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


Forgot your password?
Back for a limited time - Get 15% off sitewide on Slashdot Deals with coupon code "BLACKFRIDAY" (some exclusions apply)". ×

Comment Re:The liberals are in fact aiding the moslems ! (Score 1) 965

Now I can look for the next link in the chain: Why is it ignored by the very people it is aimed at?

That is, indeed, a very good question. I don't have a good answer, but I'm guessing it's for the same reasons that the majority of victims of Islamic State are other muslims. Religion is often an excuse or even a catalyst for violence (and these days, the religion is most commonly Islam). But the underlying reasons are often much more complicated, manifold and hard to decipher, and IS is probably the most complex threat the West have faced since... well, possibly ever.

(Man, to actually wish for the "simpler times" of terrorism...)

Comment Re:Why (Score 1) 965

When Ayatollah Khamenei comes out and says publicly that attacks on civilians are unacceptable and he publicly denounces all terrorists and calls for no attacks against civilians, then I'll be impressed...

I guess a statement from the prime minster of Iran is not enough to impress?

(Not sure why you think the Iran religious leaders would approve of the attacks. You do realize Iran is fighting against Islamic State, right?)

Comment Re:The liberals are in fact aiding the moslems ! (Score 1) 965

Where is the fatwa that declares all terrorism un-islamic and cleares up that terrorists won't go to get 72 virgins and in fact they'll go to the deepest pits of hell (or whatever the islam equivalent, I'm not an expert)?

You're probably looking for the 2010 Fatwa on Terrorism and Suicide Bombings.

Comment Re:Even if you opt into HTML5? (Score 1) 229

That's surprising; your example video plays using HTML 5 in my Firefox. (I wonder if it's my use of AdBlock Edge or Ghostery that makes the difference, then, of if I'm just living in a separate Google bubble.) I never see the YouTube Flash player anymore.

I should add, I've not even opted in to the HTML 5 player... (My Google cookies are scrubbed regularly.)

Comment Re:Do we really want Google... (Score 1) 190

They are doing no such thing. [...] PPAPI (Chrome / Opera), NPAPI (Firefox due to be phased out), and ActiveX (IE due to be phased out).

Did you just rebut my claim that plugin support is being phased out by mentioning three incompatible plugin systems, two of which are end-of-life? Neither Firefox, Microsoft Edge (nor Safari for that matter) are slated to gain PPAPI support.

PPAPI plugins are only supported in Chrome and its variants, and usage is dismal. Of plugins that were most popular just two years ago, neither Silverlight (end-of-life), Unity Webplayer (end-of-life), the Google Earth plugin, Java, the Google Hangouts plugin nor the Facebook Videos plugin are available as PPAPI. PPAPI is in practice an internal Chrome API to be used with built-in modules (not plugins) such as Flash, the PDF viewer and NaCL.

All the above mentioned plugins are being supplanted by various HTML 5 features, with the possible exception of Java (which is just dying, as an in-browser technology). The native browser features aren't all there yet; Unity's native WebGL offering is still struggling with audio and video fidelity, but the gap is closing quickly. Already, Unity reports that compiling C# to .NET IL, IL to C++, and then C++ to asm.js JavaScript, and executing the result in Firefox, yields slightly better performance than executing the original IL in the (admitedly, somewhat dated) Mono runtime normally used in Unity.

Comment Re:Do we really want Google... (Score 1) 190

"Flash gets special treatment due to its market share, but make no mistake, the browser manufacturers are looking to kill it as soon as reasonably possible, too." If this is true, it's only because they've found more obtrusive and abusive ways to advertise to us that are more difficult to block.

The elimination of plugins is happening for entirely technical reasons. Microsoft obviously has their own Silverlight plugin, support for which is also gone in their latest browser.

HTML 5 is the future, also for ads. AdBlock etc. handle them without problems.

Comment Re:Do we really want Google... (Score 4, Informative) 190

Like it or not, all the major browsers are phasing out plugin support. Microsoft and Chrome has already dropped support for plugins other than Flash, and Mozilla is about to do the same. Flash gets special treatment due to its market share, but make no mistake, the browser manufacturers are looking to kill it as soon as reasonably possible, too.

Comment Re:Do what Amazon did... (Score 1) 69

Offer up a version of the the package that is small enough to be audited in detail so that there are very very very few bugs with it.

I think they said they had it down to 6k?

Amazon's package depends on OpenSSL. What they've essentially done is to build an OpenSSL version that's 6k bigger than the existing monster.

Comment Re:No more! (Score 1) 69

Before complaining about mbed TLS's GPLv2 license, you should probably be aware that OpenSSL uses its own application-specific license, which is not OSI approved. The license contains an advertising clause similar to the original BSD license; that makes OpenSSL both GPL-incompatible and a general PITA to work with.

In fact, I'd wager that almost every time OpenSSL is redistributed, it's done in violation of the license. When was the last time you saw a product advertising that "This product includes software developed by the OpenSSL Project for use in the OpenSSL Toolkit"? That text has to appear whenever you advertise any OpenSSL-based crypto functionality.

The license is technically libre, but only by the skin of its teeth...

Comment Re:Expect an updated U.S. travel advisory. (Score 1) 28

At least if you do it you're pampered and it's safe, unless you act out (say run to one particular statue and piss on it, or grope a female soldier)

Right. According to the above mentioned Travel Warning from the U.S. State Department, the following then qualifies as "acting out" and can be cause for arrest:

* involvement in unsanctioned religious and/or political activities (whether those activities took place inside or outside North Korea)
* unauthorized or unescorted travel inside North Korea
* unauthorized interaction with the local population, including unauthorized attempts to speak directly to North Korean citizens
* exchanging currency with an unauthorized vendor
* taking unauthorized photographs
* shopping at stores not designated for foreigners

(The warning then goes on to say that "If DPRK authorities permit you to keep your cell phone upon entry into the country, please keep in mind that you have no right to privacy in North Korea and should assume your communications are monitored." So at least some things are just like in the US.)

The trouble with doing something right the first time is that nobody appreciates how difficult it was.