Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×

Comment: Really Glad to see this (Score 5, Interesting) 112 112

I really would like to see Truecrypt live and usable again. Just in terms of having a great and useful interface/featureset Truecrypt was and hopefully will again be the best crypto out there. Assuming it audits well of course.

Truecrypt inside BTsync would be amazingly powerful.


Comment: Re:It's a vast field.... (Score 5, Informative) 809 809

No, you (Alice) encrypt with your private key, then encrypt with 'Bobs' public key, then Bob decrypts with his private key and again with Alice's public key.

Thus Both Alice and Bob are authenticated, and no one besides Alice and Bob can intercept.


Comment: Re:Perspective (Score 1) 277 277

Frankly in my experience Politifact is annoyingly biased in their ratings, against liberals.

You may or may not agree with their articles - I usually *do* agree with the written article. But they will *happily* rate a liberal 'false' because their review shows that 'Yes it's true, but they left this or that context out, didn't mention this exception, yadda yadda' and then do backflips rating a conservative 'halftrue' when the article clearly shows it's not true at all, but 'if you consider that maybe they meant this esoteric way they might have meant it . . .'

I think it's because if they didn't grade on a curve, no conservative would ever read any of these fact-check sites, but my God is it annoying to watch liberals get bounced down one or two stars for minor mistakes, then watch them hem and haw and rate something half-true because there's is some esoteric 13th century use of a word that a conservative *might* have meant.

Our liberal media bias in action!


Comment: Re:Questionable (Score 1) 277 277

"Trusted newsman" is going a bit far. The problem I have with political comedy is that, to be funny, it has to take an idea to the extreme, which means everything turns into a strawman argument, reinforcing the tribal polarisation of political discourse.

Actually, while TDS certainly indulged in fallacies on occasion, the Straw Man argument, e.g. actually misrepresenting the argument someone is making, was something I thought they did a very good job of dodging over the years.

Probably less 'journalistic ethics' than that Straw men don't actually get laughs.


Comment: Re:Do it in your free time (Score 1) 300 300

More to the point, anything that evolves to eat stars, must also evolve to be able to survive the death of the first one they eat, or must have evolved to survive the death of a start prior to developing the capacity to feeding on them.

In a not-quite infinite Universe I can just manage to buy into a life form that feeds on a star . . . once. Once that happens it must either manage to escape the now dead gravity well, or having triggered a stellar explosion, survive a supernova. Legion of Super Heroes aside, these both strike me as being orders of magnitude more unlikely than the already only mathematically possible evolution of an 'Astrophage' in the first place.

Now a Planet-Eater (a'la "One of our Planets is Missing" from ST-TAS) seems more viable, although the gravity well situation is still iffy. But at least it doesn't involve surviving a super-nova.

The other possibility would be an something that is more of an infection than a 'creature' - if something started a process that ended in a supernova, but during early stages resulted in the star blowing out the infection as it blew out it's outer shells, such an interstellar virus *could* survive in deep space as part of the Nebula before being drawn into another star that passed through it and 'Infecting' it. But even then the 'it somehow survived this' value seems unlikely.

Most public domain software is free, at least at first glance.