Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



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

Comment: Re:He lies in his work too (Score 0) 131 131

Editing videos to remove information that doesn't fit his desired portrayal of events, absolutely distorting the true context of events.

He edited a leaked video, which the US Government had claimed did not exist. The events in the video where not as important as the exposure of the lies.

Comment: Re:Terrifying. (Score 3, Interesting) 61 61

This is the most terrifying and ridiculous thing I've seen in my entire life.

Americans have spent more than a trillion hours watching reality TV. That is far more terrifying and ridiculous than someone playing with a Turing-complete compiler meta-language.

Comment: Re:Why can't this be the law everywhere? (Score 1) 208 208

They would still have their one phone call

The "one phone call" is a myth made up by Hollywood. Last time I was arrested, there were several phones in the holding cell, and I was there for four hours. I could make as many phone calls as I wanted, to anyone, either local or collect.

Comment: Re:Streisand effect (Score 1) 208 208

The court just drew massive attention to this guy that wouldn't otherwise have been there. Doh!

The news reports don't mention his name, so he isn't getting much attention.

If Google isn't allowed to report facts, why shouldn't journalists be censored as well?

Comment: Re:Fee Fees Hurt? (Score 3, Interesting) 255 255

People from the USA are always amazed when they hear anybody would try to enforce the spirit of the law, not the letter.

Laws should mean what they say. If they mean something other than what they say, they should be repealed or rewritten. If the police can arrest you, not because of what the law is, but what that cop thinks the laws should be (the spirit), then you are living in a police state.

Comment: Re:Idiocy. Anyone have facebook photos? (Score 1) 73 73

I doubt that. I doubt that a facial recognition software can differentiate reliably humans and photos (or videos)

Try this:
1. Show your mom of photo of yourself.
2. See if she can distinguish between you and the photo.
3. Ask her how she did it.
What she will say, is that the photo is 2D and you are 3D. As your mom shifts her head left and right, she sees you from a slightly different perspective.

A cell phone can do the same. It has a 3-Axis motion detector, so it can detect its own movement, and see if the perspective of your head corresponds to that movement. It would be impossible to duplicate that with a photo, and nearly impossible to do it with a video.

a person could be standing still and then you get a false negative

No human with a beating heart can hold a phone that steady.

Personally, I find a chip + PIN save enough.

That option will be available if you prefer it.

Maybe they should extend the PIN to 5 or 6 digits.

Bad idea, since people will write them down. 4 digits is good enough. Brute force guessing of PINs is a non-problem.

Comment: Re:Idiocy. Anyone have facebook photos? (Score 2) 73 73

It is still stupid, as the software can be cracked

Yup. It is based on public key cryptography, so all you need is every quark in the universe calculating once per planck time, and you will have it cracked in less than a googol years. Trivial.

you could cheat the sensor with a photo printout or a photo on another phone.

Can you look at a phone and tell it isn't a live person? Why do you think it would be difficult for a computer? Some early naive implementations of facial recognition could be fooled by a photo. Modern state-of-the-art facial recognition can detect the difference.

This technique may not be perfect, but it is a big security improvement over the current system. It will require two factors: biometric and physical possession of a registered device. For transactions over a set size, it could require a PIN as well, as a third factor.

Comment: Re:Today's computer science corriculum is practica (Score 2) 153 153

Your analogy is almost as bad as the articles.

CS != IT. This makes as much sense as complaining that your car mechanic knows nothing about engines.

Except I didn't say that. You edited what I said, presented it as a direct quote, and then complained that it was a bad analogy. That is dishonest and stupid.

Comment: Re:TRWTF: List is used instead of Map (Score 1) 128 128

How the heck was I supposed to know that a 64 bit flat architecture would someday come along that still set int to 32 bits?

By reading the standard, which explicitly states that only a long is guaranteed to hold a pointer. Or by running "lint" which is designed to catch silly newbie errors like this. Or by not using casts when you don't understand how they work.

Comment: Re:Paywall (Score 4, Informative) 153 153

The link is paywalled, but programmers are not bricklayers. So just based on that one quote I can tell the article is stupid.

Indeed. TFA equates programming with bricklaying, and implies neither needs to be educated like an architect. But writing a program is much more like architecture than it is like bricklaying.

I have worked as a bricklayer. The first day, the foreman told me to pull the wall down and try again. The second day it was "good enough". By the end of the week, I could work as well (but not as fast) as the guys with years of experience. A programmer with a week of experience can not come close to someone with years of experience, and likely can't write a working program at all.

Comment: Re:Today's computer science corriculum is practica (Score 5, Informative) 153 153

We have hired, and let go, 3 "computer science" majors who didn't know how to calculate a range of IPs given a single IP and a netmask.

CS != IT. This makes as much sense as complaining that your car mechanic knows nothing about plumbing. If you want a sysadmin, then hire a sysadmin. But that is not what a CS grad is, or should be.

You should also change your hiring practices. If there are basic skills that you require, you should test for that during the interview process. By failing to do that, you are wasting your time and theirs. Letting one slip through may be excusable, but three in a row is a sign of serious dysfunction.

Comment: Re:Demographics (Score 4, Insightful) 256 256

Be nice if parents were paid for the time they had to take off to attend these meetings.

Poor academic performance is strongly correlated with poverty. Households in the bottom quintile have an average of 0.4 people employed. I doubt if the parents failed to show up because they were too busy.

"Can you program?" "Well, I'm literate, if that's what you mean!"

Working...