Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:So-to-speak legal (Score 1) 404

by dissy (#47914145) Attached to: Comcast Allegedly Asking Customers to Stop Using Tor

I have a feeling the person you are arguing with spends his days
1) eating lead with the word "beef" chiseled on it,
2) drives his car inside the shopping mall and convenience stores to get to the indoor ATMs, and
3) likes to troll handicap people

Since the first action item somehow hasn't killed him yet, that just gives more weight to the rest as an indicator of just how awful of a person it is ;P

Comment: Re:So-to-speak legal (Score 1) 404

by dissy (#47914039) Attached to: Comcast Allegedly Asking Customers to Stop Using Tor

The legal ( and its sound reasoning ) will be sure the first amendment provides you can say pretty much anything you want but it says nothing about you being able to do it in anonymity.

Says Mister DarkOx, if that is your real name...

Since you are out right admitting you are doing nothing but illegal crimes (perfectly sound reasoning once I saw your not-name in your post after all) - you'll need to do much much better to convince me and all of us why we should take the opinions of a criminal to be worth more than a grain of digital salt.

But it was a nice try, pedo :P

Comment: Re:Uber Fresh? (Score 1) 138

by dissy (#47914009) Attached to: Uber CEO: We'll Run Your Errands

It works for Cafe Courier, and they have been doing just that (and making a profit, including off me) since the late 90s.

For the two years Kroger had their peachtree* delivery service, I used the crap out of that! Groceries and pharmaceuticals to your door, and for some even further and right into your fridge.
(Thou I mainly saw that last bit only for older and disabled people. I am just lazy and not wanting to go to the store)

These days I have to hope I get a regular pizza delivery guy that I can uber-overpay for him to stop and get me something extra, and even then if it isn't on or damn close to his normal route I don't even ask.
Plus it sucks dropping an extra $20 just for two fast-food milkshakes that would be like $6 otherwise :/

But hey, sometimes it can be worth it :P

You still have a point about the drones with claw-machine game arms... Once/if those happen, I say let the two options battle it out on price and time! Should be a good show even if a win.

Comment: Re:Spoilers (Score 1) 131

by dissy (#47913821) Attached to: The FCC Net Neutrality Comment Deadline Has Arrived: What Now?

I don't see why this is such a huge deal in the US. Why not both allow so-called "Fast Lanes" and also mandate a high minimum for the "Not-so-fast Lanes" which will prevent ISPs from serving subpar rates to customers?

Sounds great in theory, but in the US the term "broadband" is defined such that the minimum requirement is 128kbps (the speed of a fully utilized BRI line - the original high speed connection)

Since I don't see them successfully raising that first the past hundred or so attempts, the fact they are moving forward on any neutrality issues is pretty much a certainty your plan will never happen here.

In fact given the lack of evidence in either direction, I would naturally assume they will end up changing that min limit to 64k if anything... we suck just that bad :/

Comment: Re:Welp. (Score 1) 255

by dissy (#47913743) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: What To Do After Digitizing VHS Tapes?

I can second that.

A couple years back a week before christmas my uncles place burnt down in the middle of the night.
Everyone always said that because of the historic covered bridge from the road to back where those few homes were, that everyone best not have a heart attack or play with fire because no emergency vehicles could possibly get there...

Fortunately they both got out unharmed - but at that point with no worldly physical possessions except his truck (which I can't say was the bestest idea to go back in the garage to get) and the PJs on their backs.

To this day the things they miss the most are the few old family hand-me-downs, and the massive amounts of photo albums they had amassed.
Including family hand-me-down albums, over a hundred years worth of memories were gone just like that.

As my imediate family is only two people (my mother and her brother/my uncle) - a total of two people asking for computer help is far from problematic for me and so of course I still do.

Somewhere between un-oem'ing his laptops windows install and handing the thing back to him, I set him up an ssh account on one of my servers and a winscp dropbox style icon on the desktop for offsite backup purposes.
But every picture from 1920 to 2009 is now gone and gone for good.

Us "youngins" have a wonderful advantage with digital media that naturally affords us easy copies and easy backups, up to ridiculous extents that simply wouldn't be possible with physical items.

There is no excuse for us not to avail ourselves of them, file format be damned.

In retrospect I now kinda feel bad for the joke I made about the offsite storage thing (long before the fire however)
I told him that machine was "only" backed up to servers in three other states plus a backup server in my basement, but with a slight config change I could add his homedir to be copied to my non-us servers as well - resulting in the possibility of our data out surviving all of us if ww3 happened...

But my point with that is that it is so cheap and easy to fling data around these days that having only one or even two backups is only slightly less painful to hear than someone who has no backups, and the slight time investment most people would need to recover and the relatively tiny cost for something that was literally impossible to do not two generations ago - there is just no excuse not to.

I would even go so far as to say a pirated movie collection would deserve some redundancy right next to personal data like home pictures and movies - and the barriers to doing so are so tiny that they truly are not worth even thinking about at the "yes or no" level.
Only the higher up level of how many copies is worth pondering over (Ex. I don't really feel its worth having a copy of the matrix 2 spread over 8 machines and multiple countries for example ;P )

Comment: Re:Traditional crimes (Score 1) 140

by dissy (#47885181) Attached to: Accused Ottawa Cyberbully Facing 181 Charges Apologizes

Also, this guy is NUTS for pleading guilty - the law is a complete violation of freedom of expression rights.

So if I was to repetitively punch you in the face until caving your skull in, you are perfectly OK with that and me being allowed to do it?

After all, I am just flexing my freedom of expression rights by executing a public performance play. It's hardly my fault the plot results in your characters death :P

Comment: Re:so don't use them! (Score 4, Funny) 230

by dissy (#47857729) Attached to: Comcast Using JavaScript Injection To Serve Ads On Public Wi-Fi Hotspots

Don't use random hot spots. It's like safe sex, only for your computer.

[me] Aight baby, play with that packet. You know how I like it
[ap] tee hee *beep*
[me] oh yea, deeper inspection, deeper inspection! oh yea!
[ap] *56k carrier sound*
[me] That's what I like to hear! Now, I put on my robe and wizards hat
[ap] ... *stp-broadcast* ...
[me] baby-aye-pee you still there? Where'd ya go??

Comment: Re:A tepid defence (Score 1) 184

by dissy (#47857687) Attached to: Ontario Government Wants To Regulate the Internet

I think regulating Google and Netflix is a really bad idea but I think there's a defensible motive in trying to promote Canadian content and defend Canadian content providers.

I can't speak for all video streaming services, but does not netflix canada already make the same percentage of canadian content available as required by the network broadcasters?

Personally I have no issues with making such options available, and while part of me wishes it was not required to force anyone to do it, but not enough broadcasters willingly would do so, and as you say there are problems with culture and identity being overtaken (although personally I think that's already happened - but not saying that's an excuse to stop trying)

What I do have issue with is forcing extra money out of non-canadian content producers to show their content in canada.

On TV I can change channels to find whichever media I'm wanting at the time, be it canadian or american. I appreciate the option being there, but would very much resent being forced to watch something against my will.

The thing with sites like netflix (and this may just be my usage) I typically know what I want to watch before hand and am only going there to specifically watch that.
This current plan sounds an awful lot like trying to force me into watching something canadian I don't want to watch at that moment and forcing others to not allow me to watch content from elsewhere at the same time.

A lot of canadians, or at least the younger generations anyway, already seem to identify mainly as americans do. Forcing content on them they don't want to watch will at best make them turn off the TV/PC, and at worse build anger and hatred towards these very regulations.

While this specific case is nothing more than one existing monopoly trying to get more money at the expense of everyone else, it's still worth thinking about continuing to make canadian content available to those that want it, while not forcibly blocking all non canadian content at the same time.
Sadly however, this doesn't appear to be the solution.

Comment: Re: ELI5 please (Score 1) 354

by dissy (#47845531) Attached to: DMCA Claim Over GPL Non-Compliance Shuts Off Minecraft Plug-Ins

Wolfe contributed code under the GPL license. He has every right to send takedown notices against distributions of his code that do not follow his license.

Untrue. You must be within your own legal rights first to even be able to apply a license, including GPL.
Wolfe is not legally able to GPL his code, since his code is itself a copyright violation. You and him can claim it is GPL all you want, but that doesn't make it so logically nor legally.

If you still think you are right and I am wrong, then lets put your money where your mouth is.
Under your definition of copyright, I now claim DPL (dissy protective license) copyright over your body, mind, and all resulting work (including your slashdot posts)

You specifically claimed I do not need any rights to your body mind and resulting work to apply a license legally, so there you go, I own you and anything you do.

Now get on a flight over here, because my grass needs mowed and my trash taken out :P

Comment: Re:Sue the bastards (Score 1) 441

by dissy (#47809313) Attached to: In Maryland, a Soviet-Style Punishment For a Novelist

The life of some middle school teacher does not even begin to factor in.

Before saying that out loud, tell yourself a few times in your head: "I have done the exact same amount of damage to children as this middle school teacher" before you begin demanding sentences for crimes you too are guilty of...

Comment: Re:Obligatory: "There's Plenty of Room at the Bott (Score 1) 151

by dissy (#47681003) Attached to: Can Our Computers Continue To Get Smaller and More Powerful?

But come on, do you really think a 55 year old paper is going to be at the top of impact rankings when computed against current research in a field moving this fast? And, even if so, isn't it more likely this work has been superseded by others? IT'S BEEN 55 GOD DAMN YEARS, FOR CHRISSAKE!!! I think your hero worship is showing. At least find a more modern reference.

To be fair, this is a perfectly acceptable reference in the given context, and the age only helps the argument not hinders it as you suggest.

Even at 55 years old, the Feynman paper is based on known technology and physics at the time. This provides a high-end boundary to the answer that is only potentially (in this case definately) inaccurate on exactly how much lower the size can actually get.

Our tech has changed, but physics not quite as much.
What we know today about building at the atomic scale is only slightly more detailed than the rough idea that was known all the way back then.

About the only thing smaller we know of today that we didn't know back then was the details of the sub-atomic world - which I should add we still know very little about over all, and certainly not enough to build useful machines using. At a technological level nothing has changed as the sub-atomic is still out of our reach as much now as it was then.

So the atomic scale is what we are discussing.

55 years ago our photolithography methods had a 20 micron feature limit.
14 years ago our newest photolithography methods have a 0.005 micron (aka 100 nm) feature limit. That is a 4000 fold decrease in size.
Today we have 32 nm and 28 nm photolithography methods, making things about 12000 times smaller than was possible using technology from 55 years ago.

Anyways, there are more recent references out there.

One good recent paper is "Molecular Construction Limits" by Robert Bradbury, if you can find it anymore. Sadly Bradbury passed away a couple years ago and his personally hosted archive of papers fell offline. Most archived ones seem pay-walled :/

Probably the best paper on this subject is "Ultimate physical limits to computation" by Seth Lloyd at MIT.
The paper is from 2000 but his current work is on the worlds largest-qbit quantum computer also at MIT - so he is already making my sub-atomic remarks out of date.

His conclusion is purely based on physics alone and ignoring any/all technological capability.

The 'ultimate laptop' is a computer with a mass of one kilogram and a volume of one liter, operating at the fundamental limits of speed and memory capacity fixed by physics.
The ultimate laptop performs [ 5.4258 x 10^50 ] logical operations per second on 10^31 bits.
Although its computational machinery is in fact in a highly specified physical state with zero entropy, while it performs a computation that uses all its resources of energy and memory space it appears to an outside observer to be in a thermal state at 10^9 degrees Kelvin.

APL hackers do it in the quad.