Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Nope (Score 1) 254

by swb (#48897649) Attached to: UHD Spec Stomps on Current Blu-ray Spec, But Will Consumers Notice?

Maybe if the rights weren't such a cluster fuck, we would have offline Netflix where the movie could be stored locally for offline viewing.

Unfortunately the rights holders and the wireless internet providers seem to be in some kind of Mexican standoff over who is the greediest asshole.

If LTE data was 10x cheaper (ie, my 10G plan was 100G), it would solve most of the stream only issues. There would still be some corner cases like long aircraft trips or weird rural areas.

Comment: Re:Other than the obligatory security theatre... (Score 1) 90

... just what would the fighter escort hope to accomplish? Are we really ready to order fighter pilots to shoot down airliners over a phoned-in threat? I guess all it'll take now to spook passengers and completely disrupt air travel in the U.S. is a few bozos with bunch of pre-paid or stolen cellphones.

IDK, observation maybe? Or did you want to hope for cellphone videos to explain what happened?

Comment: Re:Hey! I've been gypped! (Score 1) 121

by PopeRatzo (#48895951) Attached to: NVIDIA Responds To GTX 970 Memory Bug

How can you possibly remember all that? Are you maintaining some of these old industrial DOS systems? I can tell you from the top of my head what record label a rock song from 1970 was on, but I couldn't make an autoexec.bat or config.sys if you put a gun to my head without googling it. And I must have done it a thousand times back in the day.

Comment: Re:Hey! I've been gypped! (Score 1) 121

by PopeRatzo (#48895165) Attached to: NVIDIA Responds To GTX 970 Memory Bug

You don't drive your Ferrari around at max speed all the time,

I do in Need for Speed Rivals, which brings us full circle back to VRAM and nVidia trying to get those people who just bought Geforce 970s to start bugging their parents (or wives) for a GeForce 980 because goddamit, they promised 4gig VRAM and now I may not be able to play Arkham Knight on Ultra and that makes me feel awful.

Comment: Re:Well, it's more like they said... (Score 1) 121

by PopeRatzo (#48895145) Attached to: NVIDIA Responds To GTX 970 Memory Bug

Yeah, but what if you got that really good looking waitress from the Tilted Kilt to finally go out with you and you told her your car could to 200 and you drive out the Bonneville Salt Flats and it turns out your expensive car runs out of horses at 175mph and you're looking like the world's biggest douche?

How are you supposed to recover from that, huh? DAMN YOU nVIDIA!

Comment: Re: Hey! I've been gypped! (Score 2) 121

by PopeRatzo (#48895127) Attached to: NVIDIA Responds To GTX 970 Memory Bug

. Probably 99.9% of users don't have applications or hardware to use more than half of that VRAM anyways

Sure they do. People who are buying the 970 are either gamers or dopey bitcoin miners, and the top tier (and most of the middle-tier) of new games will use 4gig VRAM. Who knows about the bitcoin mining because that's all nonsense anyway. But I'll bet their little programs that they run using $1 of electricity to get 50 cents in bitcoins use every bit of that 4gig VRAM. Because they've got nothing but time to deal with bitcoin mining and GPU performance since they dropped out of grad school and now dad keeps insisting that they be looking for work but how can they do that when they're mining bitcoins goddamnit, which is the future of money and then they'll never need a job because they'll be the ones with all the money and dad's Roth IRA is going to be worthless, watch and see. And if they could just get they're hands on another $1500 (you know dad probably has it), they could really get this bitcoin rig humming and then they'd be spending $1 of electricity to mine 75 cents worth of bitcoins.

Gamers on the other hand (like me) paid for 4gig of VRAM to get more p's and more frames-per-secondses, and by god, we deserve to get 4 gig of VRAM.

Comment: Re:I have an even better idea (Score 1) 258

by ToasterMonkey (#48893649) Attached to: Government Recommends Cars With Smarter Brakes

Let's just enforce existing laws and get dangerous drivers off the road. THERE IS NO RIGHT TO DRIVE. If you are a dangerous driver you can and should be taken off the road.

I was a safe driver for 11 years; no tickets, no accidents, no "close calls", no complaints. Then one day I was driving to the airport early in the morning, got distracted by my radio, didn't notice that the traffic light was red, and ran right into a car that was (legally) crossing the intersection.

My question: should I have been driving for those previous 11 years? If not, why not? What kind of test would you have had me take to show that I was a dangerous driver? Or, if I was a safe driver except on that one morning, how would your plan have prevented my accident?

The fact is, most people are safe drivers most of the time. Except for when they're not.

OMG! You're saying the red light camera didn't dissuade you from driving through a red light??!!!!11 /snark

Comment: Love collision avoidance in my Volvo (Score 3, Interesting) 257

by swb (#48892907) Attached to: Government Recommends Cars With Smarter Brakes

If I had bought my car new and was looking at features to add or avoid, I would have put the collision avoidance system on my "meh" list and would not have paid extra for it.

As it turns out, I really like it. I have the control setup for maximum distance, which means more false alerts. But although most alerts seem "false" they're only false because I'm really paying attention and have anticipated the traffic in front of me. About 25% of the time I think it's actually valuable and there was some risk of either a really quick stop or maybe even a fender bender.

The feature that goes along with it (they share the same radar system), distance sensing cruise control, I REALLY like. I wish it would beep or something when you get behind a vehicle driving 3+ MPH slower than your set point. On the Interstate its kind of easy to get in traffic going slower than I want to by small amounts and not noticing it because the car just matches pace with the vehicle in front.

Comment: Re:The noob is you (Score 1) 186

by swb (#48892121) Attached to: China Cuts Off Some VPNs

I would think that traffic heuristics -- volume of packets, frequency of packets, persistence of TCP sessions, volume of data transferred, types of TCP connectivity would provide some hints of a VPN session versus other kinds of encrypted traffic -- would possibly provide a way to compare it to known types of encrypted traffic and see VPNs. It's not like the Chinese don't have terabytes or even petabytes of real-world wild sample traffic to compare against.

I wonder if there would be some way to beat it by combining steganography and encryption to make a VPN's traffic look like some kind of unencrypted web browsing session. Embed encrypted data into retrieved pages as GIFs and plaintext mixed in with nonsense plain text and pace the traffic patterns to more closely resemble the pace of actual page views, forcing new TCP sessions for each view.

About the only weakness would be consistently contacting the same server.

It might be less useful for the kinds of normal VPN uses (low data volume, long latency as traffic was fetched) but I would think you could beat the expectations of what VPN traffic is supposed to look like.

Weekends were made for programming. - Karl Lehenbauer

Working...