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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

Comment: Re:git blame (Score 1) 282

by Tom (#49145963) Attached to: Moxie Marlinspike: GPG Has Run Its Course

I'm not saying users are completely blameless littel angels. But I'm so sick and tired of this reflex of blaming everything on stupid users.

Some comedian said it very nicely about another topic: When a house burns down, and the firefighters put out the flames, they don't just go home and write a report saying "fire destroyed the house". They go in and sift through the debris and try to figure out what caused the fire.

In IT we largely don't do that. We treat users as mystical black boxes and root causes and once we've found the user somewhere in the chain of causality, we stop. We don't ask ourselves why the user made this mistake or why the users don't seem to want security. We say "stupidity" the same way ancient map makers put "here be dragons" on their maps.

And that, I say, is stupid. We should go in there and figure out what actually is in that white spot. Why did the user make this mistake? Why do they fall for phishing? Why do they want speed over security? And a boilerplate "because they're stupid" is not an acceptable answer.

We're so smart (or so we think), but we can't figure out how to make security desirable, unobtrusive and a positive experience. Really?

Comment: Re:git blame (Score 1) 282

by Tom (#49145943) Attached to: Moxie Marlinspike: GPG Has Run Its Course

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.

cheap excuse

People are too lazy to type in a password in order to send mail.

Then make it not necessary to type in a password. Even I don't understand why I should type a password for every mail I send.

Yes I do use GPG its the best thing we have going right now for the average person to protect his data.

No, it's not. It might be technically the best tool, but if it's unusable, then in sum total, it's not. There are many factors that go into these equations, and we techies are sometimes blind to some of them.

Comment: Re:ignorant hypocrites (Score 1) 272

by swb (#49145833) Attached to: The Programmers Who Want To Get Rid of Software Estimates

I think you've hit the nail on the head, and it's true for more than just writing software.

IT projects usually have two basic parts to them:

1) The part we know how to do and have done before. Usually it revolves around a set of tasks we've done before and that have a consistent outcome and usually exist sort of in a vacuum -- install an operating system, configure a switch, install an application.

2) The part we know how to do, but doesn't always have a consistent outcome because the specific thing hasn't been done before even though similar things have been done before. Similar tasks have been done before, maybe even identical tasks, but they haven't been done in this specific environment. Often involves integration with other systems or involves a lot of dependecies that are too hard/complex/time consuming to have a complete a priori understanding or produces an outcome which has a predicted but not completely predictable outcome.

Problems in (1) are usually easy to overcome because the solutions tend to be more easily known. Problems resulting from part (2) tend to have open-ended timelines because you often don't know what the problems are and have to create solutions.

I think people who haven't done IT work long enough or only get close enough to "supervise" it confuse the two, and assume that because even though (2) works often enough it seems to be reliably predictable.

I started borrowing Donald Rumsfeld's Iraq war quote about "known unknowns and unknown unknowns" when dealing with customers and managers about phase 2 type tasks. He may have been widely criticized for making excuses about the war, but I think there's some insight to the quote because it seems to somehow capture something about the unpredictability of outcomes with depdendencies.

Comment: easy (Score 1) 272

by Tom (#49144853) Attached to: The Programmers Who Want To Get Rid of Software Estimates

But it's so easy to make a good estimate, takes less than 10 seconds:

Take your instinctive estimate.
Double it.
Increase units by one (if you think "hours", make it days. If you think "weeks" make it months, etc.)

So if you think it'll take 2-3 days, tell your manager it'll be ready in 4-6 weeks. Don't forget that in management school, they teach these fuckers to under-promise and over-deliver. He understands.

Comment: Re:Tilting at Windmills (Score 1) 272

by Tom (#49144837) Attached to: The Programmers Who Want To Get Rid of Software Estimates

From a human psychology standpoint he would rather know that it will be done in 3 days, barring delays, than not know when it will be done and have it in two hours. I personally think that is a dumb way of doing things, but I am the outlier, not the director.

The psychological issue is that you don't know, but you have a hunch, you have some insight. You know it's probably going to be a few hours.

But for non-techies, all this stuff is a total blackbox. When you say "I don't know" they panic, because for them that means anything from a day to a month or maybe infinity. Uncertainty is a horrible psychological state and people try to avoid it. It's an instinct. When you don't know if that shadow is a monkey or a lion, it's better to panic just in case.

By saying "three days", you give him certainty. Now he knows the shadow isn't a lion.

Comment: Re:GNUradio? (Score 1) 129

Test equipment is allowed to transmit and receive on those frequencies. If it looks like a radio, it can't. I have a number of cellular testers hanging around here that can act like base stations, mostly because I buy them used as spectrum analyzers and never use the (obsolete) cellular facilities. Government has different rules regarding what it can and can't do in the name of law enforcement, although FCC has been very reluctant to allow them to use cellular jammers.

If you can afford it, something from Ettus would better suit your application.

Comment: Re:nice, now for the real fight (Score 1) 556

by TheGratefulNet (#49143589) Attached to: FCC Approves Net Neutrality Rules

the republicans are liars, plain and simple. they say they are for a free market but they only mean a free hand for big business.

you have to be able to read their 'talking points' and interpret them in a way that removes their spin.

the party of 'small government' would have no business being in your bedroom, spying on your data comms and telling you who you can marry and who you can not. they lie when they say they are for small government.

the democrats also lie. but they are not standing in the way of the free internet, its all about the republicans, this time. they seem to live in another world than the rest of us. the rest of us realize that special lock-in deals limit all of our choices and that the internet is too important to let big companies make all the rules.

Comment: Re:Easy of porting over is the key (Score 1) 156

by hairyfeet (#49143555) Attached to: The State of Linux Gaming In the SteamOS Era

I'm sorry but I think you are wrong, and here is why....the "risk" came from the previous CEO which there is no danger of returning. It was Ballmer that was pushing the "branding" bullshit, Ballmer that was pushing GFWL, Ballmer that was sticking Winflags on everything, every single complaint Gabe had cane be traced back to Steve Ballmer.

Nadella's slogan should be "Not the Ballmer, not the Ballmer" as he has shown that gives not a single fuck about sticking Winflags, devs said they wanted .NET to be open sourced? There ya go, enjoy. All the Metrosexual Winbranded crap Ballmer kept trying to shovel whether the market wanted it or not? GONE. Nadella is ZERO threat to Steam because Nadella sees that Steam has a loyal userbase and that brings value to the Windows platform, no way in hell is he gonna risk losing tens of millions of loyal as hell gamers by treating Steam as a second class citizen. Ballmer thought it was still 1997 and he could just bully his way into a market like the old days and cost the company billions with his alienating attitude, there is no way in hell Nadella is gonna do that.

Finally you have to remember that SteamOS is already fucked because Gabe shot his load too damned early. he got all those OEMs to hop on board only to leave them high and dry without an OS on launch day, so no way in hell is he gonna get jack shit when it comes to OEM support. No Steamboxes on shelves? Nobody but a few Linux faithful using SteamOS, hell he'll only get a small subset of Linux gamers as many have already said they will not support Steam simply on DRM principles, so there really isn't even any growth in that teeny niche market!

Will he keep it on life support for a few years, just in case? Probably, if for no other reason that to save face and to keep them from looking like a failure, but the days of big SteamOS announcements and buzz? Stick a fork, the fat lady is down the street having a sammich.

Comment: Re:Driver model (Score 1) 156

by hairyfeet (#49143331) Attached to: The State of Linux Gaming In the SteamOS Era

Then riddle me this...why does NOBODY, and I do mean nobody, not in FOSS nor in proprietary, support Torvalds driver model? After all if it was good there is absolutely NOTHING stopping them from adopting it, right? And what about BSD, why does it not follow the great Torvalds driver model?

The reason why is obvious, its because its shit that just won't scale. Hell basic math will show you that "let the kernel devs handle it" utterly collapses when the number of drivers reaches 5 figures because there simply is not enough kernel devs to keep up with all the hardware that is already out, much less the hundreds of new devices released this and every other quarter. It really VERY simple, in 1993, when the entire OS could fit on a single floppy? Then sure letting the kernel devs handle it made sense, they had MAYBE 30 drivers all told to deal with, now how many is there? 100,000? 200,000? Even if you pumped up the devs on coke and locked them in a room with NOTHING to but but deal with drivers they would have MAYBE 5 minutes every 3 years for each driver!

There is a REASON why the Hairyfeet challenge has stood for nearly 8 years without a single consumer Linux OS passing and it all comes down to his driver model not scaling, simple as that. BSD? It passes the Hairyfeet challenge with flying colors, too bad there simply isn't enough consumer hardware support for it to be a viable desktop. Its been 24 years now, 24 years of the same excuses, 24 years of "update foo broke my drivers", 24 years of manufacturers being unable to put a fucking penguin on the box because they can't JUST support Linux, even JUST support a distro like Ubuntu, they have to support "Ubuntu version X, kernel version Y" because THAT is how fucking picky Linus has made the OS with his fucked up driver model!

Meanwhile a Windows user can buy a PC and have the drivers that come on the system run for the ENTIRE LIFE of the system, I can take a copy of XP RTM, install the drivers, and then run it through the entire life of the OS, 3 service packs and countless patches, know how many drivers will be non functional at the end? NONE, that is how many drivers will be broken at the end and THAT is what you are competing against, and failing miserably!

But if you truly believe what you are saying? Then put your money where your mouth is and take the Hairyfeet challenge which just FYI only requires Linux to run HALF, I repeat HALF as long as a Windows lifecycle. Surely your OS can do half of what Windows can, right? I look forward to seeing your video posted here and the complete vid on Dropbox. of course we'll never see it because if you actually attempt to take the challenge you'll see what I saw countless times and that is Torvalds.driver.model.doesn't.work. and it all comes down to his driver model being made of fail.

Comment: Planet of the Mice (Score 0) 71

by HangingChad (#49143201) Attached to: Xeroxed Gene May Have Paved the Way For Large Human Brain

And that kids is how mice first became intelligent and eventually took over the earth. Later the crew of an earth space ship from the past crashed on earth and were captured by the mice. When one tried to escape the mice netted him and he uttered the classic line, "Get your stinking paws off me you damn dirty mice!"

All the mice really wanted was the recipe for cheese.

"Well, if you can't believe what you read in a comic book, what *can* you believe?!" -- Bullwinkle J. Moose

Working...