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


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Because...it's the LAW! (Score 5, Insightful) 364 364

Exactly. Remember USENET? Used to be that if you wanted something to never be forgotten, all you had to do was upload it to USENET, and you were more or less assured that it would be impossible to erradicate it completely. So it goes with this: the digital genie is already out of the bottle. If there are 3D printed gun files on the Internet at any point in time, it's now impossible to supress it, as impossible as trying to prevent filesharing of any other kind is. You can make all the laws you want, threaten people all you want, but just like Mr. Universe said: "You can't stop the signal, Mal.". Also just like non-3D printed guns, if you outlaw 3D printed guns, then only outlaws will have 3D printed guns. Stop wasting taxpayer money.

Comment: Re:HOME ownership is key (Score 1) 646 646

But then consider homeowners: They are strapped with debts and many of them cannot afford luxuries because they bought homes at inflated prices due to speculation in the housing market.

Yes, but homeowners do have something on their side tha renters don't have: equity. A homeowner is more likely to have more (and better) credit available to them because they have equity in their homes. Also installing a high-capacity electric vehicle charging station in your home, because you own it and not just rent it, would actually increase the value of the house if/when it comes time to sell it (because electric vehicles aren't likely to go away).

Or so it seems to me, anyway. I don't own a home, but I have friends that do, some of them relatively well-off with nice homes, but neither I nor anyone I know has an electric car. The closest I can come is some people I know who have a hybrid. Electric does seem to be the most logical direction for things to go, however, and while there are growing pains involved, it's better to just move towards embracing it, I think, rather than fighting it. High-capacity electric vehicle charging stations for your home only cost about $500-600, and I'd imagine it would cost a few hundred dollars to get the required 240V 30A outlet installed for it, but that's a one-time expense, I and wouldn't at all be surprised if there is some sort of subsidy program from the government, electric utilities, or both, to get it installed. For that matter I wouldn't at all be surprised, if you were going to lease an electric car, if you could talk the dealer you're leasing it from into paying for the installation for free.

Comment: Re:Slashdot guilty of pandering (Score 1) 337 337

No one will see this at this point, but I'm going to say it anyway: Disagreeing with, or just plain not liking what I have to say, does NOT mean I'm a 'troll', it just means your judgement is poor and that perhaps you shouldn't be allowed moderation points in the first place. Next time try using your words instead of just having a knee-jerk reaction and clicking a goddamned button.

Comment: Re:Classification an Interesting Issue (Score 1) 143 143

Don't feed the troll, friend. The Internet is already worse than an improperly maintained cesspool simply because dickhead trolls like that exist; responding to them as if they're earnest just makes the problem an order of magnitude worse.

In all seriousness: If playing a game with a VR headset on scares you enough that you die, I have to wonder if that's just evolution in action. How weak is your mind if you can't distinguish a game, which you voluntarily decided to play and are (ostensibly) fully cognizant of being a game, from reality? Sure, I'll personally admit that back in the days of Doom (and especially Doom 2), there were a couple times when something jumped out from behind a corner, causing me to jump a little -- but I wasn't in any danger of dropping dead from fright.

Comment: Government photo database (Score 1) 77 77

Says it all. This is just a way to get 100% of everyone into a photo database so we can be tracked everywhere more effectively. Guess what, assholes? I don't have and don't want a smartphone, I'm not going to cooperate with this bullshit, and I think I'm far from alone in that sentiment.

Comment: Re:You know it's not going to work (Score 3, Insightful) 257 257

How do you tell the difference between, say, video data and encrypted data? Or audio data and encrypted data? If you have some encrypted data embedded into an image file (or spread out over many image files) how do you detect that? Yes, I know that's called 'steganography', and it's been around a long time now. Also, if they want a 'backdoor' into all forms of encryption, don't they understand that's a double-edged sword? Or, as you say, people just go back to pre-Internet, pre-digital methods of passing information back and forth. Seems to me like they're just going to spend billions of their taxpayers' money chasing their own tail for little to no benefit.

Comment: Here's the translation: (Score 1) 257 257

Because some people are criminals and terrorists, we now have no choice but to treat everyone as if they're criminals and terrorists, therefore no one will be allowed to have any ability to have any sort of private communications.

I don't give a damn what he said about 'warrants', either, that's just a piece of paper after all.

Comment: Slashdot guilty of pandering (Score 0, Troll) 337 337

There is no real story here. It's a simple, if tragic, industrial accident. By even posting this, Slashdot is guilty of spreading FUD about completely fictional (and in this case entirely absent) AIs, pandering to the fears of people who are afraid they will 'take over'. Mod entire story down to (-1, Troll), and deprecate, disregard, delete.

Comment: Re:Just run your own (Score 1) 147 147

I'm not claiming to know how the whole system works; I'm getting a quick education on the subject as we're discussing it. It sounds like the overall load is well-distributed. You seem to understand it well enough to answer this question: If, say, even 10% or so of everyone did an end-run around ISP-based DNS servers in this way, would it theoretically cause enough excessive traffic that it would annoy the admins responsible for them?

Comment: Re:Just run your own (Score 1) 147 147

Hmm, that's a good point. However if too many people were going directly to the root servers, eventually wouldn't they take some action to limit access to whoever needs it (as opposed to who wants it) to reduce the workload on the servers? Bypassing all the lower strata of DNS servers kind of breaks the way the system was designed, doesn't it? Of course these nudnik ISPs and other bad actors out there 'tampering' with DNS for whatever their reasons are, are certainly breaking the way the system is supposed to work, too..

Comment: Re:Just run your own (Score 1) 147 147

My point is that you have NO control over the root DNS servers (or any other DNS servers you don't own), or what happens in the route between you and any DNS servers, so how do you know what's really going on? If you were to directly use the root DNS servers, how do you know traffic in either direction isn't being tampered with? You have to assume that any data of any kind sent or received from the public Internet is inherently insecure, and there's plenty of historical evidence to prove not only it's plausibility, but it's likelihood. All you can do is make the best choices you can based on available information, and hope you're not being sold down the river by some three-letter agency, or who knows who.

Comment: Re:Just run your own (Score 1, Interesting) 147 147

You're assuming that what you think are the root DNS servers are actually the root DNS servers, and that they're not being spoofed by the CIA, NSA, or whoever in the first place. You're also assuming that your ISP would allow you to do such a thing, and not brand you as someone up to no good, and cut you off.

I never trusted OpenDNS much in the first place, certainly no more at best than I would any ISP's DNS servers.

Comment: Re:Renewable versus fossil - where is nuclear? (Score 1) 288 288

How about you stop using the word 'idiot' completely, and contributing to the problem of the Internet being such a damned cesspool? I've read through some of your other comments. There's 'arguing a point' then there's 'being argumentative'. You appear to be the latter. Go away.

Comment: Re:Renewable versus fossil - where is nuclear? (Score 1) 288 288

Yes, but as someone else also pointed out, solar and wind aren't really 'on demand' power, they're dependent on conditions being right for them to deliver. Current battery technology isn't going to cut it either, it doesn't seem like it scales up economically enough to be practical either. Perhaps in a future time we'll have an energy storage solution that is economical and efficient on a massive scale, and likely (since research is ongoing) even more efficient conversion of solar energy to electric, but for the time being it's just not cutting it. Also I'd like to point out that when someone says 'nuclear power' everyone assumes 'fission reactors', when there are other alternatives that would be safer and not as difficult to manage safely. Also every year we get a little closer to realizing fusion power. This whole subject is an ongoing journey, not a single destination, and there's going to be many milestones along the way. Wind, solar, and non-fusion nuclear are just some of those milestones. For all we know, 200 years from now we'll have antimatter power, or dark energy, or who knows what? But we have to keep moving forward one way or another.

We all live in a state of ambitious poverty. -- Decimus Junius Juvenalis