Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment: Neat (Score 1) 66

by markdavis (#48643697) Attached to: Behind the Scenes With the Star Trek Fan Reboot

Must have been under a rock, had not heard of "Star Trek Continues" before, so I am watching the first episode right now. Although I can certainly understand keeping the same sets, characters, props, and sound effects, I can't for the life of me understand why they would intentionally want to use the 4:3 aspect ratio. Hmm

Comment: How arrogant (Score 1) 391

by markdavis (#48623015) Attached to: Google Proposes To Warn People About Non-SSL Web Sites

>"If implemented, the developers wrote, the change would mean that a warning would pop-up when people visited a site that used only HTTP to notify them that such a connection "provides no data security"."

Arrogant, annoying, unnecessary, stupid, and inaccurate. There are a LOT of sites that have absolutely no need for https and labeling them "insecure" will annoy clue-full users and confuse clueless users all in one swoop. And by encrypting everything, it makes caching far less useful and slows down browsing some.

This type of attitude in design is one of many reasons I don't and will not use Chrome. It is bad enough some of the recent stuff being shoved into Firefox :(

Comment: It is not skin color (Score 1) 447

by markdavis (#48612621) Attached to: Virtual Reality Experiment Wants To Put White People In Black Bodies

>"It's as simple as making a light-skinned person feel connected to a virtual, darker skinned self"

Except it is far less about skin color than speech, beliefs, attitude, clothing, how one acts, who one associates with, etc, etc. Race issues are rarely just about skin color... that is WAY oversimplifying the whole topic. Just slapping on a different color might change the way many people initially treat or interact with you, but far too many people point to that as being the main problem, when it has more to do with other factors. Still, it sounds like a good experiment to teach tolerance and remind people that you can't judge a book by its cover (you might have some notions, but should always keep an open mind).

Comment: Re: Bank Security Guy here (Score 3, Insightful) 135

by markdavis (#48578085) Attached to: Bank Security Software EULA Allows Spying On Users

It certainly won't change the fact that we can't run it on Linux and it is a pain in the ass under any platform.

Trusteer Rapport is a HORRIBLE idea and many businesses are being FORCED to deal with it because it is essentially mandatory for many banks (looking at YOU, Suntrust).

It is a totally unacceptable "solution" from an I.T. department perspective. And it is also unnecessary for many situations, if they just allow us some additional common-sense controls (like limiting access to just certain IP addresses, or using hardware token devices).

Comment: vein scan is THE biometric (Score 3, Interesting) 127

by markdavis (#48472289) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Best Biometric Authentication System?

Deep vein scan (typically of the palm) is the only biometric that I would find acceptable from a privacy standpoint. It can't be "stolen" or "lifted", it is not visible from a reasonable distance, it can't be easily scanned without the user's consent. It requires being "alive". It is reliable and simple to acquire. I have used it and seen it in action... very impressive.

Fingerprints are horribly abused and left everywhere and can't be read through gloves. Easily copied and fooled.

DNA is extremely expensive, extremely slow, has severe privacy implications, and is left everywhere.

Facial recognition is not extremely accurate, is often slow, and is the WORST biometric from a privacy standpoint.

Retina scan is complex and probably the most expensive besides DNA.

Finger spread biometric is inaccurate and insecure (can be obtained from a distance via

: is not an identifier