Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: There have been other since Stuxnet (Score 4, Informative) 94

by seibai (#46130411) Attached to: In an Age of Cyber War, Where Are the Cyber Weapons?
Stuxnet was in 2010. Since then we have at the very least:
  1. 1. Duqu in 2011
  2. 2. Finfisher in 2011
  3. 3. Flame in 2012

All of those were used by governments. One was used for industrial sabotage; the other two to spy on people who were then assassinated. Are these not "cyber-weapons"? What makes them different from Stuxnet but the degree of press they received?

Comment: Re:Information (Score 4, Informative) 242

by seibai (#45092687) Attached to: Collapse of Quantum Wavefunction Captured In Slow Motion
This is bizarrely propagandist for a site that would claim itself to be rational. It's also, ironically enough, wrong.

5. The only phenomenon in all of physics that violates CPT symmetry.

Actually, many worlds violates CPT symmetry - worldlines divide only forward in time, not backwards. CPT symmetry requires that there be no physical bias to the direction of time. CPT symmetry is plainly untrue anyway, as we have entropy. Trying to use it as an argument against Copenhagen is disingenuous at best.

MW shows every sign of being equally wrong with every other interpretation of QM at the moment. The truth is that for many people, it represents a convenient belief. Most of its advocates lack understanding of the effective distinctions between interpretations in any case, which leads to sites and arguments like this. This is particularly bad in followers of Dawkins who argue that MW solves the fine-tuning problem, where half of the problem arises from balance in mathematical entities that QM has no plausible "ratchet" for.

Comment: Minecraft level format has always been open (Score 2) 57

by seibai (#42085525) Attached to: <em>Minecraft</em> Ported To the Raspberry Pi

It's always been possible to code against minecraft - Notch has kept the level format open since the game released (even if he did change it a bunch of times after he said he wouldn't).

I've already written a bunch of level generators for it, like these two:


Dungeon Adventure

Comment: Re:Time (Score 1) 709

by seibai (#38187060) Attached to: California Going Ahead With Bullet Train

Wow, someone on Slashdot quoting Proudhon. That's...uncommon.

Have you read Locke? Everything belongs to God, or everyone, if you like, but when someone puts their work into something, the portion of what is produced that can be ascribed to their work is theirs. If I cut down a tree, it's only slightly mine, because I did the work to cut it down, which isn't much. If I make a chair out of it, it's more mine, hence I can sell a chair for more than I can sell firewood.

Here's a reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Locke#Theory_of_value_and_property

Comment: Re:Well though luck for you then (Score 1) 125

by seibai (#37503300) Attached to: <em>Star Wars: The Old Republic</em> Launch Date Announced

I think people think you can run a game like this without a monthly fee because Guild Wars did it, and Guild Wars 2 is going to do it.

Guild Wars made plenty of money with that model too. The idea that you need montly fees in order to maintain servers is a useful one to the people who want to make more money on their MMO by charging you rent to play it. Please don't promote it. The reality is that maintaining servers doesn't cost that much in light of the margins on software.

Oh, and "tough". Sorry, it was bothering me.

Comment: Re:No, it is not! (Score 1, Flamebait) 221

by seibai (#35825282) Attached to: Blender 2.57 Released &mdash; and It's Easy To Use!
To be perfectly fair, I was proficient on a couple of 3D modeling / animation suites (SoftImage, FormZ), and I'd used several others (Lightwave, Lightscape, even PovRay) when I tried Blender. It was far and away the least inuitive and most buggy piece of software I'd ever used (this is saying a lot when compared to SoftImage). Blender is not "hard for newbs" Blender is baroque, ridiculous, and flaky. It's actually far more difficult to work effectively in it, and it's sufficiently divergent from everything else that becoming proficient at it would likely make you worse at anything else.

Comment: Re:Stupid (Score 1) 71

by seibai (#35697266) Attached to: Viral Scareware Infects Four Million Websites

XSS attacks require you to push the parameters in the URL itself.

That's not actually true. Reflected XSS attacks are sometimes exploited through a URL string element (post data can also work). Persisted XSS attacks occur when user provided data is stored on the server and then later rendered in HTML without being properly encoded first.

It's entirely possible (and not all that uncommon) for an attack to rely on both an XSS issue and a SQL injection issue. Say there's some popular CMS that has a SQL injection attack that can be exploited through a form post if the user making it is logged in with a session cookie. If this attack allows the malicious SQL to then inject script into some part of the page on that CMS so that it's rendered unencoded, it could then execute the script for other users who visit the site and attempt to make the same post to other sites that come up as the result of a Google search (Google is a great enabler of these sorts of things).

Simplicity does not precede complexity, but follows it.