Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re: Who has time? (Score 1) 58 58

Then GTFO from the US. Move to like, Europe where work-to-live is the norm. (Where I live everyone has a right to 5 weeks of vacation each year, for instance)

Or simply make some cuts in your spendings and work less. It's quite possible but do require some time and effort.

Or go to your employer and start demanding some stuff. If they truly value you, they will agree to most reasonable requests.

Comment Re:Is ISO even relevant? (Score 1) 42 42

That depends on what you call a standard then.

Would you say Skype is an industry standard when it comes to IM?

No? Why not?

And then the second question; if Skype with its millions of users is not a standard, then why is XMPP with one quarter of Skypes userbase considered a standard? An open protocol, sure, but an actual standard?

It only becomes a standard if most people are already using it (de-facto) or if a body with big enough authority blesses it and push for it's implementation (de-jure). XMPP is not de-facto, neither de-jure. Sorry.

Comment Re:Is ISO even relevant? (Score 1) 42 42

Actually it *is* a great example, because you still have four isolated islands (+ a bunch of smaller ones) of Facebook, Skype, Google, rest of XMPP network not talking to each other (Google refuse to implement S2S encryption on their servers, making it incompatible with rest of XMPP network). So yes it is indeed a non-standard mess, even though open standards exist.

Comment Re:Is ISO even relevant? (Score 5, Insightful) 42 42

Yes, but in most of those cases it's because:

a) There are NO standard format in that particular field, only a bunch of competing (open/closed) formats (see for example the current mess of IM).
b) Such a standard exists, but didn't for a very long time which created a non-standard legacy mess that needs to be cleaned up by someone.

Comment Re:So how many people are still using XMPP? (Score 1) 63 63

It has had that for years yet not a single client has managed to give a easy-to-use alternative for all these years. Not one.

If Jingle require STUN/TURN then there must be an easy way to discover these services. I've been waiting patiently for a decent client/server combo, but none has materialized, and by now it's too late. (And yes, Prosody kicks ass and takes names, but clients are still lacking, big time).

Comment Re:So how many people are still using XMPP? (Score 1) 63 63

It's really sad that XMPP went the way it did, the protocol deserved more than it got.

The biggest showstopper was the lack of NAT-piercing Voice/Video/Filetransfers, and even though self-hosting has never been easier with Prosody... XMPP has never had worse prospects. Unfortunately. :(

Comment Re:Why IPv6 is broken (Score 1) 595 595

You are aware that any attempt to change the mandatory part of the IPv4 header would result in an incompatible header in any case, yes? So what does that mean?

It means that no matter which way you twist and turn the problem, you cannot escape the fact that in order to increase the address space of IPv4 you *must*, per *definition*, create an incompatible protocol. Which makes sense, of course. If you change a fundamental part of the protocol well, then it's not really the same protocol anymore, is it?

So instead of putting yet another band-aid on a protocol the engineers stepped back, took a long, good look at the problem and said "hey, IPv4 just can't do all the things we want it to, and since we will break compatibility anyway, let's create a new protocol that actually handles all of these edge cases we didn't see last time we designed a protocol, while we're at it!"

Comment It's not a technical problem (Score 0) 258 258

The problem with online voting is not a problem of technical merits. PGP already solved the digital signing bit ages ago.

The problem, instead, is how do we ensure that the vote cast was not in any way coerced?

In the current system with anonymous votes, it is very hard to force or coerce a voter to vote as one wish. Furthermore, it's more or less impossible to know which vote a certain person cast since the act of voting itself is done in secrecy. This is not so in the case of online voting.

To take an extreme example - let's say your best friend partakes in the election. How do you know that your best friend didn't vote for a particular candidate with a gun pointed at his or her face?

egrep -n '^[a-z].*\(' $ | sort -t':' +2.0

Working...