Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Sauce for the goose (Score 1) 39

by Zocalo (#48684503) Attached to: Sony Accused of Pirating Music In "The Interview"
Why limit to just the legal downloads when the **AA's lawyers certainly don't? Remember, according to the *AAs, it's also a crime to *facilitate* theft, so by making available the movie that includes the copyrighted track surely they should also be liable for all the several million torrented copies, plus all the legitmate pay-per-view downloads from Google etc. too?

While I suspect this is probaby just a case of office incompetence and someone forgetting an action that will probably be quickly cleaned up with a check in the post, I dearly hope this does end up going to court. Watching Sony's lawyers try and get themselves off the hook without setting precedents that anyone else being sued for infringing copyright can use would be priceless.

Comment: Re:Erm (Score 1) 6

by Zocalo (#48684457) Attached to: Finn Linked To Lizard Squad Christmas Attack
The two are not mutually exclusive, especially if the effect of the security flaw is compounded by multiple connections, for instance being able to use the exploit to turn a child process into a zombie and another child to be spawned until resources are exhausted. There's two security flaws there; the ability for a remote client to zombify the children and not having a cap on the maximum number of children in the config.

Comment: Re:Good news! (Score 3, Interesting) 225

by Zocalo (#48668295) Attached to: Sony To Release the Interview Online Today; Apple Won't Play Ball
Erm. No. Not even if you paid me to.

Unless you actually find Seth Rogan funny and might get some enjoyment out of watching the film the only think watching this is going to do is help make Sony and their new distributors a pile of money for what is, by all accounts, a completely terrible film that is probably going to clean up at the Raspberry's next year. You know, *Sony*, those complete arseholes behind that rootkit thing a few years ago, and not to mention all that other douchebaggery that's been smeared all over the media for a couple of weeks now? You *want* to give money to those pricks?

Just putting it on release is good enough to give the bird to Kim Jong-Un (assuming he cares in the first place since there is no way that anyone in NK outside the inner circle even knows the film exists), there's no need to help Sony survive any longer than absolutely necessary as well.

Comment: I think you've pinpointed a massive flaw here (Score 1) 347

by UpnAtom (#48665551) Attached to: Ars: Final Hobbit Movie Is 'Soulless End' To 'Flawed' Trilogy

I was hoping that the trilogy could be rescued by a fan-edit. But now I don't.

The Hobbit is completely devoid of suspense (haven't seen Part 3 and will wait for DVD). Compare with FotR:

Opening story with Sauron kicking ass.
The early scene where Frodo and the hobbits nearly get discovered by a Dark Rider. Probably the best scene of the trilogy, with visually-distorting magic and insects freaking out if you weren't convinced yet.
Weathertop, not one of the better scenes but still great.
Arwen rescuing Frodo. First deviation from book but probably made it a better film (unlike deviations in later 2 films).
Moria scenes: just amazing.

To be frank, FotR was vastly better than the subsequent two, which relied on large battles for thrills. I'm going to guess that Jackson had some help with FotR... and thank God. It's become one of the best films of all time.

Now the Hobbit had nothing like that, maybe because of child audience potential but also because of the other big flaw: none of the dwarves are convincing bar possibly Thorin. They don't look right and don't act great either.

Maybe keep the sections focussing on Bilbo, Gandalf, Radagast, Smaug, bits of Thorin and turn it into an hour long prelude to LotR. Yep, cut 80-90% of it.

Comment: Re:Brought it on ourselves (Score 1) 225

by cbiltcliffe (#48653613) Attached to: GCHQ Warns It Is Losing Track of Serious Criminals

Times are changing, nowadays you can commit crimes without even going out of your house, real-time encrypted communication with your whole gang.

When has this not been true? Invite a bunch of neighbours over with some balloons tied to the front porch, and a sign up that says "Happy Birthday Son!"
Then, sit in the kitchen talking about your plans to blow up some local municipal building, while some co-conspirator dresses as a clown and entertains the kiddies in the front room that you can see through the window from the street. (Ok, so you probably had to leave the house to buy the balloons, but still.)

Police methods and laws need to keep up with the technology and their use by criminals.

Provide evidence to a judge, receive a warrant. That's the process. Period. As technology progresses, the types of evidence you can present to a judge also progress. That right there is now they keep up with the technology.

Comment: Re:Just arrest them then? (Score 2) 225

by cbiltcliffe (#48653495) Attached to: GCHQ Warns It Is Losing Track of Serious Criminals

Evidence != Conviction.

1. You suspect someone of a crime based on some evidence you obtained legally, either by accident,by witnessing something in a public place, by a witness statement, by a confession, or some other method, but regardless, it's without a warrant, but using a method that's legal to obtain evidence without a warrant.
2. Based on this evidence, you obtain one or more warrants and use them to gather more evidence.
3. If the totality of evidence points to a crime being committed, you arrest and charge the target with a crime.

The problem with the NSA/GCHQ, etc, is that they're not following this pattern. Instead, they're doing this:

1. Perform surveillance on everybody without warrants.
2. If you find anything pointing to a crime committed by an individual, then, well, repeat step 1.

Comment: Re:LOL ... w00t? (Score 2) 291

by Zocalo (#48652013) Attached to: Amazon "Suppresses" Book With Too Many Hyphens
Not with any consistency it seems. They are apparently fine with Ernest Vincent Wright's Gadsby which doesn't even include the letter "e" once in the main text (there's a nice bit of humour/irony in there being an ebook version though), with all the readabilty issues you might expect that to bring. The works of James Joyce also still seem to be listed, come to that, so I'm somewhat curious as to just how this "readability filter" get applied. I sure hope it's not just based on reader comments, because if it is a group like Anonymous or /b/ is about to have a book censoring field day.

On the otherhand, if they can start with some of the religious dogma out there...

Comment: Re:A more important issue... (Score 1) 246

In Windows the video driver is installed automatically on the fly. All you get is a couple of seconds a blank screen, and you don't even have to exit the desktop. No, it's not. After you've figured out the video chipset manufacturer, been to their website, found the right driver package, downloaded it, double clicked the installer, agreed to the EULA, and clicked next a few times to copy the files to the hard drive.....then, and only then, is the video driver installed automatically on the fly.

That's like saying you've got a self driving car that gets you from home to work automatically, when it fact, you've got a recent Ford that only has parking assist.

Comment: Normalcy bias (Score 1) 177

by UpnAtom (#48642827) Attached to: Hackers Used Nasty "SMB Worm" Attack Toolkit Against Sony

ie 'nothing that bad has ever happened before and therefore it's probably not happening to us'

There's another bias where you feel you emotionally can't take any more responsibility and thus just pray that the worst case scenario isn't happening. Not sure it's been studied yet.

Comment: Re:Goal is cooling, not reduction of warming. (Score 0) 114

by cbiltcliffe (#48641807) Attached to: Geoengineered Climate Cooling With Microbubbles

The climate is already changing, the goal is to reduce the amount of change.

The problem is the effort is not to reduce the amount, the effort is to send change, however slightly, in a VERY BAD direction.

We already know the Earth will enter a glacial period again. It may even be tending to do so now, we really don't have the understanding of climate to say for sure.

THIS. Somebody, finally, who fucking GETS IT!

On geological time scales, there is no such thing as a stable climate. We WILL enter another ice age, sometime in the next 1000 years or so. When we do, there will be no chance in hell that earth will support its current population. I'd estimate that Earth's population will be reduced to significantly less than a billion, through starvation, disease, and resource violence. That's over 80% (probably 90% by then) of the world's population that will be wiped out, simply because there won't be enough food, water, or non-glacier-covered land for everybody to live. Most of the equatorial regions will be desert, and pretty much everything more than 45 degrees latitude away from the equator will be covered in kilometers thick ice.
The Black Plague didn't wipe out anywhere near this percentage, and we consider that to be a huge disaster.

If we can, through man made activity, prevent the next ice age from happening, even if it does cost of a couple of small island countries, the environmental and human cost is astronomically less than the ice age alternative.

Comment: Re:sjeee.... (Score 0) 114

by cbiltcliffe (#48641757) Attached to: Geoengineered Climate Cooling With Microbubbles

The climate is already changing, the goal is to reduce the amount of change.

The climate has been in constant flux ever since the earth formed from a cloud of dust. The idea that we somehow must be warming the earth with our activity, simply because it's a touch warmer now than it was in 1860 is the worst kind of arrogance.

"Is it really you, Fuzz, or is it Memorex, or is it radiation sickness?" -- Sonic Disruptors comics