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


Forgot your password?
Note: You can take 10% off all Slashdot Deals with coupon code "slashdot10off." ×

Comment Re:How about "no"? (Score 0) 370

Asking Facebook to follow German law while operating in Germany is somehow forcing "billions of Facebook users" to his ideology?

Yes, because Facebook doesn't exist only in Germany or only in the US.

If I, as a US citizen, want to deny the holocaust on Facebook, FB then has two choices - Remove the offending comment entirely, or at least block it from viewers in Germany. Either of those infringe on my right to express whatever brand of bigotry I may subscribe to despite living in an entirely different country that doesn't feel the need to outlaw critical thinking. I might not get arrested for it, but I would have had my voice silenced as a result of Germany's stupidity.

FWIW, I don't count as a holocaust denier. I arrived at that conclusion through rational consideration of the evidence, however, not because my government told me what to think - And in fact, the latter would make me less likely to believe it; any time the government really wants you to believe something, that raises the bar for the actual evidence a hell of a lot higher.

Comment Re:How about "no"? (Score 2) 370

Here in the U.S., you cannot just say anything that you want without consequences. Hate speech, threats, and bullying are illegal here.

I agree with the rest of what you wrote, but one correction - Of those three, only credible threats actually break the law (with a few temporary state-by-state exceptions for cyberbullying).

Hate speech absolutely does not violate US law. Inciting to violence against them, sometimes (again, if credible); Ranting until you go horse about the evils of Muslims or gays or Canadians, no. You have every right to hate whatever groups you want and talk about it every chance you get - Hell, you can even do it while running for president!

Several states have passed anti-bullying laws, but not federally, and individual state supreme courts (e.g., New York) have already started overturning them as unconstitutional, and only a matter of time until the USSC does the same.

Comment Re:I'm not sure this is the right response (Score 1) 198

The company was dead the moment it came out that all the female accounts were fake and paid for account deletions never happened.

It should be dead. I'm not convinced yet it will actually die. Even with the leak.

Depends what you mean by die. As one of the top cheat-on-your-spouse sites they should be done. As a widely known name and a pre-existing website that could be run with a skeleton staff for cheap it could go on indefinitely.

Comment Re:Bullshit (Score 4, Insightful) 459

other than typical reactionary hate I don't see what the problem is.

You now have your init daemon providing an alternate attack pathway for gaining privileged access to the system, in a way that completely circumvents the well-established (and monitored by most IDSs) auditing capabilities of the platform.

I'd call that a problem, but YMMV.

Comment Re: Even if practical technology was 10-20 years o (Score 1) 318

Maybe. My thought has always been that if fusion is close enough to get ballpark figures, we can build the necessary infrastructure and much of the housing in parallel with fusion development. Because the energy distribution will impose novel demands on the grid, it's going to require a major rethink on communications protocols, over-generation procedures, action plans on what to do if lines are taken out.

With fusion, especially, it's expensive at best to learn after the fact. Much better to get all the learning done in the decade until working fusion.

With all that in place, the ramp time until fusion is fully online at a sensible price will be greatly reduced.

Parallelize, don't serialize. Only shredded wheat should be cerealized.

Comment Re: double blind testing (Score 1) 420

Never mind following my link, did you even read the one sentence summary I quoted in my original post???

Here, if the World Health Organization doesn't count as a good enough source for you, how about a nice high quality Wikipedia link:
several double-blind experiments have been published, each of which has suggested that people who report electromagnetic hypersensitivity are unable to detect the presence of electromagnetic fields and are as likely to report ill health following a sham exposure as they are following exposure to genuine electromagnetic fields

Double blind. Unable to detect. What part of that don't you people get?

But hey, prove all the haters wrong! If you can do it so much better than everyone else, set up your own study and vindicate all these poor suffering folks condemned to a permanent vacation in a beautiful rural mountain village.

Comment Re:The Wire (Score 1) 211

Yes, and it felt fine. They didn't stop me, so I simply drove comfortably below the speed limit. A bit boring, but nothing to worry about. If you want to get rid of them, go even slower and they will pass.

I was once honest to gawd pulled over for going exactly the speed limit. It was in a neighborhood where most people speed through, so I guess the officer found someone obeying the speed limit mighty suspicious.

A compiled list of reasons allowing reasonable suspicion to pull someone over in Texas included traveling slower than the speed limit, traveling at the speed limit, and traveling faster than the speed limit.

Comment Re:inside job (Score 1) 198

This whole thing screams "inside job".

A lot of the information that has been released, most notably employee emails and internal company documents, couldn't possibly have also been on the servers that held the databases for the AM site. So either (1) the hackers thoroughly penetrated the company and got *everything*, or (2) the people running AM were stupider than I believe possible (actually you would have to *work* to put all of your eggs in one basket that way)

I think a combination of 1 & 2 is most likely. There's no real way for a user to tell if a site is secure or not, and an insecure site is easier to run than a secure one. No need to manage a bunch of different logins, sign out keys, create fake databases, etc. The easiest thing is to simply give devs the power to go anywhere and do anything and I wouldn't expect the management of a site like AM to spend money on something like security.

In that scenario all you need is to get a remote login to one machine, from there you sneak in a logger and grab the one admin password they use everywhere and then all you need is a bit of patience before you have everything on their network.

Comment Re:I'm not sure this is the right response (Score 1) 198

Are you suggesting that the hackers are some sort of vigilante activist group out to stomp out infidelity or immorality in general?

Huh? I felt the hackers made a stand against the fraud perpetrated by the company, not infidelity in general. Where did you infer infidelity from my post?

The company was dead the moment it came out that all the female accounts were fake and paid for account deletions never happened. It was unnecessary to release personal user information to punish the company.

Primarily to refute the claim made in the post I replied to that "because the hackers committed an illegal act that what they did was immoral, and it's immoral to 'celebrate' their hack."

I didn't raise the topic of infidelity or its morality at all in my post.

That wasn't the quote, the poster wasn't clear if he considered the hacks immoral just because they were illegal or because of the exposed user information coupled with the illegality:
Just because they used illegal techniques to attack a morally reprehensible company doesn't mean their techniques are magically vindicated. Celebrating the hack is immoral as well.

True the poster didn't mention the user information directly but I feel it's implied due to the volume of coverage and discussion about the user info.

I think the hackers would be morally justified if the simply hacked AM and demonstrated they were lying about the female users and the deleted accounts. They became immoral when they also released very sensitive and potentially devastating user information.

Comment Re:From TFA: bit-exact or not? (Score 1) 166

There used to be a web page called "Your Eyes Suck at Blue". You might find it on the Wayback machine.

You can tell the luminance of each individual channel more precisely than you can perceive differences in mixed color. This is due to the difference between rod and cone cells. Your perception of the color gamut is, sorry, imprecise. I'm sure that you really can't discriminate 256 bits of blue in the presence of other, varying, colors.

Comment Re:From TFA: bit-exact or not? (Score 5, Insightful) 166

Rather than abuse every commenter who has not joined your specialty on Slashdot, please take the source and write about what you find.

Given that CPU and memory get less expensive over time, it is no surprise that algorithms work practically today that would not have when various standards groups started meeting. Ultimately, someone like you can state what the trade-offs are in clear English, and indeed whether they work at all, which is more productive than trading naah-naahs.

Comment Re:From TFA: bit-exact or not? (Score 3, Interesting) 166

Interpolation is WORSE than nothing. you're discarding signal then adding noise in the hopes that it matches up with what should've been there kinda okay.

1, 2, 3, X, 5, 6. Guess the value of X... Congratulations, you just interpolated the right answer.

In the case of what the GP described, though, it works out even better than that, because the panel actually "knows" the right answer, so it hasn't "thrown away" information; it just lacks the luminance resolution to display it. It can, however, interpolate in the temporal domain way, way faster than the human eye can tell, to create a color we perceive as the correct value.

/ Go ahead, twitch gamers, tell us all about your ability to resolve sub-millisecond 1.5% color changes. XD

Comment Re:Why so complicated? (Score 1) 109

It is not that difficult. The only issue is transmission line stub length.

Use current mode low voltage differential signaling to keep the power down with a termination at either end of the transmission line. Then every transmitter in the middle sees the transmission line impedance divided by 2 because it is driving two transmission line in parallel. The transmitters at the ends see the same transmission line impedance divided by 2 because they are driving a transmission line and an immediately adjacent termination although the termination may be placed remotely.

Receivers are high impedance just like on the old Ethernet 10Base-2 standard.

If the minimum stub length is too long for the baud rate because of integrated circuit packaging and layout, then use the same trick Tektronix used on fast oscilloscopes by using 4 pins instead of 2 pins and route the transmission line on and off of the integrated circuit so the stub length is only on the integrated circuit.

Comment Re:no surprise, what people use at home they use t (Score 2) 158

It's when paid businesses go to Ubuntu they have to worry, but the requirements of the customers willing to pay out big money for licenses and support are vastly different than those of desktop users

And here's the rub, they made the desktop platform pretty bleeding edge (major kernel changes are inflicted in routine updates, breaking things like nvidia driver if you choose to use it, not merely being mostly unhelpful about closed source realities but actively making it more painful). Even if drivers didn't break, updates can change things dramatically at a whim, and there's no blessed 'long term' servicing branch that so nearly matches their 6 month cycle releases like Ubuntu does. RedHat is making the free situation needlessly complicated and risky to push people to RHEL, but instead are giving ubuntu the free market. Like you say, the free market by itself is no huge threat, but it influences the commercial market in the long term.

So maybe not all people like the bleeding edge and new fancy stuff like I do though I suspect Fedora's primary trouble comes from RedHat seeming too corporate and people going to what looks like a more community oriented distro.

You could also say RedHat has very little to lose by having something more like Ubuntu in lifecycle out there for free. Those folks won't pay for anything, but their mindshare is valuable among the audience that will pay.

That matters for sure, but when you're looking at an IT system responsible for millions or even billions of dollars then things like enterprize support and a dedicated server OS designed with stability in mind become really important. Whether or not you enjoy using that particular Linux flavour at home becomes really a non-factor really quickly.

What the gods would destroy they first submit to an IEEE standards committee.