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


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Wouldn't using this if it were seized... (Score 2) 227

by DarkOx (#49622053) Attached to: USBKill Transforms a Thumb Drive Into an "Anti-Forensic" Device

Its kind of grey area. Full disk encryption could itself be though of in those terms. I mean why are ciphering literally every block of information your store? Certainly it must be because you have something to hide right.

If you immediate start destroying the equipment when the cops show up that is a problems but in the case we have a device that has a normal operating behavior of putting itself into a secured state (by shutting down) whenever your wrist leave its proximity. Its not illegal (yet) to use a secure device. I would expect a good lawyer could spin this one to your favor.

Comment: Re:Industry attacks it (Score 1) 270

The problem is the so call conservatives and their regulations. A libertarian would say you can put whatever you want in the ground on your property but if it leaks onto mine, I'll see you court.

A properly run court would arrange fair compensation for the loss of use. Stop passing laws that protect industrial polluters for liability and we would stop having these problems, stop having government recognize fictions legal entities so the real ownership escapes liability. The incentive to conceal problems with technology like injection wells would disappear because we all know it comes to light eventually if the problems are real you will be sued with the possibility of loosing far more than you ever made from the activity.

Comment: Re:All aboard the FAIL train (Score 1) 537

by DarkOx (#49614691) Attached to: Former HP CEO Carly Fiorina Announces Bid For White House

This is exactly what's wrong in politics these days. Politics is not a spectator sport. There aren't simply two teams vying for the prize of being elected and using that as the trophy to put in one's case. Treating it like a spectator sport completely ignores the whole point of the exercise, which is to effectively govern the wealthiest nation in the world, and to see to the interests of both the nation and the persons in that nation.

Its a matter of perspective though. From my perspective as a voter you are correct. If you are Reince Priebus, or Debbie Wasserman Schultz than it is a "team sport." You job is to maintain the influence of you party, you do that by winning the most elections for the most powerful offices; the most trophies so to speak.

Looking at in those terms to do you spend most of resources practicing the beat the least funded teams in the league, lets call them the Green party, the Libertarians, who you will likely beat anyway or do spend your efforts to try and defeat the big rival? Additionally do you look at your problems in things you have some control over brands, marketing strategy etc; or do spend your effort on broad policy research and development only to have half your people go rogue once elected anyway?

I think understanding politics and being effective no matter who your requires looking at it both ways, as purely competitive game, and a system of government.

Comment: Re:All aboard the FAIL train (Score 1) 537

by DarkOx (#49613301) Attached to: Former HP CEO Carly Fiorina Announces Bid For White House

Except that just like in Broad terms Hillary's tenure as Sec State IS a failure.

I am not talking about Benghazi specifically in scandal machine since that she should have anticipated and prevent the specific attack where our ambassador was killed. However in a more abstract sense its a fine example of Hillarys failure, we "went in to Libya" with a certain set of objectives and the outcome looks nothing like that, the security and human rights situations are both worse.

Ditto for her handling of the rest of the "Arab spring". Tunisia is about the only thing you could call a policy success that happened are her watch and we had a very limited role there.

I don't think there is any major foreign policy success she can point at, other than USAID handing out a money (Which isn't exactly difficult). Our security and influence certainly did improve on her watch. She does not have any major legislative successes either as a senator. The most we can charitably say is her service in these roles was "adequate."

Back to Benghazi she immediately tried to blame it on that stupid youTube movie "the innocence Islam" or whatever the title was, and proceeded to try and prosecute the person who made it. From a communications perspective which is it? Are Islam and its followers peaceful members of a global community we can live side by side with our are they violent lunatics who consider an insult on youTube a just pretext for warfare? Do we support freedom of expression or do with stand behind the idea that censorship is sometimes called for? A leader ought to have strong positions on things things, yet only a couple short years later her take on Charlie Hebdo is almost opposite.

This is a pattern with Hillary, sure I can agree her views on crime might have reasonably evolved since the 90's if she was to run away from her husbands era of "tough on crime" fine, but in lots of other areas she is doing an awful lots of evolving awful quick, so quick it starts to look more like responding to opinion polls to me.

Then we have her handling of the "e-mail" scandal I am not saying she did anything but her handling of it did more to make it look like a coverup, which gets back to the messaging and communications problems. She should have turned the operation of that server over to a trusted 3rd party immediately, she didn't. Its a lot like all of her memory and record keeping problems from the "White water" era.

Here again even if I set the whole scandal and legal aspects aside, we are left with someone who thought in 2009 that doing State Department business on her private mail server was a good idea. What sort of judgement is that? Next Bradly Manning happens and thought all that and the opsec questions it raised she never considers that her personal IT contractors might pose the sort of risk. Apparently the vetting and monitoring of active duty intelligence personnel (however junior) did not cut it, but Clintons' "guy" could be trusted?

Near as I can tell Hillary is where she is because she married Bill, who had the talent to get himself elected governor than president. Hillary got thrust into money/power/politics and has since not blown it so badly as to loose it, but never could have got where she is on her own. Which isn't to say Carly is any better a choice. Hillary's candidacy however would be a joke (like Carly's) but for the fact the rest of the national Democratic party lacks anyone with a decent brand. They are either unknown, older than igneous rock, or the special kinda of crazy that if allowed to speak more publicly risks making Ted Cruz sound normal.

The GOP is like the Red Skins, relatively few like the brand but the individual players all find their fans, the DNC is like the Starts & Stripes, more people have a favorable view of the team just don't ask them to try and name any players.

Comment: Re:Many years ago ... (Score 2) 210

by DarkOx (#49589327) Attached to: Yes, You Can Blame Your Pointy-Haired Boss On the Peter Principle

his is how societal norms distort what economists like to imagine is the free market.

That is why there are two areas of study micro-economics and macro-economics. On the micro-scale, it usually is better to fire 10% of your staff. After all the people who are working hard and doing good work usually know it. If you give them a 10% pay cut they will be butt hurt about it, they won't work as hard, or do as good a work. You will most likely see a greater than 10% loss in productivity.

On the other hand hand if you fire 10% of workforce, those that "survive" will feel threatened and if anything the need to continually show how valuable they are. You probably see less than a 10% decrease in productivity, over the short term; inside the limited scope of your organization.

Now on the macro scale all the other firms out there do essentially the same thing. When hiring starts up again its done at the new wage level the market has valued the skill at. So the prevailing wage ends up just at the value supply and demand expect. Economics works you just have to be careful not to zoom in to much when applying maco-principles or zoom out to much when you try and use micro-principles.

Comment: Re:Not sure this is deserved in this case (Score 1) 437

by DarkOx (#49584611) Attached to: Rand Paul Moves To Block New "Net Neutrality" Rules

I consider myself a true Libertarian but I still support neutrality at least until such time this organizations are stripped of their rights-way across MY property and local, state, and federal governments surrender the right to use eminent domain to facilitate anything that will have private ownership.

Lift the restrictions on me from demanding a rent on pain of eviction from the cable co to use my property to host their wire, then they can use their wire however they like, once I am being fair compensated for the use of what is mine. Until then I think the I should have some say via representative government what they can do with.

Empower individual land owners, when the cable co wants to over charge and under deliver, I'll just respond that's fine raise your rates all you like, double dip if you want to I don't care, I'll just raise your rent. Sure dig up your wire and run around my property but my neighbors will probably do the same things to you so, just pay up. The problem will be fixed in a hurry. Mutual cooperation will ensure fairness.

Comment: Re:Supported != Secure (Score 1) 137

True, but if you had a working exploit that was no patch to fix, and you knew that your target was about to go off support and loose the ability to submit issues and expect a fast fix turnaround, would you:

A) Go for it the moment you have a working sploit grab all you can.

B) Wait a little while before you take the big risk of using it widely and trying to ex-filtrate the loot to avoid discovery. Then after the support is up and you know the response will be hampered make your move. You know either it will likely take longer for your infiltration to be stopped or the victim will have to accept some self inflicted harm like off-lining production systems until they can find a fix (Which in the case of a government might mean a drone strike, but that is another issue).

Comment: Re:Does it matter if you are a sceptic or not? (Score 1) 700

by DarkOx (#49577537) Attached to: Pope Attacked By Climate Change Skeptics

Not really, since if there is no man made climate change we at least need to clean up our environment anyway. If on the other hand the skeptics are wrong and they win the argument humanity is up shit creek

Bzzt. WRONG!

A whole lot of "green energy" isn't clean energy. Hydro electric for example has huge ecological consequences, if your efforts are directed at lowering CO2 and methane emissions because your incorrectly believe the greatest environmental threat is climate change you could do lots of harm, for no reason.

Even if climate change is real emissions might be the wrong thing to try and control. Forests remove carbon from the atmosphere, but they do a lot of other potentially climate impacting things as well like wick water up from the ground and release it as vapor. Maybe the world needs more woods, and clearing space for another turbine is exactly the wrong thing to do.

In the end the only real answer in terms of global sustainability is likely fewer people. An area where the Church isn't exactly on the right side of as far as the prevailing views go.

Comment: Re:Both own half. (Score 1) 373

by DarkOx (#49575951) Attached to: Who Owns Pre-Embryos?

I am not sure it works in this case. In the story the king operates under the assumption neither party wishes to see the child destroyed (children were valuable laborers after all), but perhaps one party cares deeply enough for the child their desire for its well being trumps their selfish desire to possess it or wish to spite other party by denying possession.

In these cases we very likely have one party who wishes to see the embryo destroyed. It does not make sense to turn something over to someone who has a stated intent to destroy it, only to prevent a court from doing so.

Comment: Re:Both own half. (Score 4, Interesting) 373

by DarkOx (#49575813) Attached to: Who Owns Pre-Embryos?

If a majority decision can't be reached than the status-quo basically gets maintained, the things sits frozen.

Just like if you die intestate and have two children and no spouse. Lets say you owned your house strait out for the sake of simplicity. Essentially both kids will have to reach an agreement on how to to dispose the property.

If they can't it will be pretty easy for either heir to ask the court require the thing simply be maintained, taxes paid etc out of the estates other funds, while a judge decides how to parcel out the estate fairly and what should be done. Same thing would probably happen here.

More interesting questions exist though. Lets say you and wife have some embryo's frozen as part of some assisted fertility process. It does not work, but their are left overs. You later get divorced, presently childless. She decides to try again and the implantation is successful. Can she come back for child support? Are you a dead beat dad if you want nothing to do with it?

Comment: Re:Fast track (Score 1) 354

by DarkOx (#49573899) Attached to: University Overrules Professor Who Failed Entire Management Class

But he clearly failed his economics and academic course.

When it becomes known that you can pass your course by simply paying, your degrees become worthless.

There are a fair few countries where we consider an education gained there to be completely worthless because of the corruption in academia. Sounds like the administrator hasn't considered the damage this could do to his school.

There is middle road between overly heavy handed punishments that are handed out somewhat arbitrarily and rolling over completely and failing to protect the integrity of your degree. Like I stated if the professor had been smart he would have documented the worst cheating and retained the evidence, and pursued whatever due process the schools honor system specifies. I am sure if he had he would have found support. The cheaters would have rightly gotten the F's for course or possibly an even more severe action against them like expulsion. The other students would get the message the rules are not a big joke and are violated at their peril.

Comment: Re:Cool world (Score 4, Interesting) 216

by DarkOx (#49570793) Attached to: US Successfully Tests Self-Steering Bullets

They can shoot around corners, just like they can have a fully automatic belt feed large caliber gun. Good luck getting one of those for yourself unless its an antique.

If you think this technology is going to be something you or I get head over to the gun show and buy, you can put down your keys, it'll never happen.

So we can be shot around corners but we won't be shooting around them now or ever.

Comment: Re:Fast track (Score 5, Insightful) 354

by DarkOx (#49570669) Attached to: University Overrules Professor Who Failed Entire Management Class

Yes well the Vice President of the university certainly did not fail his management course!

He recognizes that most University students today are someones precious little snowflake. That someone might stop sending checks, students may transfer and worse the best prospective students might choose other institutions where there is not a perception their on-time graduation plans might be derailed by capricious professor.

I am sorry unless you have hard evidence of a major and specific conspiracy that everyone of your students participated in you CANT fail an entire class. The reality is there was probably a few students who are innocent or whose infractions don't justify an automatic failing grade, so its punishing the innocent. The optics of that just are not appropriate for an academic institution.

If the professor was at all smart, he would have identified the worst offenders built a solid case for them and crucified them before an expulsion board to send a message to the rest of the students, and any one taking his class in the coming semesters, that he isn't to be 'fucked with'. He probably would have gotten support for the university and the public for doing so rather than tossed under the bus. Like it or not politics and perceptions matter, you'd think a business professor would know that.

Entropy requires no maintenance. -- Markoff Chaney