Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Take advantage of Black Friday with 15% off sitewide with coupon code "BLACKFRIDAY" on Slashdot Deals (some exclusions apply)". ×

Comment Re:It can be confusing... (Score 1) 555

I myself am out of date, so I need to beg off of specific numbers, but there is a third metric to consider here, power consumption. If the Intel is $50 more expensive, but the AMD consumes an extra 10W, and you pay for your electric bill, then there is a good chance that the Intel is actually cheaper to own. It's basically like gas mileage on cars.

Comment Re:That's curious (Score 1) 141

We outsource to Russia at my office.

India probably has one of the most active software industries out there, but how many major Indian software products do you use on a daily basis? (Indian CEOs and branch offices don't count) If you're a global company, you tend to make the USA your HQ. It just makes sense given the dominance of the USA stock exchanges.

Also, there's a reason why Kaspersky doesn't have trouble hiring AV developers.

Comment Re:False positive rate? (Score 1) 157

.3% false positive rate isn't bad but isn't great. However, you have to think of this approach as a technique rather than a solution. An effective anti-spam solution will combine several techniques, so the false-positive rate of any individual technique won't be enough to reject mail. Also, the penalty for flagging a mail as spam can be scored in a way that mail is not lost. For example, yahoo is notorious for flagging legitimate mail as spam, but generally delays the mail via greylisting instead of rejecting it outright.

When combined with other scoring mechanisms into an overall heuristic, .3% is tolerable as one tool in the box. However, my first impression is that this is at best an incremental improvement over an IP blacklist.

We all agree on the necessity of compromise. We just can't agree on when it's necessary to compromise. -- Larry Wall