Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Product liability is a funny thing (Score 1) 366

Second, there is unlikely to be any physical danger to anyone

Software / computer security is increasingly capable of causing physical dangers to people. If you notice, computers are parts of machines which operate physically around humans.

E.g. : https://www.sentryo.net/cybera...

Likelihood : Not sure what methodology you are using to compute likelihood. A huge majority of processors of the dominant architecture (X86) from the dominant company (Intel) have a relatively easy to exploit attack, over last 2 decades, some of which need to be patched but will never be due to apathy, which in turn is partly due to statements like yours. So your unquantified assertion of low likelihood is increasing the likelihood by a small amount.

Comment Re:"I want repaired processors for free" (Score 1) 366

- The FDIV scenario could cause a wrong result from a processor. This can merely cause a security breach.

- The FDIV scenario could merely cause a wrong result from a processor. This can cause a security breach.

FTFY.

- Security can be layered and worked around. A calculator that produces the wrong answer checked by a calculator with the same fault can not work around itself.

The history, and pre-history of man (and other animals) is full of workarounds. No engineer knows the phrase "cannot be worked around", except maybe as a joke.

You also changed the grammar cunningly between the 2 sentences.

1. "Can be layered and worked around" - true for both security and wrong arithmetic answer.

2. "Can not work around itself" : true for both security and wrong arithmetic answer.

Sounds like Intel. Dishonest.

Comment Re:everything computes (Score 1) 271

Interesting, and has parallels to the classic observer's paradox.

So if you redirect the output of a "computation" into /dev/null, and not observe the computation in any way, is it really "computation" ?

Meanwhile, in the real world, people keep calling it unobserved computation, and hence air, electrons etc. keep computing whether or not you observe it.

Comment everything computes (Score 1) 271

The air in your room is constantly computing, the electrons in all matter
on earth are constantly computing.

The point with processors like Intel's is that it is easier to control
the computation with standard, widely available methods (software). This bug inhibits this control. Which was their only point to begin with, as compared to "computation" devices like air.

Comment luggage on transit (Score 1) 294

For journeys to airports, I see people carry around 10 times the luggage on an average than they carry for other commutes / journeys within the city. To accommodate luggage that takes much more space than interstitial space between human beings, the design of the interior of the local transport needs to be vastly different.

If you design all transport to accommodate luggage, it wastes space. If you don't design the airport transport to accommodate luggage, it might get too crowded to carry luggage while mounting and disembarking from the transit. If you design only the transit serving the airport to accommodate luggage - that is difficult to do as the idea of the transit is to serve multiple purposes in a unified manner.

Do you see any solution for carrying luggage other than over-designing ?

Comment Re: Wrong approach, kill the nazi faggots (Score 1) 648

You're confusing me with yourself, it is you who tried to insult me. Though reality, on the other hand, has insulted you more, as you were trying to make statements about subjects you didn't know much about. I'm sorry but I played no part in it.

Comment Re: Wrong approach, kill the nazi faggots (Score 1) 648

my answer clearly referenced this question, and answered this question

The question, if that part was a question, was posed to the TFA. Anyway, how did you answer it ? You describe a completely different strategy from the one described in TFA - where there is a seeming impersonation of e.g. a jew, rabbi etc.

only have access to if I were involved in the creation of the bot

Which is why "or I missed something" is prefixed with disappointment about the TFA.

Anyway, you admit your ignorance and I couldn't agree more.

Comment Re: Wrong approach, kill the nazi faggots (Score 1) 648

Question :

and then designed a bot to identify duplicate accounts held by those who fulfilled those criteria.

This has always intrigued me. How do bots accomplish this ?

Your long answer : not about how bots identify duplicate accounts but how duplicate accounts are created, what is posted in them, what every such data share from sock puppets accounts achieves etc.

The only time you went anywhere close to answering the question was a vague guess about shared emails.

I have specifically pointed out that I have no more information about their methodology than is presented in the article

I will try to never again accuse you of having any information.

Comment Re: Wrong approach, kill the nazi faggots (Score 1) 648

I'm not sure how the bots identified them, shared emails possibly.

They take so much care to not cross pollinate, and then go ahead and use shared emails which are trivial to create en masse so that they don't have to share emails. Interesting.

You have missed something. The point is ....... unwitting people, who all agreed that supporting the troops was good, and animal abuse was bad.

I didn't ask how it is done, I asked how it is detected, that too by bots. First the article and now you, giving exactly the information that is useless, but just tantalizingly close to the real thing. I think you're trying to "steer people towards certain views", but it is not working for me. Try on sheep.

If the article had any evidence of having evidence of the "sock-puppet accounts" belonging to Nazis, I guess they could have provided. Such long winded justification that you are having to manufacture is weak evidence of the article being bullshit. Along with there being no evidence of it not being bullshit that I have been pointing out. I'm still not concluding it is bullshit, but leaning that way, provisionally.

Comment Re: Wrong approach, kill the nazi faggots (Score 1) 648

The designers evaluated known Nazi users based on specific criteria, symbology, stated beliefs etc

Humanly ? Any process used to eliminate bias ?

and then designed a bot to identify duplicate accounts held by those who fulfilled those criteria.

This has always intrigued me. How do bots accomplish this ? They also need to make sure that these "sock-puppet" accounts copy pictures / symbology from the attacked community e.g. Jews - because this is one of the main accusations in TFA about them. TFA should have explained much more, or I missed something.

Because it amuses me to say that Nazis smell.

Well, you can say this for all humans, both ways. I.e. all humans emanate odour, and most detect odour through their noses. What is really amusing is when you can feel the smell in your eyes :)

Comment Re: Wrong approach, kill the nazi faggots (Score 1) 648

If they look like a Nazi, quack like a Nazi, make heavy use of Nazy symbology and espouse the same values, it's reasonablt to call them Nazis.

If you don't mind going back to the actual topic :

1. So the looks of those Twitter account operators were verified by the "bot" to be similar to those of Nazis ?

2. Their quacks ? Hopefully they had Nazi quacks archived somewhere for future reference ?

3. Symbology : this is interesting, because allegedly they adopted Jewish symbology - the tiny cap, pictures of Rabbis, labels like chief Rabbi of such and such place etc.

Do you have evidence that the bot or its operators had any evidence about actual Naziness of the operators of Sock Puppet Accounts (TM) ?

Slashdot Top Deals

FORTUNE'S FUN FACTS TO KNOW AND TELL: A cucumber is not a vegetable but a fruit.

Working...