Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:wft ever dude! (Score 2) 210 210

The problem is that in the early days they handed out class A subnets like they were candy, wasting millions of IP addresses with every one.

This is correct, and we should continue efforts to reclaim IPs from entities sitting on massive swaths of unused space. Eli Lilly surrendered part of their unneeded allocation, for example. I say forget the corporate blocks for now until the emergency is a bit more dire. While companies like Halliburton and Ford Motors can't possibly have a need for a full /8, trying to recover from them is likely to present legal challenges.

Instead, why don't we take a look at how many /8s are reserved for militaries?,,,,,,,,,, It goes on well through the IPv4 space but I got bored of looking them up, and just those represent more than 180 million IPs that could be released for public use. Networks like SIPRNET aren't publicly routed and don't need public IPs. Most of these blocks are entirely unused on the public internet. Of course the military has plenty of valid, publicly accessible services, but they don't have 180 million of them.

As a taxpayer, I would much rather see these chunks of IP space SWIP'd out to ISPs who can justify their need instead of being destined to forever sit around dormant and registered to the military.

Comment Neat stuff (Score 1) 16 16

Just watched ISS transit over my house about an hour ago. I was excited when the HDEV stream first went online and I spent a day or so with one monitor showing nothing but that feed. But I had no idea that video like this could be captured from 250 miles up using commercial equipment. That's scary good resolution and stabilization for video, makes me wonder how far beyond "Enemy of the State" the US government is doing from their birds.

Allow me to add my vote that Urthecast is a name I find hard to parse properly.

Comment Re:The Privacy Mess is because of? (Score 4, Interesting) 484 484

The two major exceptions have been and Those two companies clearly sold my email address to marketers and spammers.

Can you be sure? Every now and then, I'll open up the floodgates and alias all of @domain to an account just to see what comes in. At one point I noticed a ton of spam to netflix@, and got pissed until I remembered that the email on my Netflix account isn't netflix@. That's never been a legit alias, so it's probably a dictionary style attack. Spammers are blasting shit out to netflix@<everywhere> much like the ssh bots try logging in as alice, bob, and a few thousand other users that have never existed on most systems.

Comment Re:I'm surprised they missed "Wi-Fi Sense." (Score 3, Informative) 484 484

It shares a *hash* of your password (Slashdot of old would know the difference) with first-level friends (not friends of friends) for networks where you actively choose to. It's like given them the password, except better, because you don't.

How does that work?

Suppose the password for my wireless network is BillGates. You're saying Wi-Fi Sense stores some hash of this, let's say 510ae47865e94f0e2165, and shares that with my friend. My friend comes over to my house. How does his computer sign on to my wireless network knowing only the hash, 510ae47865e94f0e2165? That isn't the password for my network, the router isn't going to accept it.

Comment Re:A simple proposition. (Score 1) 380 380

Slashdot sels no product. Sells no service. And wouldn't get enough donations to cover its costs. So they deserve to die?

They used to sell a service where you could subscribe to Slashdot for some nominal fee per 1,000 page loads. The fact that they quit selling this service is their own problem, the scaffolding is all there. It just needs to be turned back on and made worth the investment.

Because people generally don't want to pay for anything. And running these things isn't free.

Our next stewards should revisit the freemium/subscription model. I used to pay $5 a month for TotalFark, now I spend around $3 a month for reddit gold, lots of people pay $10+ for Something Awful, but I never saw any compelling reason to buy a subscription here. I can suppress ads without subscribing, and the other features weren't appealing enough to make it worth a few bucks. Get rid of the page count model and switch to a couple dollars per month. Then ask the community what features would justify those dollars. Comment editing, a richer set of supported HTML tags in comments, the ability to revert to the layout from 10 years ago, etc.

Comment Re:nothing new under the sun (Score 1) 446 446


The Krebs article linked in TFS mentions as much.

"We're on the doorstep of [confirming] who we believe is the culprit, and unfortunately that may have triggered this mass publication," Biderman said. "I've got their profile right in front of me, all their work credentials. It was definitely a person here that was not an employee but certainly had touched our technical services."

Comment Poor analogy (Score 1) 88 88

Did eBay tell you which item to list and when to list it? Did eBay set the price? Did eBay dictate that you couldn't be in your pajamas when you listed the item? Did eBay refuse to let you sign up because the item you wanted to list was old and looked like a piece of junk? Did eBay structure their platform so the only way your items get bids is if you spend 50 minutes of every hour logged in to eBay?

Comment Re: Now if only Slashdot would get rid of video ad (Score 2) 327 327

The cynic in me wonders whether that was calculated marketing sleaze as opposed to laziness, maybe they're targeting people who try searching for Game of Thrones. The various app stores all have auto-suggest, so you start typing in "game of" and get other suggestions including Game of War.

Comment Copyright trolls going down is a good thing (Score 2) 91 91

Hi Ray, nice to see the NYCL moniker around here again. I have a few questions if you're willing.

First, you indicate that a judge has denied discovery due to several factors, one being that an IP address does not identify any particular individual. Can you speak to the weight or breadth of this specific Court's opinion here, in layman's terms? I see references to the Eastern and Southern districts of New York, might this decision influence cases outside of those jurisdictions?

Second, this business of "if the Motion Picture is considered obscene, it may not be eligible for copyright protection." I've read about certain cases where the Court stated that obscenity has no rigid definition, but "I'll know it when I see it." Does that have any bearing on the Malibu case? Was this some kind of completely outrageous pornography, where any community standard would likely find it to be obscene, or was it just run-of-the-mill porn? Would it matter either way? Would the opinion have likely been the same if the case involved a blockbuster Hollywood film instead of a pornographic and potentially obscene film?

Lastly, I'm curious whether or not you've kept up with developments in the case regarding Prenda Law, and how you might compare this case to that one, if at all. I try to read Ken White's PopeHat blog every once in awhile to see how poorly the Prenda copyright trolls are faring. It doesn't look good for Prenda, and I wonder if you would put Malibu in the same proverbial boat.

"History is a tool used by politicians to justify their intentions." -- Ted Koppel