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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Better to use Android Auto / Car Play than native (Score 4, Insightful) 29

This is why it's better to separate the car from the entertainment system and just use it as a dumb screen when it comes to apps that are not directly related to the operation of the vehicle. It's easier to manage something like that on a phone. If it kills android auto, just switch to bluetooth audio until it's fixed.

And GM wants to get rid of Android Auto and Apple Car Play? Expect more of this, plus locked-in, walled garden garbage so they can sell more of your data...

Comment DMCA part of complaint looks weak (Score 3, Interesting) 37

Reddit might have a good complaint about terms of service or CFAA or something. I don't know. But at least one part of their complaint looks like garbage:

7. Congress has enacted laws to prevent exactly what Defendants are doing:
circumventing or bypassing technological measures that effectively control access to copyrighted
works. See Digital Millennium Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. 1201, et seq. Each of the Defendants
in this action is profiting by evading technological control measures to access Reddit data it
knows it does not have permission to access or use. Because Reddit has always believed in the
open internet, it takes its role as a steward of its users’ communities, discussions, and authentic
human discourse seriously. Through this action, Reddit seeks to end Defendants’ circumvention
of security measures protecting Reddit data, blatant misuse of Reddit content, and disrespect for
its users’ rights, all of which harm Reddit and its hundreds of thousands of authentic human
communities.

Ah, DMCA, my old friend. Let's review some DCMA definitions from 1201(a)(3), but I'll add some emphasis:

(3) As used in this subsection—
(A) to “circumvent a technological measure” means to descramble a scrambled work, to decrypt an encrypted work, or otherwise to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure, without the authority of the copyright owner; and

(B) a technological measure “effectively controls access to a work” if the measure, in the ordinary course of its operation, requires the application of information, or a process or a treatment, with the authority of the copyright owner, to gain access to the work.

It is here that I must mention that I happen to have a reddit account, and I am somewhat familiar with that website. And I never, ever authorized any technological measure to limit access to my posts/comments. That doesn't mean reddit can't do it, but reddit never asked me and I never authorized it, so whatever is being circumvented does not, therefore (by DMCA's own words), "effectively control access to a work" because the technological measure was never authorized by the copyright owner. I suspect that no reddit users have authorized this, or at most, only reddit employees have been ordered by their bosses to authorize it.

Furthermore, how do we know that the copyright owners don't authorize anyone to "avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure" their copyrighted works? I authorize people to do that. (Indeed, my Slashdot sig below, is a reference to that.) I don't think I have ever said on reddit that I authorize it (the way i have done here on Slashdot) but if anyone (reddit?!?) ever bothers to ask me...

There seems to be some popular misunderstanding of DMCA, that it prohibits cracking DRM. But that's only true if the copyright owner authorized the DRM in the first place and also if they don't authorizing cracking it. Neither of those two required conditions apply in this case.

Comment Given the economics, it might not help much (Score 5, Interesting) 66

Consider the cost of a new EV, and the insurance, the end of the federal EV incentive program this year and what an Uber driver makes these days, and it may not be enough of an incentive. Certainly, Uber trips are probably an ideal case for electric vehicle use (short trips, lower speeds with stop and go regen braking) but the economics of Uber driving are probably pretty touch and go from the various reports I am reading. (I would like to hear from Uber drivers directly on this matter)

Most Uber and Lyft rides I've taken are in older, well maintained cars. They probably are owned outright or the payment is reasonable. Insuring an older internal combustion car is cheap. Yes, there is a savings in fuel with an EV IF you can charge at home most of the time and you have an EV discount with your provider or you live in an area where electricity is cheap to begin with, but often the other costs can outweigh that. Just looking at the payment and insurance for my wife's (purchased used for around $30k) Tesla, and I am not sure if there is any financial savings in the fuel costs in the end, compared to my high-MPG Mazda3 which is paid for and is cheap to insure, and has had almost no maintenance needed since new, No one who is just getting by is going to do it out of the the kindness of their heart for the environment.

You also have to consider the shelf life of the battery, and amortize the cost of the car over time. A lot of these things don't matter if it's your personal vehicle and you're getting enjoyment out of owning an EV on top of it being useful, but if you're looking at it as a business case that you depend on for your survival, it's a different matter.

Any rideshare drivers here who would like to comment? The above is speculation based on my own experience owning both types of vehicles at the same time, but not as a rideshare driver. I have more questions than answers.

I think this incentive would appeal most to someone who lives in a household with multiple incomes, where the rideshare income is supplementary to another, higher income. Then it would be an incentive for someone who can actually afford to take advantage of it. My three cents.

Comment Re:eyebrow-raising (Score 2) 32

If you're afraid of spreadsheets in the financial industry, you should probably just keep your eyes closed. The entire industry is built on them to a very large degree. I've been in IT for almost 30 years, and over most of that, I've seen Excel spreadsheets used throughout the various accounting departments of companies ranging from small operations of a couple of dozen people up to multinationals with tens of thousands of employees, with some banks in there. Some of those spreadsheets are enormous and are doing complex calculations across sometimes a couple dozen worksheets, where changing one number can take several seconds to recalculate everything even on a reasonably modern computer.

Comment Re:Good on them (Score 3, Interesting) 73

"It takes four hundred thirty people to man a starship. With this, you don't need anyone. One machine can do all those things they send men out to do now. Men no longer need die in space, or on some alien world. Men can live, and go on to achieve greater things than fact-finding and dying for galactic space, which is neither ours to give or to take. They can't understand. We don't want to destroy life, we want to save it!" - Dr Daystrom

If you ignore the plot of the episode (where M5 is doing buggy shit and taking Daystrom's sanity with it), I think his speech sums up my outlook on technological progress pretty well. If somewhere, someone is toiling, that's an error to be corrected. In a weird way, creating the fat slobs of WALL-E is, in fact, the goal. (Though for some reason, I prefer to picture Hedonismbot from Futurama as my true ideal.)

As for how to solve the resulting "finally, we can all afford to be fat slobs, so now we are all fat slobs" problem, I dunno, someone else can worry about that. ;-)

Comment I can sympathize (Score 2) 62

I don't consider myself an artist, but I suppose I could be. Like a lot of other computer dorks my age, back in the day I played around with ray-tracing and the classical mirrored sphere floating above a checkboard plane. (You too, huh?)

Then I tilted camera a little bit, changed the checkboard into a colorful 'Brot. Then multiple mirrored spheres, and a sun-like light source floating above it all (actually many light sources, slightly offset, to give the shadow edges more of a diffusion), a gradually shaded the sky to look like a winter sunset (I remember many January evenings walking home and looking at Albuquerque's evening western horizon, and thinking about parametric functions based on the angle, to recreate that blue-to-green-to-red look), then added more complex solids as I got a little better at the math, sent 4 or 9 rays through each pixel and anti-aliased, and ..

.. then focus moved away from the composition to performance, where I had a whole Netware network of machines at my workplace (shh, sneaking in there at night) to draw in parallel, using record-locks to control which y values were done/undone. And some of the machines were 486s with floating point hardware(!!) (OMG so fast!), and then ..

.. ok, and by the time I got bored and moved onto the next thing, I'll admit that what I had was still a cliche pastiche that few people would call art. It was crap, but it was damn fun to make, and that was the whole point. And so ends my story (but not my rant!).

But what if I had stuck with it? What if I had something to say? (Which I didn't.) I didn't draw those pictures, but I "drew" the thing that drew them. I specified them, and there was no limit to the complexity that could have been taken on. If had kept with it and had made something good (which I didn't), but then someone said I hadn't been the creator of my images, or that they were unfit for copyright whereas someone's freehand-drawn picture was fit, I think I would have resented that!

Wouldn't you?

The guy in the story didn't write Midjourney, but if he had, I would totally support his claim.

And waitaminute, so what if I wrote the program? That part of my work was just in getting it to work, and then getting it to work faster, and that's when I got bored because Dammit Jim, I'm a programmer, not an artist. But the other part of the work was the composition, the arrays of "objects" (this was straight C and nothing about the program was OO) and their positions and properties. What if someone else took my program but then modified the arrays to model the scene to their specification? Would their work be unfit for copyright?

Comment Re:A question for people familiar with cryptology (Score 2) 38

Unlock all interactions? No. Unlocking a specific interaction? Maybe.

For common uses (like the public web), the most likely approach to decrypting a specific interaction is to break the RSA (cert-based) on the outside and then the Diffie-Hellman (ephemeral per-transaction) on the inside, then recover the symmetric encryption key to decrypt the rest of the conversation. But this is not trivial, and it requires more work than to just toss the transaction into the quantum computer.

The ephemeral layer is where things get harder. Even if you can derive the RSA key on a regular connection, you've got the first layer, but the DH layer is redone for each new connection. (Some sites don't use DH, or are vulnerable to downgrade attacks where DH isn't used, but DH is pretty widespread.) Every ephemeral negotiation has to be individually cracked. Tor uses DH or x25519 on all connections, so each has to be individually cracked. It is expected that breaking an individual 2048-bit RSA or DH encryption would take several hours if one had a quantum computer of sufficient power. Cracking 3072- or 4096-bit RSA/DH will take even longer, if it's even possible on the same systems. However, we appear to be a long way from such capabilities, and the NSA isn't likely to use it to break arbitrary Tor connection encryption, saving it instead for much more practical items. As soon as the NSA has practical quantum computing, it's going to have decades of backlog to go through just for the international signals, and getting anything moved up in line is going to need a damned good reason.

Comment Re:Why does it matter? (Score 1) 33

Hope you're up on your Sumarian antivirals because I'm gonna Snow Crash your ass.

You're still alive, I see. Yes, it's true, the lethal payload mentioned in the above video isn't actually included within it. I knew there was little danger in linking to this video, but don't you realize it could have been much worse?

Comment Re: He might still be alive (Score 1) 103

And we wouldnÃ(TM)t have to deal with the enshitification of the iPhone and the Mac.

I won't say it about the Mac but it definitely applies to the iPhone: it came pre-enshittified and Jobs was definitely personally responsible it. The iPhone was a terrible regression in the history of PCs, where we somehow went from personal computer revolution of the 1970s back to the IBM-decides-what-you-run of the 1960s.

It would have been good for Jobs to have left the computer world a decade earlier than he did. He didn't need to die, but everyone would be much better off today if, in the early/mid '00s, Jobs had opened a tire shop or restaurant or gorilla costume rental business. Anything but handheld PCs. It's been nearly two decades (!!!) since Apple out-Nintendoed Nintendo and we still haven't recovered. If anything, things are getting worse.

OTOH the modernization of Mac OS to Mac OS X was done very well, and IMHO the word "Mac" would now be a semi-obscure 20th Century historical reference if Jobs hadn't brought in NeXT and made that happen.

Slashdot Top Deals

Nature always sides with the hidden flaw.

Working...