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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment What was it all about anyway? (Score 1) 438

Gee, what do you expect? It's a transparently value-holding commodity, not a place-holding commodity; I'm just making up theoretical terms, here, but, so to say, its value comes from exchanging it for value's own sake, not through direct representation of something else. Case in point: when was the last time you bought or sold something in terms of bitcoins? Yet there they are, soaking up processor time, gaining value and losing face. Is that what it's all about? "I dedicated my processor to a hell of a lot of number crunching, now that's just gotsta be worth SOMEthing!" -- (???)

Comment power supply?? (Score 1) 202

I recall, before they shipped the alpha, that Raspberry Pi was supposed to work from the power supplied by an HDMI cable. Is there some variable to be considered there, as well, or did they abandon that design? I gave up interest pretty early when I was told that I would be considered to receive one of the early models and then never received a follow-up.

Comment Re:Screws over the people with real alarms (Score 1) 243

*Shrug* You intended to perform for your audience the rite of acknowledgement into the echelon of true believers. So what if you failed to let them know what it took to be really there? You did all humankind a favor by demonstrating, with your performance, that puppetry and cascades of wonder have no match for the actual imposition of securely obtained and restrained measures upon every least facet of throughput.

So, you mayest show that the simplest coward is but a simpleton, but, where were you, when all of us crowed for a simpleton bemoaned, who was yet a well-disciplined ward to clean the paths ahead of all us the rest?

I don't think you really do care -- I know I do, and I can tell, you do not.

Comment Re:Screws over the people with real alarms (Score 1) 243

Alroight. final argument:

Consider where G O D used to stand in for security AND technology, both similar.

Consider if you told tales about security technology.

Consider how effective you'd be while admiring the eventual growth rate and power structure of something like the vatican, the muslim world, and the hindu/buddhist structure, all combined.

Tell me you don't think a little make-believe, a little lying, are effective means of creating a world where nobody is sure what to believe, but people learn methods of "faith" (trust-based security) to defeat the overwhelming tides of the "devil" (the ever-present threat of falsehood, including the epitomy of falsehood -- malware).

TECHNOSHAMANISM is at hand! Embrace it! Lie! Cheat! Steal! Corrupt! Take your spoils, as I will take mine, for from an early time I know we all have earned them, not as they were plucked like teeth from the mouth of a poor young man but as they were the feathers of the phoenix taken from the dwindling fires of an early age almost squashed by hegemony and greed!

Take up the knowledge that obfuscation DOES offer some security, and use it as a springboard to collapse those systems that attempt to squelch your security through incorporate frustration and under-thought malfeasance.

Why have we not shown this world a thing or two, already? Who are we? Always under-paid, under-laid, under-privilege bastard sons of stupid bitches, or are we decent enough company to take under the wings of even the highest eagles?

Break a few more bangles, and urge a few more charms, and I'm sure that the "nerd" culture might even win a few favors where, for now, it stands like a reedy moss in a thicket of water and shit, soaking up detritus and proving for itself nothing but its own respiration.

Comment Re:Screws over the people with real alarms (Score 1) 243

ONLY if the deterrents in use in your dichotomy are false deterrents.

Consider this: the thieves now throw themselves headlong into security systems believing they might be false; the thieves are caught mid-act by effective, real, actual, working, again: effective security systems; the thieves are fucked (caught).

This might be a possible scenario where broadcasting the existence of the tar-baby or fake intruder countermeasure results in heightened effectiveness of existing effective countermeasures simply because: more people plunge into them based on the probability of those countermeasures being ineffective based on some crazy stunt-kit that copycats actual security.

Do you understand what I'm saying? People are dynamic.

Many thieves look at cameras and actually judge for themselves whether those cameras are the real thing or are fake cameras put up to ward off thieves.

The idiots waltz right through attempted thievery and are caught because, indeed, the cameras were real but the thieves acted as if they might not be. It happens frequently.

Despite what some may say, fake security DOES impede real crime, and obfuscation DOES impede real attempts to decrypt.

Comment apply this same mentality, everywhere. (Score 1) 243

I came up with a pretty distinct statement about this concept.

""There's no security in obfuscation" cannot be a positively true statement. Comparatively, there is absolutely *no* security in full disclosure or revelation, whereas in obfuscation there is *enough* security that many people resort to it in an attempt to secure things, typically because it's just *enough* to fool people."

You can read it at my professional (not my funny friendly one) gabe.petrie at facebook.

Comment [idiots.] (Score 0) 535

The job description doesn't "mess" with your "head" because of the content the censor is required to view, nor due to the length of time spent in viewing it, nor in the therapy or lack thereof afterwards.

The reason a person might become unstable while performing the duties of this particular job is because the most horrible things one sees must then be determined not to be viewed by anyone else, and not only are you forced -- by pay and coercion of duty to your signature -- to renounce what you've seen as "wrong", you are then also to be sure to be alone in what you've seen if your job has been done thoroughly for all. Talk about "forever alone". Talk about "twisted".

It has nothing to do with liability or humanism. It's about alienation and idiocy. Anybody who would spend time justifying the existence of a position like this, and to go on furthermore, likening it to some onslaught of meager slings and arrows, and to show how it can all be channeled by some corporate scheme into better good for profitability, is a completely inhuman wretch who has a malformed consciousness that befits only a malformed head, and may something fall from the heavens that will cleave that head thusly right.

It's censorship, you fucking idiot. Quit talking l33t-a$$, corporate hegemony about it, unless you're just aching for the prospect of getting paid to fap to mangled dead babies as our corporate robolords inform us you've been so occupied these long months in our employ.

Comment Re:Putting health records on the web is a good thi (Score 0) 112

* Trully, brah, 2nd/3rd-world gauranteed health coverage is way, way way, WAY better than this total shit-hole butt-rape in the face scab nightmare we call "America"! Fuck yeah, you should move the fuck out. Do yourself one better. Before your neighbors break into your home and replace your anxiety meds with sugar pills. Fucking Americans!!! *sob* I just wish I had all the gauranteed health care coverage available in so many 2nd/3rd world countries.

Slashdot Top Deals

We don't know who it was that discovered water, but we're pretty sure that it wasn't a fish. -- Marshall McLuhan

Working...