Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×

Comment: Re:linux hard to install and use for desktop users (Score 1) 45 45

that was always a problem of Linux being reliant on X Windows, and you don't know if the X windows is going to run properly until it's installed. therefore the installer has to be text-based, or so they claim. but it's all BS. the people who are doing the video drivers have a vested interest in discouraging direct use of those video drivers -- they are typically employed in jobs that have to do with either X Windows or something related. they want you to use X, even though X is terribly insecure and generally crappy software.

Not sure if you're stoned or trolling or dropped out of a time vortex from the 90s, but

1) GUI installers have been the norm for desktop oriented distros for years, mostly through live CDs.
2) For most of Linux history there's been zero credible competitors to X
3) Wayland is mainly driven by ex-X developers
4) Wayland will still need drivers to have accelerated graphics

5) Neither application developers nor users usually see X, you write against for example Qt and the toolkit takes care of talking to X. They might hate X, but they hide its quirks pretty well.

Comment: Re:He answered the most boring questions! (Score 2) 45 45

It's the typical FOSS mindset. Since you did something other than what I wanted, all of your work was a waste of time.

I think those wanna-be generals aren't really the community, but those who want to exploit the community to achieve their pet goals. To steal an expression from 4chan: The FOSS community is not your personal army. The opposite is less intuitive, but it also means the community isn't going to stand still just because your pet needs have been met while many others feel theirs haven't. For example I haven't heard much shit about PulseAudio in recent years, though initially it was rather crappy but it did add features that didn't exist before. Maybe in ten years time we'll feel the same about systemd.

Comment: Re:Iran is not trying to save money (Score 1) 216 216

It's pretty hilarious and pathetic there are people who are so gullible in this world

geopolitics is not the same as saying hi to the new neighbors in a gated community and full of slightly more complicated motives than arranging play dates with other soccer moms. you are a rather sheltered and naive individual. you really should stop commenting on subject matter when you obviously don't have a good understanding of how nations behave in this world

you're well below serious interaction on this topic

Comment: Re: Altough I agree (Score 1) 61 61

They've been holding out for the long term for about 5 years now. Presently Microsoft loses 12 cents on every mobile device they sell, and that doesn't even count the R&D and marketing costs. There is all of zero indication that things will turn around. Every so often there's a new WP, and the fanboys jump for joy saying that "this is the one that will fix it all, omg its so awesome!" and the result is just crickets.

I've heard it described that developing apps on WP feels as restricted as writing code in javascript on a web browser.

Comment: Re:data-mining encrypted data? (Score 1) 36 36

Datamining is just a computation, an arbitrary computation. It has input value(s) and an algorithm which depends on computed intermediate values and finally an output(s). There is nothing special about the data that datamining works on which differentiates it from any other kind of data within that framework I described. This is the wonder of homomorphic encryption. It DOES let you do aribitrary computation without decrypting the data.

That's not the same as doing arbitrary computation on data whose general semantics you are totally ignorant of. Is it numeric data? Is it text processing? What is its format. Sure, you have to know that level of detail but that's like saying "this string is a pssword". Does it get you any closer to knowing what that specific encrypted password is? It does not.

Comment: Re:Is bitcoin sustainable? (Score 1) 36 36

Yeah but your counter argument doesn't account for the sheer scale of what VISA and the banking system do compared to Bitcoin. OK the banking system uses more electricity, but what is the amortized cost on a per transaction basis? That's the question. Accoring to TFA the answer is VISA is HUGELY more environmentally friendly and cost effective than Bitcoin and, and this is the point, always will be because by design Bitcoin makes it harder to obtain coins depending on how much processing power (energy) is being expended to obtain those coins at any given time.

If all bitcoin machines went solar however, then we might have a different outcome. The practicalities of that, given that Bitcoin assumes distribution of computing power, are not in Bitcoin's favor either.

Comment: Re:Not surprised (Score 1) 315 315

claim they were always going to do this if needed to but hadn't realized they were required to

Yeah, and ignorance of the law is no excuse right? In places like Canada, the fines for failing to have the proper insurance start at $10k per incident. After the first incident, they jump to $50k, $100k and $250k per incident thereafter. Maybe it's time for the crown/DA to start laying fines at their feet.

Comment: Re:data-mining encrypted data? (Score 2) 36 36

Sorry, but this time you're just wrong without stipulation. The whole point of homomorphic encryption and computation is the computor never has the key and the data is never decrypted. It remains encrypted throughout the computation.

They are doing this and then they're also doing a second thing, distributing the computation which is an ortho. concern to the homomorphic encryption and computation, in theory at least, if not in this implementation.

Homomorphic encryption is counter-intutitve to most of us. I had never heard about it until a few months ago. At first glance, it seems like a thing that can't be true; like relativity.

Comment: From the whitepaper... (Score 1) 36 36

"..on different nodes, and
they compute functions together without leaking information to other nodes. Specifically, no single
party ever has access to data in its entirety; instead, every party has a meaningless (i.e., seemingly
random) piece of it."

Because there is no Naurus node in ay ATT room anywhere sucking up all internet traffic, duplicating it and sending it off to the NSA before sending it to its intended destination.

Don't get me wrong; the blockchain is fascinating and makes possible very interesting applications with far reaching societal implications. My own opinion is much blockchain applications will overshadow even the IoT in terms of revolutionary effect on society. Irrefutable verifiability is like a philosopher's dream.

But anything operating under the assumption that there is no entity that "has access to all of X" is just wrong out of the box, which is not to say it's useless out of the box or uninteresting, just wrong on that *very* significant detail

A fail-safe circuit will destroy others. -- Klipstein