Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Important Stuff (For the discussion) (Score 1) 232

Yeah, yeah, I know, but be fair. Carly Fiorina's presidential run is not "news for nerds". Carly Fiorina crashing and burning in any capacity, however, is.

It's kind of like "Steve Jobs bought a yacht" isn't news for nerds, but "Steve Jobs died because he thought woo-woo was better than actual medicine" is. Many of us enjoy schadenfreude if it's people we collectively dislike.

Comment Re:Already??? (Score 1) 232

what made her think that she's right for this job?

You could make an argument that nobody is "right" for this job and that the best possible qualification is somebody with excellent executive (the adjective, not the position) functioning skills and management ability. The President doesn't actually do very much but make decisions and usually based on information provided by extremely qualified specialists with decades of experience.

The biggest inherent skills a President probably needs are, sadly, personal charisma and political intelligence.

Comment Re:Re-entry aiming (Score 1) 202

There's a very slim chance that there may be an extremely secret cabal of very high level DPRK leadership that have some kind of "we're gonna die anyway" plan for deposing Fearless Leader in the event he goes all the way off the reservation and starts a war with a major power like the US.

But...Kim Jong-Un executed a whole bunch of very senior guys not long after he took power, including guys who had been close to his father for decades and he also is fond of shuffling top generals from time to time. All of this is designed to put the "fear of Juche" into his senior leadership and make any kind of coup plan impossible to organize.

Plus it's such a shit-ass backwards place to live that you just know the good perks (like eating, heat in the winter, and other luxuries) are doled out to anyone willing to squeal anything remotely like a coup attempt and I'm sure they all squeal on each all the time in a desperate attempt to keep their positions and perks.

It may be debatable how long the DPRK army is able and willing to fight. Fuel shortages could be a problem and their army is hardly positively motivated to stay in the fight, especially if they had to face something like sustained heavy air campaigns involving carpet, thermobaric or firebombing. Cut supply lines, morale, etc. may cause them to collapse early. Or given the last 50 years available, they may be so deeply dug in that they are able to ride it out for months.

Comment Re:Worse when it's icky and weird but not illegal (Score 1) 128

The story raises so many interesting questions, especially since you're so conservative yourself. The main one being, was it even "gay fetish sex photos"? What, you saw a dick and you thought "gay"? And then from there you had this whole reaction about how dare he be gay when he lives a conservative lifestyle with a wife? From there you immediately assumed his wife didn't know? That he was a hypocrite? And 20 years later you still don't understand what an asshole you were being?

I can only surmise that two men sharing sexually explicit photos of themselves somehow qualifies as having at the very least a strong undertone of homosexuality.

I don't know what world you live in, but surely 20 years ago, there were very few conservative religious institutions that were openly supportive of poly-amorous marriages, especially those which involved bisexual or homosexual relationships.

I think assuming that he was engaged in a secretive, homosexually-oriented relationship in contradiction to his stated religious beliefs and in contradiction to his marriage vows isn't exactly going out on a limb with my own personal biases.

Of course, if you're inclined you can choose to believe some counterfactual argument that exchanging photos of one's genitalia with a member of the same sex isn't homosexual behavior on any level, that his wife knew of and approved of this, and that he belonged to a Christian religious denomination that approved of poly-amorous marital relations involving sexual behavior with a member of the same sex. Hell, you might even throw in the idea that his employer endorsed using his work email account for this, since it's about as likely to be true as any of the other counterfactual arguments.

Comment Re:Worse when it's icky and weird but not illegal (Score 1) 128

Why do you presuppose being gay means you can't be conservative or religious or have a family?

In every Christian denomination I can think of, including the current Mormon church, a marriage is an exclusive relationship between two people. Until only very recently that same thing would have been true written as "...between a man and a woman" and still is in a huge number of mainstream religions.

Given the definition of "exclusive" and "two people" as being basically immutable, I don't really see how engaging in fetishistic and surreptitious (even if not explicitly homosexual) sexual behavior with other people actually fits the exclusive part.

I think it's beyond debate that doing this with your work account is downright stupid.

Comment Re:I agree with them (Score 1) 252

While their belief that people who don't like them won't click on them is true, advertisers are kind of like proselytizing religions. Their deepest motivation isn't to convert the mostly converted, but to reach those who are the hardest to convert. Marketers are convinced of the idea that selling to the man who doesn't want to be sold to is only a matter of reaching him with the right campaign.

Comment Re:Re-entry aiming (Score 1) 202

We'd never invade DPRK. They are basically a giant warehouse of every infantry weapon system ever developed by the Russians or Chinese. It would be a monumental effort to invade them with infantry, even after a conventional bombing campaign of months.

I would wager a nuclear reprisal by the US is more likely following even a flawed launch that dropped a nuke into the ocean. The Republican congress would declare war and impeach the President the same day if he wouldn't sign onto it. Given our current level of political divisiveness, I wouldn't put a coup d'etat against a reluctant Democratic president outside the realm of possible.

Comment Re:Let's get real (Score 2) 202

I think in terms of total probability, the US is more likely to launch a nuclear strike on DPRK than it is to invade and fight a ground war there.

DPRK is armed to the teeth with conventional weapons and has had 60 years to dig in deep, making a conventional ground assault extremely painful. Not that the US couldn't *win* such a fight should it choose to dedicate the resources, but it would be extremely resource and manpower intensive.

And for what possible gain? No appreciable natural resources, a civilian refugee crisis of epic proportions, a diplomatic shitshow with China and Russia, both of which would use a US commitment to pursue every bit of mischief they are capable of and a price tag in the trillions. Not to mention the global economic ding from the likely destruction Seoul and the disruption to a not-insignificant part of the global supply chain.

Kim's nuclear ambitions are equally ridiculous. They're decades away from any kind of reliable and effective long-range nuclear weapons program and even when they get to the point where they have a half-assed accurate ICBM that can deliver a half-assed effective nuclear weapon, what are they going to do? Any serious *attempt* at using it or even believably threatening to use it, faces the existential threat of a US retaliation that would annihilate them, something that not even the USSR at its peak could avoid, either.

Comment Worse when it's icky and weird but not illegal (Score 1) 128

At an old job back in the 1990s when we had the first company-wide email system with Internet connectivity we used an old version of Groupwise. The SMTP gateway was a standalone DOS system and it used to choke from time to time, requiring extracting the queued message it couldn't process. I used to pull these out and if possible, decode the message and attachments for the intended user.

One of these messages was to a "rising star" in the company and featured some personal chatter between the employee and some outside personal contact, complete with pictures of both of them wearing fancy suits in staged poses, but with their genitals hanging out.

The "rising star" employee was well-liked for being humble, hard-working and smart. He was also socially conservative, with pictures of his young, stay-at-home wife and fairly open about his involvement at church.

I thought the whole situation was just kind of icky -- guy trading gay fetish sex photos, while positioning himself as a conservative, religious family man. It wasn't the photos, but just the hypocrisy. I had a hard time working with the guy (which I didn't very much anyway) after because it was all just kind of creepy.

Comment Re:This crap again? (Score 3, Insightful) 241

Why can't she say she was drunk, going to his apartment seemed like a good idea and they became intimate until she had second thoughts?

The story has too many holes in its timeline for this not to be a plausible explanation. You can create worse scenarios from the same facts, but it seems questionable that Richmond carried her passed out to through the streets of Florence to his hotel. She most likely agreed to it and was self-ambulatory even if she was intoxicated.

The sexual contact was probably ill desired, but it sounds like it stopped when she wanted to stop and again, we have no good explanation what put her on the bed in that situation to believe in unless you're subscribed to the idea he brought her home in a passed out state and put her on her bed.

The worst you could say that Richmond was opportunistic and a cad.

My belief is you can't call buyer's remorse sexual assault and you don't get a pass for getting intoxicated and making bad decisions that result in unwanted circumstances. It doesn't justify forcible assault, but it doesn't condemn sexual advances when you've willingly gotten into bed with them or agreeing to have sex for that matter.

Too many women are making bad decisions and having cognitive dissonance about it afterward and then seeking absolution through blame because they can't live with their mistakes.

Comment Re:Subpoenas and the right against self-incriminat (Score 1) 161

... protection against compelled self-incrimination.

In many countries that protection is provided not by a constitution, but by tradition of jurisprudence. If the government decides to take that protection away in their 'war on terror', which has happened in other countries, someone will have to prosecute the government to get that protection re-instated.

It is a protection that many in the United States are quick to surrender when they feel threatened, but thankfully so far the more wise heads have prevailed.

In the past 50 years or so the popular attitude toward the protection has faltered. A half century ago invoking your right to remain silent was seen as a good use of protecting yourself. Those who did it were considered smart. But these days, when someone invokes the fifth amendment in the US it is often seen with derision and suspicion.

Anyone can incriminate themselves all they want voluntarily, confess all you want. But the protections against compelled self-incrimination are extremely important. Sadly too many don't realize how important they are.

Comment Subpoenas and the right against self-incrimination (Score 5, Informative) 161

Perhaps they know who the phones belong to, but what makes them think the owner is one of the San Bernadino killers?

That's where law enforcement is having a hard time.
* Government can use a warrant to demand the item be surrendered, and preserve it as evidence.
* Government can demand passwords from third parties like phone companies under both subpoenas and warrants.
* BUT individuals have a constitution protection against compelled self-incrimination.

The government is supposed to produce evidence and link the person to the crime without a forced confession. It is a GOOD THING, it helps prevent things like being tortured to confession and fishing expeditions looking for crimes. Prosecutors and police can demand an individual produce papers and documents that link them to a case, but (assuming their legal defense is doing their job) by doing so they trigger the protections of the fourth and fifth amendments by compelling the evidence.

This was recently re-affirmed by the supreme court in US v. Hubbell. If the government demands that the person gives up documents, papers, or passwords to the device it is compelled self-incrimination. If the government demands a person incriminate himself to collect evidence, it becomes poisoned and the government cannot use it or information from it to help with prosecution.

Police and prosecutors absolutely can demand the people turn over passwords .... but by doing so they also trigger immunity, they cannot use that fact or anything learned from the devices as evidence against them. They'll bitch and moan and complain about not having the passwords, they'll petition congress about how unfair it is to law enforcement that police need to actually investigate crimes and can't use self-incrimination tactics, but the lawyers know full well all it takes is a single slip of paper to legally demand the passwords. Grant them immunity under the protections of the 5th and they are compelled to turn the passwords over, but the person also walks away from criminal liability.

Simply (perhaps dangerously oversimplified) in most of these cases it is that the police are lazy. There are many other known details, much other evidence, but investigators are going for the easy pickings of the data on phones and other personal documents typically protected by law. They could do actual leg-work, actual investigation, actual crime scene evaluation, and many investigators do. The ones wanting to break down the constitutional protections are the lazy investigators who won't be bothered to use the other available investigation tools.

Comment Re:Oops (Score 3, Insightful) 620

Were they ever really relevant, or has it most always been a lifestyle magazine for fetishizing technology? Vanity Fair for Macintosh users who fancied themselves high tech? The kind of thing the CIO keeps in his office to show he's "up to speed"?

The only people I've known to read it wouldn't know TCP from UDP and have stronger opinions about icon design than cryptographic hash functions.

To be sort-of fair, I have flipped through it a few times and found a few articles that were interesting, but it's really kind of a design-centric version of Popular Science with more emphasis on computers and networking.

Comment Stupid complicated pricing, limited choices (Score 1) 83

CenturyLink just put in fiber optic internet in my neighborhood and offers up to 1 Gbps speeds, but doesn't support static IPs. I've been using Comcast business and mostly don't mind what I pay for business class to get a /29.

I've been toying with the idea of switching to CenturyLink and running a pfsense instance on a cloud provider somewhere. Most generic Internet traffic (TV streaming, web, etc) would go out the CenturyLink dynamic IP and server traffic would get routed via IPSec to the pfsense instance to the cloud-based public IP addresses. This worked technically when I tested it with a virtual lab.

The Amazon cost estimator makes it seem mostly reasonable for compute and transit -- my actual server traffic is trivial, and even with generous CPU usage estimates it looked kind of reasonable.

The downside is that Amazon is very Linux oriented. There's a marketplace AMI for pfsense, but they want $500/year and creating your own is non-trivial. There are some FreeBSD AMIs but turning one into a working pfsense would be non-trivial as well.

I'd be tempted to try this just to kick the tires and see if the idea executed well in real life (like, no absurd latency or CPU utilization with the IPSec tunnels, etc) but I hate Netgate's AMI pricing so much I'm not even willing to shell out the $20 it would cost to run it for a week.

I'm sure there's a better place offering this or letting you install it yourself, but I can't easily find it.

Slashdot Top Deals

After Goliath's defeat, giants ceased to command respect. - Freeman Dyson

Working...