Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re: More nation-wrecking idiocy (Score 2) 576

Or (at one time) "reasonable and prudent".

Perhaps my favorite factoid about the state I grew up in is that prior to 1974 there was no set speed limit. When the Federal 55MPH limit was set, Montana's law defined speeding not as a moving violation, but as an "environmental waste of resources", and the fine was a flat $5 which didn't go on your record. The joke was to "keep a stack of fives on the dash" while driving through Montana.

In 1995 they re-instated the "reasonable and prudent" speed limit until it was struck down in 1998. During all of this there was no evidence that the lack of speed limits impacted fatalities.

Comment Re:Oops (Score 2) 600

Or a fourth option: Wait for AdBlock subscriptions to be updated with rules that bypass Wired's ad-blocking blocking.

People who read Wired daily might be interested in spending $4 a month, but for someone like me who only ends up there a few times a month (probably the bulk of their "20%" number), there's no way that will fly. If the anti-adblock subscriptions get updated to work then great, but if not then I won't really miss Wired.

No more wired.com links please. It joins forbes.com on the /. blacklist.

Totally agreed, but will our new advertising firm overlords feel the same? Whaddya say, Whipslash?

Comment Re:Other side of the airtight hatchway (Score 5, Informative) 151

If you have the ability to write a malicious DLL into a folder for the executable, you already have the ability to run administrator level code. Why bother with the DLL?

cf: Raymond Chen

Exactly. Raymond covered this a few times in the past.

Using delayload to detect functionality is a security vulnerability
It rather involved being on the other side of this airtight hatchway: Disabling Safe DLL searching

If Safe DLL Search Mode is enabled, then the Current Directory isn't searched until after all the system directories are searched. Safe DLL search mode is enabled by default starting with Windows XP with Service Pack 2 (SP2).

This sounds like a complete non-story.

Comment Re:The gun is pointing at the foot (Score 5, Interesting) 419

And all 12 people that used the feature will be missed.

When your market share has shrunk to little more than the people who only continue to use your product because it has features that differentiate it from the alternatives, removing those very features is a damned stupid move.

I'm just waiting for them to finish the work currently underway to dump XUL and the current addon API, utterly destroying the current addon ecosystem and fully alienating all remaining users. That will be final stroke in Firefox's Chromification, and its death.

Comment Re:Ossified community (Score 1) 1832

Give back the subscribe feature so we can pay money to avoid ads. It hasn't worked in ages. I used to like to give other commenters gift subscriptions if they said something I found particularly entertaining or enlightening. It was like moderating, but with cash.

Another vote here for reviving and revitalizing the (now defunct) subscription feature. Let users pay to remove all advertising, keep some old perks (early viewing articles was great) and come up with some other cool perks. Consider updating the system to allow both time-based (e.g., monthly) as well as the old pageview-based option. A significant number of registered users abhor advertising and (at least claim to) want to support sites directly.

Oh, and fix the damned user account settings and preferences pages. It's embarrassing how broken they are, and how long they've been that way (years). It's impossible to find settings and some (like subscriptions and comment moderation options) seem to have been ninja-removed.

Comment Re:Literal comment (Score 1) 1832

Ability to prioritize certain posters.

You can already do this actually. If you log in you can add people to your Friends list and then set your comment moderation preferences so that friends get a bonus.

Slashdot is kind of decrepit but it does have some fairly powerful configuration options (especially when you consider it had them more than 10 years ago, haha).

Comment Re:Isn't this what --preserve-root is for? (Score 5, Informative) 699

This looks like an EFI design bug. Why should EFI allow the OS or any other software brick the system by deleting its variables? Like OO, EFI should allow access to these variables through methods and not directly.

That you reached +5 makes me weep for Slashdot.

It's completely normal for a *nix based system to expose something like UEFI variables through the filesystem. It's a concept called Everything is a File and is the same reason why root can read and poke places in /proc and /dev to get information about the system or make changes to it. I can sympathize with the systemd developers on this one (I know, get a rope) because making a unilateral decision to force UEFI read-only over this one issue will have a long-standing and huge impact of system administration (and this goes double controlling large networks of systems).

The fact that root running rm -rf / causes problems shouldn't surprise anyone. Even with newer flags like --no-preserve-root, running as root means exerting ultimate control. Some care is expected or eventually you'll get burned.

Besides, the real question here I think is: Why don't these motherboards have a ROM backup that can be used to restore and boot the boards after catastrophic failure of their saved state? Even without the rm -rf / red herring, that seems like a brain-dead requirement, and one that legacy boards have supported for decades.

Comment Re:Attention new management (Score 1) 1309

Can you please weed out the bullshiat "you are all cows" homophobic rant posts that have been defiling this once great site for far too long?

Honestly, given Slashdot's history of trolling -- goatse, gnaa, penis bird, systemd -- the Moooo! Cows posts are so benign that the moderation system can easily take care of them as needed (occasionally they are funny, as is the case with most troll posts).

I don't see why so many posts here advocate using this ownership change to implement draconian filtering or banning or the removal of anonymous posting. All of that goes exactly opposite of what made Slashdot and what keeps is distinct from the hundreds of other discussion sites out there.

Comment Re:Attention new management (Score 1) 1309

Also get rid of all those spammy APK posts littered everywhere. Figure out how to block his dumb ass from every posting in Slashdot again.

This place just wouldn't be the same without his incoherent rants. It's like my weekly dose of timecube.

Exactly. In fact, I think they should add a +1, Incoherent mod option so we can give APK's posts the visibility they obviously need :)

Comment Re:Open to Questions (Score 1) 1309

There were also follow-ups on stories that had been posted recently, and they were grouped together into a single article. This was called Slashback. As I recall, that was posted weekly. I'd love to see that come back.

Ah, the Slashback section (I always thought they should have named it "Backslash" :) ). Also one of my favorite features, and one that got lost in one of the first "re-designs". I imagine it was axed due to requiring editors to actually work, but that's just a guess.

I'd love to see the current code powering Slashdot to be released as FOSS.

Would love to see this too. Put it up on SourceForge, keep it active, accept pull requests.

Editors were generally unwilling to link to paywalled sites or sites that did sketchy things.

And no more blog spam! It used to be such a faux-pas to link to blog spam or a link farm instead of the original article source material. Now we get links to kewl-news-omg.info instead of directly going to nasa.gov.

Comment Re:Horrible Summary: Some clarifications (Score 5, Interesting) 256

XFA PDF's are different in that there are no actual postscript commands in the PDF and they do not use the AcroForms technology. The layout and form inputs are defined in an XML document embedded into a PDF container. Adobe Reader then dynamically generates the postscript to render the document on the fly when the PDF is opened. If the PDF reader being used doesn't understand XFA (for example. pdf.js), then they get the generic "Please open in Adobe Reader."

Good god. Just when I started thinking Acrobat couldn't get any worse... What ever happened to the Portable part of the Portable Document Format? :(

Adobe needs to stop riding on the coattails of the PDF standard and just create their own damned document format completely separate from PDF. They've been shoving more and more of this kind of stupid shit into PDF files for years, all under the guise of PDFs being a "standard" -- just to encourage the spread their bug-ridden malware by making the files unusable in other programs. It's gotten worse than the ActiveX webpages from the early 2000's.

Comment Re:Not that crap again (Score 2) 256

since it is much harder to hide nefarious features inside code that can be publicly inspected

Not THAT crap again.

Heartbleed should put that right to bed.

Heartbleed had nothing to do with the potential for "nefarious" hidden functionality in closed-source systems. If anything, Heartbleed might be a counterpoint to Eric Raymond's proposal that "given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow" -- but the truth is that complex problems usually have complex solutions, and the more complex the solution the smaller the percentage of those eyeballs that has expertise.

As far as the article's argument goes, I'm torn. I can see immense value in requiring the software that government uses be open source. It levels the playing field in terms of accessibility while promoting the transparency required for a successful democracy. It also falls in line with other existing aspects of the government, such as the requirement that any works created by the Federal government (generally) are put into the public domain.

However I can see the argument that computers and software are just tools to get stuff done. Interoperability can be simplified when you target specific application versions (say, "MS Office 2010 and newer") rather than a more squishy target such as "Open Document Format". While there's no reason you couldn't do that, it seems like when it comes to software today, sadly, sticking to an implementation of a (possibly proprietary) standard rather than a generic standard itself ends up causing fewer problems.

That said, I'd definitely agree that it should not be required to use Adobe Acrobat to submit a grant application.

Comment Re:Beware of Rust. (Score 0) 75

Are you the same AC that was posting FUD about Rust the other day? A bunch of the same baseless complaints and the same reference to a "moderation attack squad".

Don't forget that this is Rust code written by people who ought to know Rust better than anyone else; they designed the language after all! If they can't write non-buggy Rust code, then we shouldn't expect less-talented Rust users to be able to do any better.

Nonsense. Being an expert in a language says nothing about how well you understand or can implement a solution for a given problem. If anything, that GitHub page should give someone reassurance that the project is actively maintained, that bugs are filed and solved (nearly 14,000 closed issues versus 2,300 open).

It's also a big problem that there's only one implementation.

Nonsense. This is called a reference implementation. It's completely normal and expected for newer programming languages.

The syntax of Rust is unremarkable.

Nonsense. So you're upset they didn't go crazy and try to re-invent something as crazy as Ruby or Brainfuck? I don't much care for Python's syntax or handling of whitespace, but that's hardly a reason for everyone avoid Python.

It took them forever to get Rust 1.0 released.

Nonsense. This is completely normal for free and open source projects, where the 1.0 release is a big deal because it means the project actually works. Contrast this with commercial companies who usually toss a 1.0 on a product the first time it successfully builds. It took VLC 8 years to reach 1.0, but of course it also took 14 years for FFmpeg, the primary library which powers VLC, to reach a 1.0 release. Quite the fanfare was made when Wine reached 1.0, after only 15 years. Version numbers don't mean anything -- would you be happier if Rust pulled a Firefox and was on version 48 already?

The Rust community gives me a particularly bad feeling. They're rather tyrannical about enforcing their code of conduct.

Nonsense. So they have a code of conduct that you disagree with. Don't contribute to the project then.

But now be honest -- were you driven off by the "attack squad" for being a dick? That would certainly explain the repeated anonymous FUD you keep posting.

Slashdot Top Deals

10.0 times 0.1 is hardly ever 1.0.

Working...