Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:The Internet of security holes (Score 1) 105

by MrHim (#49465089) Attached to: Microsoft and Miele Team Collaborate To Cook Up an IoT Revolution
And don't forget that because this is a brave new world, dozens of different companies are going to compete for it. One or two will succeed, most will fail, and a lot of houses will be littered with IoT devices with firmware that is no longer maintained because its creator is now out of business. This is so going to suck.

Comment: Re:Vale Linux (Score 1) 167

by MrHim (#40656613) Attached to: Valve Continues Recruiting Top Linux Talent

Seems like reasonable speculation to me. Valve may be hedging against the likelihood that if a significant portion of their user base moves toward thin clients and cloud services then those users will not have powerful PCs. But, if valve makes a console with high-end hardware then they have a better shot a staying alive.

This whole shift back to thin clients is something a friend and I have been trying to keep tabs on. Gamers have been the driving force behind the huge gains in CPU overclocking and GPU performance (which we're using for other purposes) and if PCs die (as predicted by many) then I'm worried that the powerful CPUs and/or GPUs that are so cheap and readily available today will become expensive "server" chips.

Comment: Re:PIN Codes (Score 1) 241

by MrHim (#37571224) Attached to: How often do you put pen to paper?

I don't think I want my pin broadcast across a (potentially) insecure local Wifi network. I'd much rather the analog solution in this case (a signature). Yeah, my server could potentially swipe my credit card and steal the account info, but:

  • * since it's credit and not debit, I don't have to fight to get my money back. I simply tell my CC company that the charge isn't mine and let them investigate.
  • * it is a lot easier to catch an employee stealing card numbers than an anonymous geek who hacks the WLAN from across the street.

Comment: Re:What's so hard? (Score 1) 119

by MrHim (#34511286) Attached to: The First Truly Honest Privacy Policy

What's more -- Aardvark doesn't routinely collect information from its users. Apart from the Google Ads, this site is a cookie-free zone -- I probably know nothing at all about you anyway!

I went to your site and Firefox prompted me to accept the following cookie:
name: font_size
content: 0
path: /
Expires: End Of Session

Not a big deal, really, but it doesn't match up with your policy.

Comment: Re:Backwards (Score 4, Informative) 853

by MrHim (#29240455) Attached to: Emergency Government Control of the Internet?

Well I've done the research and here's the deal:

The 50 million number comes a Census *mailin survey* which is completely unscientific and therefore invalid.

You've done the research? Care to provide a citation for your claims?

The 50 (sometimes 47) million number that is often quoted comes from SAHIE. A quick glance at the about page will show you that:

The SAHIE program models health insurance coverage by combining survey data with population estimates and administrative records. Our estimates are based on data from the following sources:

* The Annual Social and Economic Supplement (ASEC) of the Current Population Survey (CPS);
* Demographic population estimates;
* Aggregated federal tax returns;
* Participation records for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly known as the Food Stamp program;
* County Business Patterns;
* Medicaid and Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) participation records; and
* Census 2000.

If you want to dig deaper then checkout the data inputs section.

BOTTOM LINE: it is not a "mailin" survey or anything of the sort. 47 million is the best, educated guess of the number of uninsured based on data from a wide variety of sources collected in 2005 and compiled by SAHIE; 50 million if you look at the 2006 data.

Comment: POSIX advisory file locking... (Score 1) 270

by MrHim (#11337256) Attached to: Worst Bug or Shortcomings in a Standard?
int main()
int fd, fd2;
struct flock fl;

fd = open(TEST_FILE, O_RDONLY);

if (fd < 0)
perror("open failed");

bzero(&fl, sizeof(fl));

fl.l_type = F_RDLCK;
fl.l_whence = SEEK_SET;
fl.l_len = 1;

if (fcntl(fd, F_SETLK, &fl) < 0)
perror("lock failed");

/* fd is now locked, whoohoo!!! */

fd2 = open(TEST_FILE, O_WRONLY);

if (fd2 < 0)
perror("open failed");

/* fd is now @^%$#ing unlocked!!!! For the love of God, why!?!?!? */


The best way to accelerate a Macintoy is at 9.8 meters per second per second.