidious Goddess, loves blood better than brick, and feasts most subtly on the human will." -- Virginia Woolf, "Mrs. Dalloway"