Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment This is mostly correct (Score 1) 312 312

While Dr. Yak is largely correct on the science, and the fact that a lot of people would be surprised to find certain genetic details about themselves, Dr Yak also completely wrong.

It is completely possible to use genetic details to classify people into groups. There are certainly overlapping people, like Native-American mixed with African, and Northern European. There are lots of people signing up to find out what their "origins" are. There are definite differences between African, Asian, Polynesian, Scandinavian, Jewish, Middle-Eastern, Southern Europeans, and so on. It does not rise to the level of races within the species. Even though: Europeans are largely Homo Sapien/Neanderthal cross-bred, Southern Asiatics are largely Homo Sapien/Denisovian cross-bred, and Africans are largely Homo Sapien/Other ancient hominid cross-bred. There is some mixing of these three, making probably a whole spectrum. Again, though the homogeneity of the human species is so complete we have only one race.

Having only one race doesn't mean there are no scientifically determinate variations. It just means, you can't always tell by looking at someone, what those variations are. I think that is really what Dr. Yak is meaning. These characteristics can be used to include or exclude certain people from some exclusive club. But those doing so, would do well to test themselves first, to make sure they fit in the category they think they do.

Comment Brilliant! (Score 1) 366 366

Nothing like adding a filesize check into the save script so you don't fill up your filesystem and crash it. That would have cost them what two lines of code?

That's like building a nuclear weapon with no off switch. Who does that?

Did they christen this spacecraft? Did they name it the USS Eve, perhaps?

Comment I concur. The article is Bullshit. (Score 1) 236 236

This article is so full of it. There have indeed been other reports of injuries and some of deaths by meteorites/asteroids. Including as the parent response notes, the major catastrophes that happen when they do occur. We are right to worry about an event that WILL eventually happen, even though it is very rare. An event that when it happens will make up for all the minutes, days, weeks, months and years it didn't happen.

Reported deaths dating back to BCE.

It might not also be a bad idea to look at the orbits of all the known potentially hazardous objects (that means asteroids/comets, of a certain mass, that intersect Earth's orbit). It's a sobering graph.

Comment Re:Kansas isn't even remotely flat (Score 1) 235 235

Well, I guess "flat" is a relative term. If you consider a change in elevation from one end of Kansas to another end of almost 3400 feet (from 679 ft above sealevel to 4039 ft above sealevel, then relatively speaking yes Kansas is flat. Boring, maybe, but flat not. I think everyone is confusing Kansas for Nebraska. Kansas is not remotely flat. Take it from a New Yorker who moved to Missouri and drives across Kansas to get to Colorado. Or look at a topological map.

Comment The Elephant in the room, no one is talking about (Score 1) 332 332

Beside the fact Californian growers are wasteful water users, and thus can sell at "competitve" prices, after getting those governemnt subsidies via our tax dollars, there is another issue.

We should remember that Global Warming (or the natural tendency for the planet to heat up, if you don't believe in Global Warming) is causing a lot of freshwater to flow into the world's saltwater bodies and thus desalinating the oceans and seas which is endangering the entire planet's marine environment. We are now talking about desalinating even more of that water. Once these plants are built California growers will cmoe to rely on them even when there is no drought. Other places will follow suit, and eventually the ecosystem in the World's oceans and seas will collapse. NASA has already said that the collapse of the Western Antartic Ice Shelf cannot be stopped, and that's a lot of freshwater. It's a death spiral, and not sustainable. Better get focused on those Moon and Mars colonization projects, because we're going to kill this planet, sooner, rather than later. We're going to need options.

Comment Re:neither bridge nor tunnel (Score 1) 226 226

Or do like the Chesapeake and make it a mix of Bridges and tunnels. That way when the Chinese, N. Koreans or Russians try an invasion we can seal a tunnel on the American side, and wait for the invasion force to fill up the tunnels and bridges before we blow the other end. But, if they built it, I'd do that road trip! Think of all the tourist spots, Tunguska, Wooly Mammoth fields, Gulag,...

Comment Re:B is the new F? (Score 1) 315 315

It was over a decade ago. It was a busy box, running a DNS sever, SSH daemon, mail and web with Postgres and MySql. Python and a host of other stuff was installed. It wasn't static html. Like I said I never patched it, and there were security patches that had come out. I believe at least one was a buffer overflow issue. It was vulnerable by the time it got hacked. It happens. Linux isn't immune to attack, just harder. If you don't patch, it makes it less hard. I also didn't do any hardening. Don't recall which distro it was, possibly a RH distro before I switched over to debian for servers.

Comment Re:The Clintons (Score 3, Informative) 315 315

Yet cited email as a tertiary reason for firing the African ambassador.

Installing a private Internet connection in your Dept. Of State office bathroom, in order to bypass the government link is a far cry from running a mail server out of your home.

There's a massive difference in setting up a server you own and are the only one to have 24/7 unfettered access vs using a free email provider.

That's for sure! We've all seen how secure Yahoo, AOL and Google email accounts are. That is not to say running a private email server is a walk in the park. Just because someone uses a free email provider doesn't mean they'll have a more secure server.

So you are aware there was a memo put out by Pres O. 24 August 2012 concerning use of private email for state business.

You do realize she'd set this server up in 2009 and left in Feb 2013? So she continued to use her own server her last five months, rather than do a disruptive move to the State server, when she already knew she was leaving in a few months. Your point?

Comment Re:B is the new F? (Score 3, Informative) 315 315

The rating is an F because it supports SSL2. Yet, they didn't show a single example where it permitted an SSL2 handshake or connection. Every email server supports SSL2. The real question is does it actually permit SSL2 connections. Hell my server "supports" SSL2, but I have it connections disabled in the configuration. This security rating is just a load of political crap. Everyone picking on poor ol' Hillary for using a private server. It must be weak because it's not based at the State Department. Because we all know the best and brightest computer nerds work for the Fed?

Now given what I see there from this scan, she's using SHA-1 for signatures. Definitely not best practice. I'd rate that server as a C or a D. The server appears to be an IIS server. A hardened Linux server would have been the way to go. Just because it's not a guvmint server doesn't mean it is automatically weak. My server gets attacked all day long and hasn't been hacked. Sure, I'm not a big target either. I once conducted an experiment to see how long it would take for someone to hack my Linux system. So I put one out there, and didn't patch it, did a minimal security setup, like you might get from a Linux Servers for Dummies tutorial (there are plenty out there). It took 4 months for my relatvely unknown server. But that was years ago. I haven't been hacked since, and no that is not an invitation to try. I get DDOSed on a semi-regular basis. Not much I can do about that, other than what I am doing. I haven't got a 1000 servers to offload attacks to.

In the end, a well configured and maintained server stands as much of a chance of being secure as any server out there, save perhaps the DOD. Bigger is not necessarily better.

In case of injury notify your superior immediately. He'll kiss it and make it better.

Working...