Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment: Don't be bleeding out on my ground for no reason (Score 1) 392

I'd hate to see that happen but if you break into my house you probably should do it when I am not here for the sake of your own mortality.

Perhaps the number of laws being broken by this whole black bag show should finally be addressed.

If the "law" pathologically disregards the law then why the hell should anyone else give a rats ass about the law?

Personally, I don't think anything I do is worthy of anyone time to snoop but who knows maybe spying on my search for a good place to take a vacation will save somebody else some time.

Blanket surveillance through global system compromise is a bunch of BS anyway since there is a high degree of probability that those who want to hack the surveillers using their own tactics.

The reason that we have locks is because thieves actually steal stuff. Increasingly we are having trouble distinguishing the good criminals from the bad.

Comment: I have the same issue. (Score 1) 464

by almondo (#48718603) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Are Progressive Glasses a Mistake For Computer Users?

While I do like the progressives for driving because they give me good dash focus again I found the same issue you at my 8 foot wide 2 host desktop. Fortunately for me the solution is simple as I am near-sighted and I can/do continue to work without glasses. The aperture of progressive lenses does cause a much more pronounced physical movement track to be required and for me that was very noticeable and very annoying. The non-progressive bifocals had a much wider horizontal aperture.

Comment: Downloaded way too much bongwater already (Score 1) 294

by almondo (#48666157) Attached to: BT, Sky, and Virgin Enforce UK Porn Blocks By Hijacking Browsers

This will backfire like a well fed big dog that hasn't been out all day. If you railroad people to use your broken, half-baked, unreliable networks and render our highly reliable self-contained devices that we pay for inoperative, well what is to stop us from promoting our machines to be APs with your MAC, your AP name and a big path to nowhere while we drink Long Island Iced Tea in your bar and surf 4G on our Note 4? Go ahead, block my phone too. Maybe you want to call your bankruptcy attorney to discuss your business model first. I was in a Sheraton last week that could not come up up with 2.5M down or get above 80Kbps up on $10 a day "10Mbps premium" service. I took the laptop out in the hall and wandered around too. The pipe was fried everywhere. If my MiFi AP had been blocked and my ability to work affected as a result the whole chain would have earned red-tag status on the extended stay far away plan. Some people just don't think things through.

Comment: DNS zone seeds, Tor resolver, IPv6 tunnel funnels. (Score 1) 388

by almondo (#48620359) Attached to: Sony Leaks Reveal Hollywood Is Trying To Break DNS

The "I will remove your phone number from the phone book on the payphone at the end of the block and you will then cease to exist" mentality is truly laughable. I would say these fools need better experts but hey, who am to judge the comedy value of the overfunded clueless people of the world? The problem with MPSonyAA is while they may have more money, other people will always have more brains. Resistance is futile and greed is pointless.

Comment: Block Jamie Dimon at the door and save BILLION$ (Score 1) 1

by almondo (#48538405) Attached to: US Treasury Dept: Banks Should Block Tor Nodes

Seriously, $24 million? What fraction of the total scam volume is that? I would bet it is far less than 1%. Actually look at the criminal conduct of Jamie Dimon and his clan and you could probably prevent $24 million dollars an hour in fraud, theft and abuse. Blaming Tor for incompetence is pretty ridiculous.

Too big to jail is guaranteed to fail.

Comment: Re:Divert the calls to level 3 (Score 2) 159

by almondo (#48398447) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Dealing With VoIP Fraud/Phishing Scams?

While the Rambo style vigilante response option sounds good on the surface (and don't get me wrong, my natural response would be along these lines if it were not for the legal implications) the problem is that when you do this, you are now violating the same regulations as they are and you are arguably by definition "retaliating" which stacks even more regulatory violations on your illegal response. They have a bus full of overpaid lawyers ready to swoop on you if you "attack" them. For this reason I strongly recommend against this type of response even though the BOFH in me would very much like to employ it.

Comment: High dollar litigation with the FCC is effective (Score 5, Informative) 159

by almondo (#48398367) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Dealing With VoIP Fraud/Phishing Scams?

In the past I have had to deal with L3 on some similar nonsensical "our abusive users are not our problem" crap. As you have already observed, they have a well refined hearing problem. First, decide how much the per call impact is to your business in your opinion. Estimate the number of calls per day and multiply by the per call rate and then by the number of days to come up with a daily and sum "rate of damages". Then have a lawyer letter drafted and sent to their legal department and make sure the letter shows that you also sent a copy of the draft to the FCC Attn: Fraud & Abuse at 445 12th Street SW, Washington, DC 20554.

In about the time it takes you to go to lunch, the problem will subside. At L3, FCC copied abuse resolution rolls down hill, pretty fast.

Comment: Re:Bring back the shuttles. (Score 1) 47

Seriously? Are you still running LSI11 platforms in your datacenter? People who don't know the issues with the shuttle are imagining they can drive from the trunk with no camera. I could make a 69 Cadillac Eldorado into a hybrid with a range of about 10 blocks as long as it is not up hill either way.

A good supervisor can step on your toes without messing up your shine.