Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



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: Wikipedia? Really? (Score 4, Informative) 144

by johnnys (#49180549) Attached to: Technology's Legacy: the 'Loser Edit' Awaits Us All

Seriously, who depends on Wikipedia as a reliable reference? How about something a LITTLE more serious, like the Smithsonian magazine?

To wit: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/...

"But Arbuckle's lawyers introduced medical evidence showing that Rappe had had a chronic bladder condition, and her autopsy concluded that there "were no marks of violence on the body, no signs that the girl had been attacked in any way." (The defense also had witnesses with damaging information about Rappe's past, but Arbuckle wouldn't let them testify, he said, out of respect for the dead.) The doctor who treated Rappe at the hotel testified that she had told him Arbuckle did not try to sexually assault her, but the prosecutor got the point dismissed as hearsay."

And:

"It wasn't until the third trial, in March of 1922, that Arbuckle allowed his attorneys to call the witnesses who had known Rappe to the stand. ...They testified that Rappe had suffered previous abdominal attacks; drank heavily and often disrobed at parties after doing so; was promiscuous, and had an illegitimate daughter."

If not a hooker, then perhaps it's too close to call. Fatty deserved better.

Comment: "Loser edit" is a new name for a very old evil. (Score 5, Insightful) 144

by johnnys (#49179921) Attached to: Technology's Legacy: the 'Loser Edit' Awaits Us All

Remember Fatty Arbuckle? He was a bigger star than Charlie Chaplin in his day. He mentored Charlie Chaplin and discovered Buster Keaton and Bob Hope.

Then he threw a party where a hooker got sick and later died. Months later, the jury at his final trial actually gave him a formal written statement of apology from the jury, because of the grief he had gone through for no good reason.

His films were banned and his career was over: And all the publicity was edited and picked to ensure the narrative justified his destruction.

It's called "yellow journalism" these days but it's been around since speech was invented.

Comment: From the draft... (Score 2, Interesting) 171

by johnnys (#49079529) Attached to: HTTP/2 Finalized

"HTTP/2... also introduces unsolicited push of representations from servers to clients."

Seriously? Do we need yet ANOTHER way for a server to push unwanted code and malware onto our client systems? This is the greatest gift we could POSSIBLY give to the cybercriminals who want to break into our systems.

How about we think of security somewhere in this process, instead of pretending it's someone elses's problem?

Comment: This is actually GREAT news! (Score 1, Interesting) 415

by johnnys (#48558417) Attached to: Microsoft's New Windows Monetization Methods Could Mean 'Subscriptions'

Finally some Clue (TM) out of the Redmond mothership!

In a subscription model, M$ does NOT have to tempt the users with "new features" to get you to buy their software, so there's no impetus to "change everything for the sake of change" and the abominations that are Me, Vista, "ribbons" and 8 should not happen anymore.

The initial cost of Windows drops to zero: Why would the mothership bother charging for it up front? The first hit is always free!

Since M$ is getting paid for every Windows system running, they can actually FIX the security problems in Windows instead of insisting that we all have to upgrade so they can make money. They will be able AND motivated to keep supporting older versions for much longer. Less retraining and hassle for the end users, and more stable and reliable systems for users and businesses to depend on.

Businesses have been doing it this way for years now, and they like it.

Comment: Here's the problem. (Score 5, Insightful) 205

by johnnys (#47318755) Attached to: The Security Industry Is Failing Miserably At Fixing Underlying Dangers

The "Security Industry" makes money for the shareholders selling "stuff". Any time they see a problem, they will treat it as an opportunity to sell more stuff, since that is how they make money. If the problem is because the customer has already bought too much stuff, they will still try to sell the customer more stuff since THAT IS WHAT THEY DO.

So if you want to be secure, what do you do? We all know: You get rid of crappy software, simplify your systems, remove unnecessary cruft and hire developers, network systems people and architects who can build you what you need securely. You do NOT hire the cheapest meat puppets who can find the company website and spell "javascript" and you don't outsource your security to the lowest bidder.

This requires real effort on the part of the company paying for all this: They need to recognize that the "Security Industry" and their shiny, happy sales droids are just parasites ripping off the public with the "latest and greatest security stuff that will really protect you this time I promise not like all the other times, I really really mean it THIS time!".

They really need to understand that the RIGHT way to GET Security is to design it in, have the right people building and managing it and proper oversight over all of it. To do that you have to treat it as a profession and a core part of what the company does, not as a "service" or "product" that can be "bought in" or "outsourced" to a low bidder.

Security needs to be treated as a profession in any company with a significant cyber presence, just like the accounting them, the legal team and the core business functions. Pretending it's "just something that we can buy from a vendor" is short sighted and ignorant.

Comment: Re:Dead on arrival (Score 1) 345

by johnnys (#47279113) Attached to: Harley-Davidson Unveils Their First Electric Motorcycle

Wrong! Wrong! Wrong!

90% of motorcyclists are perfectly reasonable people who ride motorcycles with the original quiet mufflers, or a reasonable muffler that is not a lot louder. The 10% of cretins who ride with earsplitting open pipes are the MINORITY. Don't think that because they make 90% of the noise that we're ALL like that.

I've ridden 40,000 miles on motorcycles in Canada and the USA and I always had a reasonably quiet muffler. So please don't keep spreading the lie that "90%" of us are lowlifes: There's probably a MUCH higher percentage of politicians and bankers who deserve culling than motorcycle riders!

It is much easier to suggest solutions when you know nothing about the problem.

Working...