Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

Comment: "Likely to end up in an ethically worse position" (Score 1) 392

I see the "close access work" as a bit of a red herring, and the "ethically worse position" is the real story. Mass surveillance is just too nice to give up. So, I predict that we will be seeing government malware that infects large numbers of computers in order to attempt to maintain the status quo.

Comment: Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate (Score 1) 693

by flonker (#48868105) Attached to: Doxing Victim Zoe Quinn Launches Online "Anti-harassment Task Force"

So, are you saying that Wikipedia is wrong, or just saying that because it doesn't agree with you, that you want to dismiss it?

I'm saying that it's a controversial subject, and as such, anything on Wikipedia should be taken with a grain of salt.

I was not stating my opinion, because I hadn't seen enough of both sides to develop one yet. One side seems normal mixed with a few crazies, and the other seems all crazy. I was looking for the normals on the other side in order to see what their argument was, but have yet to find them. From what I've read here, I think I'm finally starting to understand that they are, in fact, all crazy, and that they have no real disagreement other than that they find the very existence of the first group repugnant for no readily apparent reason, and that they're projecting their thoughts onto the first group.

I apologize for attempting to define "SJW". I thought you legitimately didn't know how the term was being used, and like I said, I now understand your side of this disagreement.

Comment: Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate (Score 1) 693

by flonker (#48866399) Attached to: Doxing Victim Zoe Quinn Launches Online "Anti-harassment Task Force"

FYI, Wikipedia generally isn't the best reference for controversial subjects.

I see the term SJW being used as a pejorative against a group which includes some but not all feminists. In particular, third-wave feminism seems closely intertwined with the social justice movement.

Comment: Re:The review ecosystem is good and truly broken.. (Score 5, Insightful) 249

by flonker (#47962649) Attached to: Small Restaurant Out-Maneuvers Yelp In Reviews War

It would need to be a full on classification system, similar to how Netflix does ratings. That is, it would have to put both the reviewer and the review reader into groups, and weigh the rating based on the reviewer's similarity to the reader.

"People with similar ratings to yours gave this restaurant 2 stars, while the general public gave it 4 stars."

The problem with this is that you would need a whole lot more ratings in order to get any kind of reliability.

Comment: Re:Netflix has light DRM? (Score 2) 304

by flonker (#46152077) Attached to: Adobe's New Ebook DRM Will Leave Existing Users Out In the Cold Come July

I don't know about anybody else, but the reason I don't find Netflix DRM unpalatable is because I didn't purchase the content. The "rental" is very explicit in the agreement between the Netflix and the consumer. If Netflix were to start to sell movies, I would find that objectionable. I do find Steam objectionable, as well as most DRM.

Comment: Re:If all it takes is one... (Score 4, Insightful) 65

by flonker (#46071427) Attached to: Spoiled Onions: Exposing Malicious Tor Exit Relays

The primary development goal of Tor is to prevent the request from being traced back to the requester. (As a secondary effect, it also bypasses various national/regional content blocking schemes.) Malicious exit relays are detrimental, but in theory the user should be aware of the trust issues involved. I would label this as a user education issue.

The major points being:

  • If your traffic is on the Internet, unless it is encrypted (such as by SSL), it can be passively monitored with only moderate effort.
  • If you are using Tor to reach the Internet, your traffic can't be traced back to you, but it still goes out over the Internet; see the previous point for more details. Tor can do nothing once the traffic is back on the Internet.
  • Attacks such as sslstrip exist. Be on guard against them.

Comment: Re:SETI (Score 1, Informative) 107

by flonker (#45806097) Attached to: NASA's LLCD Tests Confirm Laser Communication Capabilities In Space

A great example of this that I've seen is: Shine a spotlight at the moon (from Earth) and sweep it across the surface. You can move the spot faster than the speed of light, thus the wave moves faster than c, but no individual photon moves faster than c, and no information is conveyed faster than c.

Comment: Re:FP (Score 2) 174

by flonker (#45747587) Attached to: DHS Turns To Unpaid Interns For Nation's Cyber Security

The U.S. Department of Labor's Wage and Hour Division allows an employer not to pay a trainee if all of the following are true:

  • The training, even though it includes actual operation of the facilities of the employer, is similar to what would be given in a vocational school or academic educational instruction;
  • The training is for the benefit of the trainees;
  • The trainees do not displace regular employees, but work under their close observation;
  • The employer that provides the training derives no immediate advantage from the activities of the trainees, and on occasion the employer’s operations may actually be impeded;
  • The trainees are not necessarily entitled to a job at the conclusion of the training period; and
  • The employer and the trainees understand that the trainees are not entitled to wages for the time spent in training.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internship#United_States

"There is no statute of limitations on stupidity." -- Randomly produced by a computer program called Markov3.

Working...