Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
Note: You can take 10% off all Slashdot Deals with coupon code "slashdot10off." ×

Comment Re: No surprise (Score 1) 210

Given this is with a phone that is transmitting to the world saying "I am here", you are taking my statement out of context.

Last I looked most equipment doesn't broadcast to the world saying "I am here" to within a couple of feet
which is what I'm lead to believe is the resolution of the triangulation. Phones and the right triangulation equipment gets that resolution.

Military grade GPS gets that sort of resolution.

Comment Re:No surprise (Score 1) 210

Does the car stereo say to the world "I am here"? Phones talk to the world. They are not passive devices.

If the music is up too loud do the police / council rangers come and knock on the door saying turn the music down. You can broadcast in the EM spectrum or in the audio spectrum. With the right equipment you can
hear both.

Perhaps you should look at what I am saying rather than your preconceptions of what is being said.

Comment Re:No surprise (Score 1, Insightful) 210

What civil liberties are being broken when they search for a piece of stolen property? That property could be in a bin, ditch etc. Now to enter a premise they need reasonable suspicion that the property is in that premise. Triangulation of a signal from stolen property gives that suspicion at which time they need to get a warrant. The act of searching for a stolen device electronically itself shouldn't require a warrant.

This really is no different than seeing a stolen car in the driveway of a premise. The phone / car is visible to the world.

If you drive around in a stolen car you can expect to be pulled over. If you are carrying a stolen phone and it is turned on you can expect to be located. This doesn't require technology that is unknown to the general public. Triangulation of signals has been done for the last century. The precision of that triangulation has improved all that tine.

Putting a phone in a pocket does not hide it. Turning it off and putting it in a pocket hides it.

Comment Re:No surprise (Score -1, Troll) 210

There are some uses that should require a warrant, some uses that don't require a warrant.

Searching for stolen property without knowing the person who stole the property shouldn't require a warrant.
Searching for stolen property when you know the person who stole the property should require a warrant.

Searching for a phone of a presumed abductee with/without a warrant depends on the circumstances.
Searching for a phone of a presumed felon should require a warrant.

Attempting to correlate phone presence with a event or a sequence of events should require a warrant.

The whole secrecy issue is basically bogus these days as the technology has been disclosed.

Comment Re:No support for dynamic address assignment?!? (Score 2) 287

Firstly servers don't need DHCPv6 to assign them a address. They can just pick a address and register it in the DNS themselves. They really don't need a DHCP server to do it for them. HTTP/S doesn't care about the IP address that a machine has.

Secondly SLAAC is not only used with link locals.

Just because you want to do things one way doesn't make it a requirement.

Comment Re:When will IPv4 go *silent*? (Score 2) 595

You do realise that this is complete garbage. The reason that we need IPv6 is that IPv4 was never designed to scale to every household in the world. 4 billion addresses was never enough for that. We have extended IPv4 by about 2 decades through the use of address sharing but the amount of sharing is now going from 1 addresses per household to less than 1 address per household and the tricks that allow address sharing at the household level without to much administrative pain don't work between households.

Real Users hate Real Programmers.