Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Article got it wrong (Score 2) 101

by c0d3g33k (#47539103) Attached to: Private Data On iOS Devices Not So Private After All

You lost me when you said "expert Steve Gibson". If by "expert" you mean "shameless selfpromoting security wannabe", then OK.

No. These are examples of shameless, self-promoting wannabes:

Steve Gibson at least provides genuinely useful information most of the time and from what I can see does a decent job of teaching non-technical folks to understand and implement good security practices. He's a little hard to take in large doses when I've seen him on This Week in Tech and his website hurts my eyes, but I wouldn't paint him with such a broad brush. He doesn't seem to be a charlatan as much as a well-meaning but occasionally bumbling 'little guy' trying to build a business in the technology/security realm.

Comment: Re:call them (Score 1) 353

by c0d3g33k (#47510327) Attached to: Netflix Reduces Physical-Disc Processing, Keeps Prices the Same

Depends on age and life circumstances.

M-F is when you go to work then come home and drive the kids around to after school activities (which at high school age often run into the evening hours), then rush home, fix dinner, then try to watch something but you're too tired and it's too late to stay awake. On the nights where they don't have something scheduled, you can go out for dinner or some live entertainment if the kids are old enough to stay home alone.

F-S-S (Fridays straddle both categories because Saturday) is when you catch up on the household chores and then plant yourself on the sofa to work through the DVR and Netflix Disc queue because the last thing you want to do is get in the car and drive some more. And the kids don't have homework due the next day (F-S), so they can take the time to watch the Netflix disc with the family.

Anyone else with a different pattern from the three above (including mine)?


Ask Slashdot: Future-Proof Jobs? 509

Posted by Soulskill
from the robot-overlord-exterminator dept.
An anonymous reader writes: My niece, who is graduating from high school, has asked me for some career advice. Since I work in data processing, my first thought was to recommend a degree course in computer science or computer engineering. However, after reading books by Jeremy Rifkin (The Third Industrial Revolution) and Ray Kurzweil (How to Create a Mind), I now wonder whether a career in information technology is actually better than, say, becoming a lawyer or a construction worker. While the two authors differ in their political persuasions (Rifkin is a Green leftist and Kurzweil is a Libertarian transhumanist), both foresee an increasingly automated future where most of humanity would become either jobless or underemployed by the middle of the century. While robots take over the production of consumer hardware, Big Data algorithms like the ones used by Google and IBM appear to be displacing even white collar tech workers. How long before the only ones left on the payroll are the few "rockstar" programmers and administrators needed to maintain the system? Besides politics and drug dealing, what jobs are really future-proof? Would it be better if my niece took a course in the Arts, since creativity is looking to be one of humanity's final frontiers against the inevitable Rise of the Machines?

Comment: Re:On average, average is a crappy metric. (Score 2) 191

by c0d3g33k (#47365365) Attached to: 30% of Americans Aren't Ready For the Next Generation of Technology

If you don't know, that isn't necessarily always the case. The average of 1, 1, 1, 2, 10 is 3. In that case, 80% are below average.

Well yeah, I do know. Because I went to school and stuff. Your pulled-out-of-your-posterior-to-make-some-sort-of-vague-point sample set is 5. The population of the U. S. is currently hovering around 316,165,718. The distribution you posit would suggest that 80% of the population ranks below earthworms. Any idiot knows a sufficiently large sample set is necessary to derive any meaning from the concept of average. Your suggestion is ridiculous. I wonder which side of the line you fall on? :-)

Comment: Real time streaming for everyone at once is broken (Score 2) 364

by c0d3g33k (#47196557) Attached to: Netflix Trash-Talks Verizon's Network; Verizon Threatens To Sue

The elephant in the room: Requiring streaming for every customer simultaneously with no option for offline playback is a broken model with respect to how the internet works.

Granted, since any customer can arbitrarily choose any item in the Netflix library for viewing, the capability for streaming in real-time needs to work decently well. In practice, however, only the things in "My List" are likely to be viewed by a given customer, so downloading to a local cache would allow playback at optimal quality without needing ideal network performance.

It seems to me the intense desire on the part of Netflix and the "rights holders" for full control, maximum monetization and the deep rooted fear that someone might figure out how to make a copy is the real reason this is even a problem.

I would have no problem with a Netflix client that incorporated some sort of DVR-like functionality so that items of interest could be added to a local queue (sorry - queue is a deprecated term - My Local List). That would be wonderful for situations where the available network is sketchy (eg. hotel, coffeeshop) or not present (airplane, campsite, beach, etc). Rampant sharing could be minimized by allowing only one (or a few) devices to have the locally cached content, and requiring a network connection to download or release a particular item. Or if that's too complicated, just allow a limited number of authorized devices per account that can cache the same content.

I think enough customers would take advantage of this to alleviate the problems caused by real-time streaming and take a lot of power away from the intermediaries.

Comment: Re:How does one determine the difference... (Score 5, Insightful) 389

Between serving the public's interest, and serving one's own interest at the expense of the public? This is intended as a serious question--I like Snowden's idea, but how would we determine the difference between someone who's alerting us to government malfeasance, versus someone who's ideologically bent on disrupting government regardless of whether there's malfeasance or malevolent intent involved?

Wrong question. If the bar is set so high that people like Snowden have to prove their intentions unambigously, beyond a reasonable doubt, in order to prove their credibility, then they are lost before they begin, because the system assures that's never possible. But that's not why it's the wrong question. It's wrong because information about the workings of a government should never be secret except in the most exceptional of circumstances. Revealing information that should never be secret in the first place should not pose the risk of "disrupting government" regardless of the intent involved. If "disrupting government" merely means "learning what we are doing so you can debate the issue and vote to stop us", then the problem is more fundamental than you think.

Comment: Re:I still cant log in! (Score 4, Insightful) 174

by c0d3g33k (#47095165) Attached to: Organic Cat Litter May Have Caused Nuclear Waste Accident

This is /., not your bank. There is no army of Chinese hackers anxiously waiting for your password so they can assume your identity and become internet superstars. You didn't re-use an important password for /. did you? Just check the IP address for plausibility and accept the expired cert.

That's some astonishingly bad advice.

Comment: Re:Then YOU have a problem (Score 1) 238

by c0d3g33k (#47073397) Attached to: Google Fiber: No Charge For Peering, No Fast Lanes

referred to 2 parties in an imaginary conversation

Then "we" still do not have a problem, because Google does not have a problem.

YOU have a problem. You can say that because it's clear. Do not fear clarity.

Noted. No need to shout. Thank you so much for setting me straight. Where can I sign up for your "Overcoming Fear of Clarity: Useful Techniques to Maximize Clarity When Using the English Language in Informal Settings" seminar? It sounds really interesting.

Comment: Re:Who is "we"? (Score 1) 238

by c0d3g33k (#47069651) Attached to: Google Fiber: No Charge For Peering, No Fast Lanes

If your noble stance hides the fact that you attach yourself to the fiber like a tick to suck value by monitoring my use of the service and selling that information to the highest bidder, then we have a problem.

Why do "we" have a problem?

In the context of the post it wasn't an all-inclusive term, but referred to 2 parties in an imaginary conversation, myself and Google. Often a prelude to talking things over and working something out.

Comment: Re:Visibility of your videos (Score 1) 197

Not YouTube's problem, is it? Viewers find videos like they find anything else, by looking for them in the places where the videos are. My grocery store doesn't tell me where I can find related groceries not in the store. I go to several stores in the area and learn what each has that distinguishes them from the other. I go to the store that has the best produce/meat/seafood/organic/whatever when I want that thing. I don't consider Stop-n-Shop evil because I have to shop at other places depending on what I want.

Comment: We don't make money from peering or colocation (Score 4, Insightful) 238

by c0d3g33k (#47067811) Attached to: Google Fiber: No Charge For Peering, No Fast Lanes

So what do you make money from if I become a Google Fiber customer? That's what I'm concerned about. If it's just the fair-market cost of the service I'm paying for, then that's fine. If your noble stance hides the fact that you attach yourself to the fiber like a tick to suck value by monitoring my use of the service and selling that information to the highest bidder, then we have a problem.

The number of arguments is unimportant unless some of them are correct. -- Ralph Hartley