Slashdot stories can be listened to in audio form via an RSS feed, as read by our own robotic overlord.


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:No (Score 1) 1037

by Obfuscant (#48583113) Attached to: Time To Remove 'Philosophical' Exemption From Vaccine Requirements?

Who's responsible if your child has a bad reaction to the vaccine and dies or is permanently disabled?

And who is responsible when people who have reasons you approve of for not getting vaccinated kill or cripple other people? (Claiming that children who aren't vaccinated are doing either one is simply ridiculous, but that's what you get from AC oftentimes.) That child who is allergic to the vaccine has just as much chance of spreading the diseases as one who isn't vaccinated for other reasons. And one who has a compromised immune system and can't be vaccinated is more likely to get that disease and spread it. Should those children be removed from the general population to protect the rest of us? Aren't they killing or crippling others?

And then what happens when the government decides that other things are required? E.g., lot of people are highly allergic to peanuts, so shouldn't peanuts be outright banned to protect them? If you have a Reeses PB Cup in your pocket, you are killing or crippling other people, you know...

The issue is not as black and white as it is being made out to be by some people. It is an indirect risk (like second hand smoke), and the risk is a problem only because a lot of people are exercising the freedom.

Comment: Re:The dissent (Score 1) 104

by Obfuscant (#48575875) Attached to: Canadian Supreme Court Rules In Favor of Warrantless Cellphone Searches

Why do they need a warrant to search your car if you're driving around in it?

Because it would be hard to argue that the area under your spare tire in the trunk is in your "immediate control" and thus subject to search based on your arrest. And even for areas that might be argued are under your immediate control, waiting to search until they have a warrant means there would be no "but you didn't have a warrant" defense at trial.

You might as well face it, if they arrest you in your car and impound it, they'll get the warrants they ask for.

Why do they need a warrant to search your house if you are there?

Fourth Amendment? Other than 1) what is in plain sight, or 2) within reach and might hide a weapon.

Comment: Re:why should he have it (Score 2) 234

by Obfuscant (#48568443) Attached to: James Watson's Nobel Prize Medal Will Be Returned To Him

Watsons crime, namely that hes an old crumudgeon, isnt the issue for me. I tolerate the acerbic opinions of the elderly in regard to race, sexuality and gender, and try to view them as contextual expressions of a generation that was cheated into believing nonsense.

That's pretty much the same thing the old curmudgeons say about you, you know?

Comment: Re:XBMC Finally? (Score 1) 138

by Obfuscant (#48565601) Attached to: $35 Quad-core Hacker SBC Offers Raspberry Pi-like Size and I/O

The Raspberry Pi is kind of in a weird situation, and I can't understand why it really caught on. On one hand, it's overkill for little electronics projects where something like an Arduino would be much better suited. On the other hand, it's not quite powerful enough...

This bed is too hard, this bed is too soft, this bed is just right. Yes, it's overkill for trivial tasks, it's underkill for high-powered computational tasks. It's just right for lots of things in between. I've got one running a Winlink RMS gateway using a Pi-TNC for radio to internet communications, and another as the gateway computer (just inside the router) for a data collection network to provide ntp, smtp, snmp, logging, etc services on the network. I had a second one on the same network to control two cameras that needed serial commands. And another that does nothing but collect temperature data and put it on the net.

And sometimes just being able to program in a real programming language is valuable. Like the serial command to cameras program that I was able to write and debug on a desktop and then port with only trivial changes to the Pi when it came time to put the final network together.

Comment: Re:Wonder if the OTG port can be used as a periphe (Score 1) 138

by Obfuscant (#48565531) Attached to: $35 Quad-core Hacker SBC Offers Raspberry Pi-like Size and I/O

I can think have 5 ways you could have accomplished the goal of network configuration without a keyboard and mouse off the top of my head.

6. Pull the "hard disk" off the Pi and stick it in a card reader on any other computer, edit the files you need to and put the disk back.

7. Use the native DHCP client on the Pi to let it get an address from your existing DHCP server and ssh into it.

Comment: Re:Another view (Score 1) 57

They could do all that, but really, would they bother? Just to save the cost of a frequency license? That sounds rather far-fetched.

And yet, this reports the abuse of ham radio by the Indianapolis, IN, USA police department. You can read about FCC actions, for example, this one, which is typical of the kinds of illegal use commercial operations make of ham radio.

Comment: Re:bad idea (Score 1) 57

I transmit that I'm listening from time to time when I am listening. I don't CQ because I don't have anything that I particularly want to talk about while I'm driving with family in the car.

There are those who would claim that your listening announcement IS calling CQ. I hold the opinion that "it's nice that you're listening, if you wanted to talk to someone you'd say that."

Comment: Re:bad idea (Score 1) 57

Do you have their call signs? I'd love to know. Encryption is not legal. If I open a hinternet, I cannot encrypt it.

Are you in the US? If so, yes, you can. You are not encrypting it for the purposes of obfuscating the meaning.

"If these changes allow ham radio in the UK to increase in usage,

That says neither that it is needed nor that it was intended for that purpose.

give me the citations then.

Here. While it includes an HF component, the local transport is almost exclusively via packet.

Tell me exactly why it is not possible to incorporate Amateur radio into hospital emergency communications plans without encryption?

Because the hospitals are eventually going to ask for it.

Has sent health and welfare.

"Health and welfare" is not medical information covered by HIPAA.

One of the first problems that happens, is a paid employee is no longer a volunteer. They can be of course, but their use is limited via amateur radio.

You've already lost that battle. You should keep up with the changes to the regulations.

but I should let you know I am a technical adviser to our local group. So I'm not completely ignorant of emergency amateur radio communications.

Well, I dunno. You've said a lot of things that are wrong. They may have been correct in the past, but times have changed. Just your statement that "encryption is not legal", for starters. Your ignorance of Winlink. That you think there is some limit on government employee's use of ham radio. And that you seem to think that "health and welfare" traffic is what HIPAA is about.

Comment: Re:bad idea (Score 1) 57

Are there really ambulances in England using the ham bands? For transmitting medical data? I guess they use their bands differently than we do here in the US...

It's called "RAYNET" and it is very similar to ARES in the US. Support for emergency services like hospitals and government agencies. Hospitals, at least in this area, get a lot of support from ARES. Hospitals tend to deal with medical data.

Comment: Re:It will never pass and not for the reasons (Score 1) 109

by Obfuscant (#48536739) Attached to: Ron Wyden Introduces Bill To Ban FBI 'Backdoors' In Tech Products

Wow are you wrong. Seriously, overwhelming, jaw-droppingly-stupidly wrong.

And then you provide a quote that proves I am right. Thanks.

It was one of the strangest personal crusades on Capitol Hill: For years, Sen. Ron Wyden said he was worried that intelligence agencies were violating Americans' privacy. But he couldn't say how. That was a secret.

He wasn't "worried" they were, he KNEW they were. He knew and did nothing but issue "vague warnings". It was a SEEcret, you see. And as a US Senator with a mandate to serve the public who elected him, he didn't.

But Wyden (D-Ore.) was bound by secrecy rules, unable to reveal what he knew.

Those "secrecy rules" would not prevent him from writing exactly the bill he's being lauded for writing now. It would not have prevented him from writing a bill to prohibit what was happening. It would not have prevented him from doing a lot of things. All the secrecy laws kept him from doing was telling the public the specifics, but "telling the public" isn't how you get these things stopped. Nothing is still nothing.

Do you know who the Senator was who asked that question that showed that Clapper was lying? Go on. Guess.

Wow, he proved someone lied to congress. He didn't do anything to stop what they had been doing while they were doing it, but after they did it long enough he asked a question. I'm impressed.

Even the people who are with-it enough to know there's a problem, are such morons they can't manage to figure out who their friends are on an issue.

Yes, I agree. And to know who their friends aren't. The fact remains: Wyden could have easily written such a shotgun bill the day he found out what was going on, but he chose not to. He's not the friend you think he is.

Comment: Re:bad idea (Score 1) 57

Nothing in Ham radio requires encryption.

Why yes, it would be wonderful for the same kind of people who play fart sounds on the local repeater to be able to send telecommand signals to amateur radio satellites. Just a great idea. By the way, that's one of the kinds of signals that is explicitly called out in the regulations as allowing encryption.

But the rules don't actually talk about encryption, they talk about obfuscating the meaning. There are a large number of people using what used to be called HSMM -- basically, 2.4G wifi -- and they have encryption enabled. Why is it necessary? To keep Joe Ignorant from using his unlicensed laptop from connecting to a licensed NAP.

Packet Radio has mostly turned into APRS anyhow.

Also wrong.

There is a lot more to Ham radio than whacker's dreams of green vest glory.

Got no idea what you think you're saying here.

The demand for encryption, as I noted before is not to increase usage, it is based on the pipe dreams of Emcomm people, who claim it is impossible to send Health and welfare information that isn't encrypted.

Also wrong. Nobody has said it is needed to increase usage, and "health and welfare" traffic has nothing to do with it. What is involved is the integration of amateur volunteers (and non-volunteers) into hospital emergency communications plans. And now, the excuse that the hams passing that traffic won't be employees of the hospital is gone, because it is highly likely that at least some of them will be. They'll have a radio in their hand they cannot use because HIPAA applies to them.

Comment: Re:It will never pass and not for the reasons (Score 0) 109

by Obfuscant (#48533521) Attached to: Ron Wyden Introduces Bill To Ban FBI 'Backdoors' In Tech Products

Honest question. Why would Republicans not support this bill?

Good question. And completely unanswerable based solely on the description of the bill here on /.. (How DO you properly end a sentence that ends with '/.'?)

But if you read the bill (pdf), you might find some clues. For example:

(a) IN GENERAL. -- Except as provided in subsection (b), no agency may mandate that a manufacturer, developer, or seller of covered products design or alter the security functions in its product or service to allow the surveillance of any user of such product or service, or to allow the physical search of such product, by any agency.

How broad can you get with your paintbrush? An interesting interpretation of this might be that the FCC regulations for emissions no longer apply, because a cellphone can be "surveilled" by following the signals it emits using the FCC standards. E911 info is FCC mandated surveillance, as well, in very broad terms.

Maybe the "exception" paragraph?

(b) EXCEPTION. -- Subsection (a) shall not apply to mandates authorized under the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (47 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.).

So this law is already watered down by CALEA. And what is a "covered product"? Here you go:

(2) the term "covered product means any computer hardware, computer software, or electronic device that is made available to the general public.

Emphasis mine.

Or maybe it will be voted down when it becomes an amendment, as it was in the house?

In the House of Representatives, Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) took up the issue of government encryption rules earlier this year. She passed an amendment to the annual defense funding bill ...

She didn't actually pass the amendment, she proposed the amendment and the house passed it. In any case, it was a rider to an otherwise unrelated bill. It is a standard ploy to attach unrelated things, and when one side votes against the part they don't like, they get painted in pubic as being against the other part they could accept. That's why there is talk of a "line item veto" from time to time, to remove the President from the "all or nothing" game.

Or maybe they'll vote against it because of what it is: a political game played by a master gamesman, who chose now to do something when he could have done it long ago. All this NSA stuff that got leaked -- he knew it before it got leaked. He's on the committee that has regulatory oversight to that agency. Did he do anything when he found out what they were doing? No.

Dennis Ritchie is twice as bright as Steve Jobs, and only half wrong. -- Jim Gettys