Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Suggestion (Score 1) 446

by KlaymenDK (#41397115) Attached to: Motorola Seeks Ban On Macs, iPads, and iPhones

I got my nickname tsa long before the TSA existed so please refrain from making remarks about the TSA.

I think you mean us to refrain from making remarks about the other TSA?

You being "the" TSA ... or maybe you don't want us to make remarks (such as this one) about you ... or both ... or I've confused myself. I'll sit down now.

Comment: LXDE? (Score 1) 216

by KlaymenDK (#40093853) Attached to: Linux Mint 13 (Maya) Has Arrived

I'm currently on Linux Mint LXDE 11, or Linux Mint 11 LXDE, or whatever it's called. I love that it's so extremely fast to start stuff up, much more so than my previous some-other-distro with KDE4.

Is there, or will there, be an LXDE release for Mint 13? I can't figure it out from the site. (Yes, I'm bad at reading, apparently.)

Comment: Re:Flat Files FTW! (Score 4, Insightful) 388

by KlaymenDK (#39951413) Attached to: Living Fossils: Old Tech That Just Won't Die

I would write a data reader/writer module for the program.

Quoted in lieu of an upvote. This is the #1 step in optimising file system access -- store it in a flat file first, with a proper wrapper, and then you MAY update to a higher-end system later on IF it's needed. Don't underestimate the bandwidth and accessibility (as in: hacking data for testing, etc.) of the flat file! :-)

Comment: Hang in there (Score 1) 388

by KlaymenDK (#39951377) Attached to: Living Fossils: Old Tech That Just Won't Die

Hey there. I just want to say, stick to your Tungsten as long as you want. There is pain in switching (I hesitate to write "updating").
Personally, I switched (from a couple of T3's) to Android as the "best" alternative to PalmOS. It's not crap --it is the "best", after all-- but it is nevertheless not nearly as good as PalmOS. Oh handwriting, how I do miss thee! (Yes, I realise that Access put out a "Graffiti" app, but it does not compare to the full-screen support and custom strokes of TealScript.) My ailing work laptop is in dire need of a reload, but I'm loath to do it -- I can't ever reinstall Palm Desktop.
My brother used *up* a small handful of Psion Series5's with several parts replacements, but in the end went for an iPhone and is reasonably content with that.

Comment: Re:Attach a solar sail (Score 1) 412

If we can't get off this planet in serious numbers before it hits, the universe goes on without us.

That is the most objective statement I've ever seen on Slashdot. Not "we'll all die, and that's that", but a far greater perspective where our loss is immeasurably tiny.

Comment: +1 ! (Score 1) 1244

by KlaymenDK (#39274393) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Good, Forgotten Fantasy & Science Fiction Novels?

Yes! How odd that it took this long to get mentioned -- what with the movie adaptation bringing it back into current relevance.

I read these many years ago and found them quite entertaining: The story is quite good, and the quaint ancient-science-finction-before-it-was-even-called-that just adds to the enjoyment. Of course the 8th colour is lighter than air and can be stored in tanks to make ships fly...!

(Also, you don't have any problems with "disturbances in the avidyne fusion converter", so no need to "neutralize the electroplasma pattern with adaptive matter stream". :-)

Comment: I'm no lunatic, but ... ? (Score 1) 73

by KlaymenDK (#39134475) Attached to: Solid Buckeyballs Detected In Space

I would very much like a knowledgeable person to explain how it can be that a telescope can be used to find molecule-size phenomena, when we have so often heard that we can't use a telescope to verify if there actually is NASA hardware on the moon "because it's too small to detect".

I once read a very good article (link long lost) about optical mirror angles, focus, and relative sizes of stuff in distant nebulae and on the moon surface. I wonder if a similar explanation exists for detecting these molecules.

Well, in the meantime, I'd better go RTFA!

Comment: It does not matter the strength of your public key (Score 4, Insightful) 108

by KlaymenDK (#39042901) Attached to: 99.8% Security For Real-World Public Keys

It does not matter the strength of your public key if nobody knows to demand it.

THIS! This is the core problem! Everybody knows email, and most people know that you shouldn't share your password with others, but nooobody knows about proper signatures and how to work with them.

If each and every digital signature out there was useless, how much of our total bandwidth would be compromised?
The painful answer is, at most the percentage that is signed in the first place, which is a drop in the proverbial ocean.

Cory Doctorow has a statement about obscurity being a far bigger threat to authors than piracy, and I posit that an analog can be drawn for obscurity of security practices, the population at large, and privacy/security.

It's hopeless to encrypt all your email unless your peers (including granny and junior) knows how to process such email, and knows to be suspicious of unsigned communications. If only some of the globally popular communications services would have the guts to enable, and indeed, enforce this. (Google and Facebook, I'm looking at you.) Yeah I know, they wouldn't be able to stay in *business* if they did that (which nicely highlights what, or rather who, the "product" really is).

Comment: /dev/urandom vs /dev/random? (Score 1) 108

by KlaymenDK (#39042837) Attached to: 99.8% Security For Real-World Public Keys

They will complain that '/dev/random is too slow (implicitly not realizing the urandom option)'

Please help me understand this bit. It sounds as if you would prefer urandom over random. I'm not skilled in randomness on Linux, so I checked Wikipedia (emphasis mine):

[...] A counterpart to /dev/random is /dev/urandom ("unlocked"/non-blocking random source) which reuses the internal pool to produce more pseudo-random bits. This means that the call will not block, but the output may contain less entropy than the corresponding read from /dev/random. While [/dev/urandom] is still intended as a pseudorandom number generator suitable for most cryptographic purposes, it is not recommended for the generation of long-term cryptographic keys. [...]

That, to me, sounds as if one should not use urandom if random is as all feasible.

So what's the deal here?

There must be more to life than having everything. -- Maurice Sendak

Working...