Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Actually, it's part and parcel of absolute fasc (Score 1) 74

by sumdumass (#48930497) Attached to: Snowden Documents: CSE Tracks Millions of Downloads Daily

That's sort of how Ruby Ridge got started. The FBI and ATF badgered a guy to spy on skinheads around the bend from his house and in the process tried to get him to sell illegal arms to them.. he refused but eventualy did something with a shotgun and told s guy how to saw it shorter than the legal limits then they shot his family up trying yo arrest him gor illegal firearm sales.

Its actually a bit more complicated than that but the elements are sll there. Some of the other so called stand offs in the 90s started similar. Except i think those went beyond what the fed agencies were trying to do making it less obvious. Weaver was railroaded for sure though.

Comment: Re:Zone of lawlessness: The U.S. government (Score 1) 389

Lol.. its laid out withing the constitution.

To act as a unified front to foreihn matters of the state, to set up post offices and roads, to settle disputes between the states, to provide for the common defence, and a couple other things.

You do understand that the states are or were actual countries who formed a union surendering only part of their soveregnty for these purposes right? The state is where this taking care of the people if it is to happen is supposed to be. This is why all fed programs in such manner other than social security and medicare is pushed thriugh the states. It id why all constitutionsl amendments that prohibit acts or action of the people (slavery for instance) has an explicite statement giving congress the ability to enact laws to achieve the amendment's purpose.

Comment: Re:What's more irritating? (Score 1) 157

by thegarbz (#48930231) Attached to: One-in-five Developers Now Works On IoT Projects

The funny thing is your hatred is only really directed at the marketing of two things which have been used elsewhere from decades. Both are actually good ideas.

The idea of remote access to information, remote backup, and online services have been around for longer than the internet. Just now when someone uses a fancy name like "The Cloud" people freak out about it.

Likewise the idea of continuous monitoring of assets to gauge reliability and potential cost savings opportunities has been around since factories were first built. But it's only now that someone has given it a crappy name IoT and marketed it to common joe outside of the process / automation industry.

Comment: Re:Yes, the IoT is coming... (Score 1) 157

by aaarrrgggh (#48929757) Attached to: One-in-five Developers Now Works On IoT Projects

I think you have that wrong. They will connect via an encrypted tunnel over port 443 to an AWS cloud instance to log all your activity and provide an "interface" for you to use anywhere you want. Should you decide not to use that interface, your Thing is a Paperweight. But they might still be able to display advertising on it...

Comment: Re:not the point (Score 1) 327

by thegarbz (#48929751) Attached to: Why Screen Lockers On X11 Cannot Be Secure

Hibernate != lock.

Locking a screen maintains all the programs in the background and happens without consideration of what is running. The hibernation process is a bit more like shutting down and standby. Both of them have the same hooks into processes just like the screensaver does. There are ways that programs need to interact with these systems to prevent them from happening so you don't for instance end up with a screensaver in the middle of watching a movie, or hibernate the system while in the middle of a download.

You may notice that if your laptop hibernates due to low battery it will ALWAYS hibernate, just that hibernating due to closing the lid is not a priority given above apps that would not handle the result gracefully.

Comment: Re:FUCK YOU WHAT THE FUCK IS IOT (Score 4, Informative) 157

by thegarbz (#48929739) Attached to: One-in-five Developers Now Works On IoT Projects

Smart, but if we're going to substitute the jobs of editors with Google then maybe we should go all out. Instead we're paying useless editors who don't actually do their job and circumventing it through a tongue in cheek website that provides you with a Google search.

Also I'm in China you insensitive clod. Can you Bing it for me instead?

Comment: Re:readamding compremehensionation (Score -1) 124

by sillybilly (#48929485) Attached to: Proposed Space Telescope Uses Huge Opaque Disk To Surpass Hubble

Ok, well I see nobody came up with this, and I've thought about it more. The whole point of putting up a huge ring instead of a huge lens, is again, to save weight. But with astronomy it is usually not the triangulation accuracy that matters, as in, 3d-vision of knowing the distance, but light collection and image sharpness. So what I said about partial outer fresnel lens rings, binocular style, is not correct, the very purpose of the ring is increased light collection surface area all focusing to a single point to create the image, doing it at minimum weight possible, and if they carried on along the lens, it would get prohibitively heavy in the center. However, this problem of increased surface area without increasing the weight has been already solved, and it's called the Fresnel lens itself. And in fact, the central rings of the Fresnel are the lightest, because they can be made flat and nearly parallel, so super thin, while the outermost rings are the heaviest, because of the steep angle requirements for diffraction there, unless you are willing to increase the frequency of the rings making them each skinnier and narrower, compared to pretty fat stripes of glass in the center. Also the achromatic requirement for the materials near the outer rings increases - meaning the prism-like refracting glass cannot split the colors of the rainbow, but the material has to be accurately achromatic for all frequencies, possibly UV and infrared too, or whatever you can get. So as far as astronomy goes, and light collection surface area just an opaque disk in the center is no better than a traditional Fresnel lens, other than the requirement on the accuracy of shape and accuracy of focal point manufacturing, which may be slightly less of a problem with a single outer ring, but why not pay attention and tune it to the max you can tune it, instead of putting up an opaque disk. Even with an opaque disk the opaque part needs to be closer to the lens, so that when you have to steer the gigantic ring contraption with rocket fuel, you only have to move the ring, not the opaque disk which is close to the camera or focal point, and if you go with a Fresnel lens, you could have locally installable and removable filters that could block out certain rings at a time if needed, and only allow the outermost one, or innermost-ones to collect the light, or if you allowed slight achromaticity, varying the focal point could collect the blue, red, yellow, etc portions along the rainbow individually, including UV and infrared by themselves too, which then you can computer compound to reconstruct the image.

So in the astronomy sense of looking at distant galaxies, the binocular 3D vision sense, kind of like looking out into the sea for ships from a port, and seeing the distance with binoculars which is not possible with a single telescope, so for astronomy sense the 3D effect is not important, because the base of the triangle you use in your computations to get your 3D view is so minuscule compared to the hypotenuse and other sides of the triangle, that the math still spits out error, and you cannot tell how far a galaxy is with a couple hundred mile binocular spacing, maybe a spacing that spans the entire solar system between two telescope looking at the exact same thing might work. However what a 3D vision can do in space is see nearby objects, or search for nearby objects. You simply put your eyeballs into a cross-eye for near range, such as looking between Neptune and Pluto, or just behind Pluto, and then whatever you're looking at, if any objects come into intense focus while everthing before them and behind them blurs out, you can instantly find meteorites, even if they are extremely small, headed for Earth. We just had a near miss of a fairly gigantic meteorite that whizzed by Earth and missed, on Jan 26, and the non omnipotent lifeforms on Earth that split the Red Sea during Exodus could have altered its course to make it slam into Earth, precipitating a global catastrophe that would instantly put an end to stupid lawn mowing that people do everywhere, simply because oil shipments would have stopped, and then using manual scythes is actually not a problem for bugs, flowers, mushrooms and other lifeforms, on grass and flowers that have grown knee high, but the constant harassment every 2 days by a lawnmower and complete lack of flowers, that is a problem presently that needs to be addressed. So there is more time until another one of these near misses whizzes by and intentionally gets crashed to put an end to the out of control often senseless natural destructive behavior of one of the species on Earth, called humans. And in that cutting grass to create a couple foot protective zone from snake in the grass for your kids around the house is not a problem, if you want to. Or if you have to destroy weeds because you need to grow food there. Or you have to hunt to feed yourself, but not for mass market. Or you have to pollute a natural water in a way where it can easily absorb it and deal with the pollution without extinction issues, but you make a living on it, in economically dire circumstances. Like my cat Geoffrey only destroys when he's hungry, and even then 1 out of 7 mice escape by his dabblings. It's the out of control senseless and useless destruction, such as grass cutting on an uninhabited lot, or even, say Walmart street front lots, over mere sense of beauty is what's at stake here, and if you do not like the flowers and weeds that have been around for hundreds of millions of years, you can import other flowers that are prettier to you and more pleasing to your eyes, but there is a desperate need for flowers, for butterflies, bees and even ants, and in turn spiders, dragonflies to live happily. So in any case, having binocular like searching telescopes sweeping in plane and out of plane of the planets (the recent near miss whizzz by was coming way out of plane) 3d-vision looking for anything that turns up in-focus is a worthy thing to do, and for that you need a decent size triangle base for the trigonometric sine cosine triangulation land surveyor calculations, which your brain processes unknowing to you when you see in 3D vision one object farther than another.

By the way the chromaticity issues arising with lenses and prisms have also been solved already, including in astronomy, through eliminating diffraction and instead using total reflection, i.e. paraboloid mirrors, like in your flashlight, but instead of a light bulb at the focal point giving you a parallel beam, you put a concave paraboloid mirror at the bottom of a pipe, and put the camera where he light bulb would be to collect the image. So while even for a Fresnel lens you need some kind of thickness except for the very flat central part, for mirrors you can make those any small thickness that is structurally still sound, and even break them up into individually movable portions (and then you have to get very good with the alignment technology, such as laser interferometry distance measurements between 2 or 3 mirrors to pick up their precomputed positions when trying to aim at something.) But here, if you truly want to save on weight for a telescope instead of using a single Fresnel lens ring around the outer edges and blacking out the center ones with an opaque material, make that opaque material into a paraboloid mirror (possibly from Moon-mined aluminum), and in space where the only bother is solar wind plus micro-meteorites, possibly aluminum foil thickness might be acceptable, as long as you can create an accurate shape. Either with the Fresnel lens ring, or multi ringed huge Fresnel lens, or the mega-paraboloid mirror, the issue is geometrical accuracy in the mirror shape. On Earth they used to use mercury-pools set aspin, and the spinning created a super-accurate paraboloid surface on mercury, kind of like when you spin a bucket of water the water surface rises up at the sides, and the center stays flat but depressed, a parabolid shape, of course not accurate in practice if you just jerked the bucket, but should be pretty accurate if you have maintained uniform spinning for a while. Of course in weightlessness there is no driving force to force a liquid surface into a paraboloid, so for artificial gravity you may need a big rotating cylinder space station where you produce individual paraboloid elements of the paraboloid mega mirror to check your CNC calibrations, unless you trust your CNC's enough to accurately make the individually tiltable laser interferometry alinged paraboloid components, that line up on command to focus light from a distant galaxy, and get out of focus when a bright object passes by in the view, such as a planet, to not burn up the camera by heating it to the boiling point of tungsten, desert solar concentrator style, merely off of the light they collect reflected from, say, Uranus.

Comment: Re:not the point (Score 1) 327

by thegarbz (#48928787) Attached to: Why Screen Lockers On X11 Cannot Be Secure

So...what you're saying is "people who aren't security conscious continue to be vulnerable to attacks that exploit their sloppiness and/or lack of attention"?

You joke but think about an un-educated but security conscious example. In windows the OS lock screen reigns supreme. Windows+l, or closing the lid works in every scenario, it doesn't matter if I have full screen video, context menus, a program preventing sleep / screensaver functions the computer will lock on an external event.

Now you have a linux desktop. Your employees are security conscious but not necessarily smart. The receptionist needs desperately to go to the bathroom, does what she does to lock the screen but it doesn't work. Now do you think that someone will sit there waiting for IT support to tell her why her *worthless lockscreen isn't showing up while needing to go to the bathroom? Of course not.

Security is always defeated by if it's function is complex / unreliable from an end user point of view. Any security that significantly negatively impacts the user will be met with circumvention attempts.

*I say worthless because while I haven't used locked screens recently I remember a few years ago I bypassed an Xfree86 lockscreen by force closing the X11 session using ctrl+alt+backspace. The end result is X restarting and dropping me onto the desktop logged in as the user.

Comment: Re:not the point (Score 1) 327

by thegarbz (#48928723) Attached to: Why Screen Lockers On X11 Cannot Be Secure

Isn't the point of a screen locker to keep a person from accessing my computer while I step away for a moment (to go to the bathroom or refill my coffee mug.) not to prevent programs from accessing things?

Indeed but fundamentally if you can't lock out other software from accessing things then you can't prevent other software from responding to user inputs. Several years ago a colleague who for some reason just discovered screen locking was showing off his secure system. I hit ctrl+alt+backspace and the X11 session restarted sans any running application including the screenlocker logged in as the user.

The piece of software at the time preventing me from accessing the computer as the user was worthless.

Comment: Re:So to cicumvent the screen locker... (Score 1) 327

by thegarbz (#48928685) Attached to: Why Screen Lockers On X11 Cannot Be Secure

... there has to be a trojan on the system or at least something connected to the X server over the network.

No the problems go far deeper than that. Effectively any program can prevent the screenlocker working accidentally or on purpose. Likewise the screenlocker can prevent any program from working accidentally or on purpose (i.e. open the laptop lid, unlock, and only then the convenient volume buttons will work).

Best of all the purpose of the lockscreen is to secure the user session while they aren't at the keyboard. I fondly remember back in the day someone showing off the X11 lockscreen and saying that I can't use the computer as him because he locked it. I hit ctrl+alt+backspace which killed the X11 session and automatically restarted it, logged in as the user who was now dumbfounded.

X11 has always had these problems. The protocol really isn't designed to handle such concepts.

To restore a sense of reality, I think Walt Disney should have a Hardluckland. -- Jack Paar

Working...