Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

+ - The Koch brothers political network plans to spend almost $1B in 2016 elections->

Submitted by whoever57
whoever57 (658626) writes "The Koch brothers revealed plans to spend $889M during the 2016 election cycle . The money would be spent on both congresisonal and presidential races. This level of spending will require commitment from both the Koch Brothers themselves and about 300 other donors. The money will put considerable pressure on Democratic supporters and candidates who will likely be at a considerable funding disadvantage in 2016."
Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:california is a joke (Score 1) 80

by whoever57 (#48901659) Attached to: Ed Felten: California Must Lead On Cybersecurity

They have the stupidest, most intrusive laws that negatively impact every other state.

You are welcome to your state where a lack of laws allows employers to restrict your opportunities to change jobs. Yeah, welcome to your overlords who use the lack employee protection to push your income down.

Comment: Re:california is a joke (Score 1) 80

by whoever57 (#48901599) Attached to: Ed Felten: California Must Lead On Cybersecurity

NOTHING is going to happen in California. Their budget is a joke. They have a double digit sales tax rate and the biggest deficit out of every state

Perhaps you should come up to date on California's budget situation. Even if California had the biggest deficit in the past, California has the largest economy of any state, by a wide margin, making everything relating to finances bigger in California than any other state.

California doesn't even have the highest sales tax rate.

Comment: Re:Other than the obligatory security theatre... (Score 1) 109

by whoever57 (#48895533) Attached to: Bomb Threats Via Twitter Partly Shut Down Atlanta's Hartsfield Airport

I assume that the plane was rerouted on a pretty much direct route from where they were to Atlanta. They'd want to make sure that the airplane stayed over relatively unpopulated areas in the event of an explosion.

And if it strays off its assigned route? Do you really think they are going to shoot it down?

Comment: Re:Defective by design. (Score 3, Informative) 209

by whoever57 (#48891333) Attached to: China Cuts Off Some VPNs

It doesn't help that most VPNs are so easy to detect and block at the IP header level. PPTP depends on the GRE IP protocol (47), and L2TP is usually tunneled over IPSec, which depends on the ESP IP protocol (50). By using different protocol numbers in the IP headers, the designers of these protocols made it mindlessly easy to block them, and made them harder to support, because routers have to explicitly know how to handle those nonstandard protocol numbers.

The last time that I was in China (a couple of years ago), OpenVPN using non-standard ports to my private server was blocked. In the end, I ran OpenVPN over tcp/22 (yes, ugly and slow, but it worked). I don't understand why VPN's were blocked but not SSH. OpenVPN uses UDP (by default), so no obvious protocol numbers to block.

Comment: Re:Why lay fiber at all when you can gouge wireles (Score 1) 199

by whoever57 (#48890809) Attached to: Verizon About To End Construction of Its Fiber Network

Competition is great. For the customer. For awhile. Not so good for the businesses that are competing. Perhaps you've heard of the term "dumping"? That's when a "competitor" can afford to sell below cost just to drive his competition out of business. Great for the customer, until the competition goes away and prices go back up.

We used to have a great small local magazine shop in this town. Borders moved in. They had books and magazines and a coffee shop and ... all in one place. The local shop was driven out of business. Bad for them. Then Borders lost the competition with B&N (and Amazon) and they have now gone away. It's an hour drive to the closest full-service shop. This competition turned out just great for the local shop, Borders, and the customers in this town, didn't it?

It wasn't competition from a direct competitor that drove Borders out of town, it was a technological revolution. Ask youself if you would be better off riding round in a horse-pulled buggy, or in a car. Your argument above applies directly.

But yeah, there are natural monopolies. That's why we have regulated utilities, such as PG&E.

The cable and phone companies benefitted from sweatheart deals to install their connections in cities, yet they would scream in outrage at the prospect of a new competitor getting a similar sweatheart deal to bring in service.

Comment: Re:Attitudes (Score 1) 223

by whoever57 (#48863249) Attached to: The Current State of Linux Video Editing


I used to use Kino, but this doesn't work on 64-bit. I believe the developer has transferred his efforts to Kdenlive. Kino worked well, but required format conversion in most cases.

All I want is an effective non-linear editor.

I have never managed to do anything with Cinelerra. Usually, it crashes within seconds of starting, but I haven't even figured out how to open a file containing video. The "documentation" (I use the word loosely) seems to assume that you have already opened the video.

Kdenlive seems to have possibility. Let's hope that it really progresses.

Comment: Re:building municipal broadband is prohibited (Score 1) 160

by whoever57 (#48854181) Attached to: A State-By-State Guide To Restrictive Community Broadband Laws

I think many of us could agree that the "opinion" of the Supreme Court needs to be "revisited" in a number of areas these days.....

I agree with your opinion of the opinion of the Supreme Court, but there is a long line of decisions that underpin the Fed's ability to regulate almost anything. Expecting the Supreme Court to change its opinion on this topic is wishful thinking. It isn't going to happen any time soon.

Comment: Re:building municipal broadband is prohibited (Score 1) 160

by whoever57 (#48853101) Attached to: A State-By-State Guide To Restrictive Community Broadband Laws

Hmmm.. So your argument is that because the internet crosses state and international boundaries the Fed is free to regulate it. The problem with this is that the commerce clause is about regulating TRADE as it crosses the boundaries between the states and other countries. The Fed can regulate, tax and otherwise control things that cross the state's border, but what happens within the state is the business of the state. The Fed has been justifying a LOT of things using the Commerce Clause, which are really pushing us into some very grey areas.

Please tell me why my interaction with my local phamacist is regulated by federal laws? Please tell me why I cannot grow marijuana for my personal consumption in my back yard? Both of these are because the Supreme Court does not agree with your interpretation of the Commerce Clause. Don't blame the Feds, blame the Supreme Court which has allowed the Fed to implement such laws and regulations.

So, my reading says that the Fed can regulate buying/selling (commerce) that crosses the state line over the internet, but if the state wants to regulate ISP's within it's borders, it is free to do so w/o Federal involvement as long as the state doesn't stray beyond it's constitutional power

Both your reading and my reading of the Commerce Clause carry zero weight. Only the opinion of the Supreme Court matters and it has made it quite clear that your reading does not agree with its view of the Commerce Clause.

Comment: Re:Waiting for Republicans to come in and defend t (Score 1) 311

by whoever57 (#48836767) Attached to: Eric Holder Severely Limits Civil Forfeiture

The Republicans that are concerned about civil liberties (ie, those who didn't think about civil liberties when the patriot act was first signed, but have regretted it) will support this move.

Unfortunately, those Republicans don't exist. Well, to be more accurate, they exist, but not in any elected office.

"Thank heaven for startups; without them we'd never have any advances." -- Seymour Cray