Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

Comment: Re:One of many reasons not to use Steam (Score 1) 216

by Yosho (#49066903) Attached to: Valve Censoring Torrent References In Steam Chat

And corporations stifling speech is still an infringement of speech.

On the other hand, why should a private corporation be obligated to provide you with a platform for your speech? If you run your own web forum, would it be ok for me to fill up your forum with, say, posts advocating White Power, or would it be reasonable to ban me? I shouldn't even need to post the obligatory XKCD comic here.

"Oh torrents are pirate channels!". Really? Updates from Blizzard are all pirated????

Pretty sure nobody said that. If you'd bother looking at the article at all, you'd see that references to specific sites that are known for pirating material are being flagged. Go ahead and talk about Blizzard's updater all you want.

And note that you can be kicked out of Steam for this, whereupon your ENTIRE collection becomes null and void.

What are you talking about? Please show me any indication at all that somebody has been banned from Steam and rendered unable to access any of their games because they tried to talk about torrents.

Yeah Steam has the BEST DRM! In just the same way as firing squad is the best form of murder!

And you make the BEST points, in the same way that Hitler had the best final solution! See, I can also use extreme, irrelevant hyperbole!

In the course of one post you went from being somebody who didn't understand how free speech works to somebody who is using extreme hyperbole to argue against something that didn't even happen. Good job.

Comment: Re:People *want* MS vendor lock-in? (Score 2) 175

by Yosho (#48940207) Attached to: Microsoft Launches Outlook For Android and iOS

People actually want their information stored in Microsoft's proprietary format? I thought that was something done out of ignorance, or because you felt forced to do so.

No, and yes, that's right. I don't know that anybody has said, "Sweet, I love Outlook!" Rather, you use Outlook because you work for somewhere that uses an MS Exchange e-mail server whether you like it or not.

Comment: Re:It is hard not to associate this with 8chan (Score 2) 184

by Yosho (#48872219) Attached to: Moot Retires From 4chan

"Very few places" here being slashdot, youtube, reddit, twitter, and pretty much everywhere else on the internet...

You can say anything you want, but you'll probably get modded down and ignored quickly, if not banned.

And even if you don't, you've still got a reputation. Your real identity may not be attached to your posts, but you've still got an identity, and people will at least remember what you say and possibly track down your uses of that identity on other web sites.

Anonymity isn't just a feature on 4chan, it's part of the culture. Nobody can punish you for anything you say, nobody can speak louder than you, and nobody can embarass you because there is nothing linking your identity to your words.

People make a lot of noise about "evil" things being said on 4chan, but that's not quite right. There's a lot of honesty on 4chan. Without any repurcussions, shame, or punishment, everybody can say exactly what they're thinking. They're still thinking it elsewhere -- but they feel like they can vocalize it on 4chan. And there's a lot of interesting, insightful discussion that goes on there, too, especially with regards to subjects that are too taboo or embarassing to discuss in places where you have an identity.

Comment: Re:The NSA would love it. (Score 2) 203

by Yosho (#48726237) Attached to: Why Aren't We Using SSH For Everything?

Got any reliable citations for those sources, or is it just the nebulous "some"? I mean, some sources say the NSA has brainwave scanners and can tell what you're thinking from a van outside your house. But those guys are nuts.

The protocol is an open standard, and anybody who has looked at OpenSSH's source code has "cracked" it. It's not terribly complex. If you're transmitting over an unencrypted connection or using a compromised cipher or key, anybody can figure out what you're doing.

The real issue (and what you're probably thinking of) is whether the NSA has backdoors in or has cracked different encryption ciphers that are commonly used over SSH. If they have, that's a much more widespread problem than just SSH, because those ciphers are used elsewhere, too (like in HTTPS).

Comment: Re:The human eye is proof God exists (Score 2, Insightful) 187

by Yosho (#48667337) Attached to: Human Eye's Oscillation Rate Determines Smooth Frame Rate

The appeal is that it's the truth. People want to discover the truth about how our world works and how we came to exist in it, and science is how we do that -- and every bit of science we have indicates that evolution is the only plausible explanation for the current diversity of life on Earth.

you're pushing the idea that life has no true purpose and random death means progress

No, we're not, and I think the whole "you can't have meaning without religion!" bit is one of the most insidious lies the Christian church has pushed. Not following the dogma laid out in 2000-year-old books means you can make your own purpose in life. You can decide what gives you meaning and what you consider progress. I promise that if you go to any Humanist gathering, you will see plenty of people who have meaning and purpose without religion. Talk to them a bit, even -- I'll bet they'll be perfectly friendly if you say, "Hey, I'm a Christian but wanted to see what you guys are all about." Learning first-hand what life without religion is like is better than taking your pastor's word for it (after all, do you think maybe he has his own agenda?).

I'd rather bet on a .001% chance that Jesus is Lord than 99.999% chance that life is based on nothing but random chance and death.

Here's the thing, though: there's not a 0.001% chance of that, there's a 0% chance of it. There is zero evidence than any sort of supernatural being exists at all, and it's a huge leap from there to "Christianity is true," with just as much evidence. You are believing it purely because it makes you feel good. That's your choice, but maybe you should find out what the alternative is actually like before dismissing it.

Comment: Re:It's totally superfluous (Score 4, Interesting) 164

by Yosho (#48658049) Attached to: NetworkManager 1.0 Released After Ten Years Development

And these guys spent 10 years simplifying that?

No, they spent 10 years simplifying things like scanning for wireless access points, detecting the encryption type, and storing credentials. Or setting up routing over Bluetooth. Or configuring and switching between different types of VPNs. Or bridging between multiple interfaces. And having a little icon in your system tray that you can right-click on to do it all.

If the only thing you ever do is set a static IP for your ethernet card then you probably don't need it, but a lot of people do more complex things than that.

Comment: Re:Just wondering... (Score 1) 416

by alexgieg (#48583985) Attached to: MIT Removes Online Physics Lectures and Courses By Walter Lewin

[quote]It is pretty unlikely that sexual harassment will ever be considered okay in the future.[/quote]

I've once read a piece of fiction in which a future society had "non-consensual sex" as a standard part of their culture. Hundreds-of-years-old still living (thanks to advances in medical research) 21st century-born citizens shook their head at this, but when they told the youngsters they thought it absurd, they all looked at the oldsters with uncomprehending expressions. That's because thanks to advances in technology it was a non-issue. No resulting psychological traumas, no physical injuries, no pain, no unwanted pregnancies, at most a small inconvenience, and even so only if one's in a hurry. Hence, not a crime, not even a misdemeanor, but mere bad manners.

Rule of thumb: don't try to predict the future. If a current author can already imagine such a scenario, the actual social reality a few centuries down the line might be radically weirder than even his most hallucinating dreams. As ours would be to any 17th century surviver were one still around.

Comment: Re:Google doesn't have a monopoly on ANYTHING. (Score 1) 334

by alexgieg (#48474175) Attached to: The EU Has a Plan To Break Up Google

You have to make up your mind. Either central banks are fundamentalist free market advocates, or they aren't. In this post you seem to be agreeing with my point that they aren't. So, which is it?

The problem with FREE free markets is, that they don't work.

True, which is why I'm actually a distributist, not a libertarian. That however has no bearing on the original argument about what central banks are or aren't.

Comment: Re:Google doesn't have a monopoly on ANYTHING. (Score 1) 334

by alexgieg (#48459745) Attached to: The EU Has a Plan To Break Up Google

Thanks, I liked that article. It expresses many of the same criticisms I have to Rothbard, better than I myself could.

However, that has no bearing on the issue at hand. Central banks are state monopolies that prevent the free market of private currencies. If one's a fundamentalist free-market advocate, then currencies are just a good among others, and monopolizing on their production is anything but being free. Hence, any central bank cannot by definition be a fundamentalist free-market advocate, else they'd advocate for their own monopolies over their respective national currencies to end.

That's why, incidentally, no huge company is ever truly libertarian. Libertarianism is always the position defended by those neither at the bottom nor at the top of the economic pyramid. It's a purely middle-class ideology.

Comment: Re:writer doesn't get jeopardy, or much of anythin (Score 1) 455

Whether smarter things than us can exist is an unknown.

It's highly probable though. We can do a lot of pretty awesome stuff running in basically fixed hardware, and hardware full of bugs at that. Build a brain without cognitive biases and it'll be smarter by that alone. Build an intelligence that can dynamically alter its own source code and hardware to optimize for specific tasks and it'll be even more so. There's probably a limit on how much such optimizations can achieve, but in any case we're hardly there, wherever "there" is.

Comment: Re:Pressure from the *West* (Score 1) 128

So what you're saying is that governments in the world used to be coerced into behaving differently. Now, governments in those countries now have a greater say over their own future.

FTFY. People rarely, if ever, have a say over anything. They are coerced by their own governments, which in turn can be or not coerced by other governments. In any case however, they are and remain coerced.

The Tao is like a glob pattern: used but never used up. It is like the extern void: filled with infinite possibilities.

Working...