Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Another security theater excess... (Score 1) 1003

Comment Re:It seems good (Score 1) 591

so Blizzard hates and will not support the Troops.

Of course that isn't true, and screaming "But you have to think of the chil^H^H^H^H troops!!!" wasn't the point I was making. I pointed out one particular reason that I personally have been without access to an individual Internet connection for extended periods. There are many other reasons why people don't always have access to a permanent connection.

I suspect, but don't know, that part of the justification for this requirement is anti-piracy, although Blizzard appears not be making that claim publicly. What Blizzard actually thinks is likely either that the small loss of revenue will be worth the benefits provided by the requirements, or that the loss from users not buying the game due to the requirement will be equaled or exceeded by additional sales driven by the anti-piracy measures. If the requirement is indeed solely about protecting the online experience, I pointed out a simple solution to that issue. If it's about anti-piracy, then obviously that solution is irrelevant.

Comment Re:It seems good (Score 5, Insightful) 591

Because of the things blizzard is doing this move is needed to help stave of some serious issue that can arise with RMT. I think they are bold for doing this and it makes sense why they would. In this iteration of the series SP has taken a backseat, especially given the popularity of MP in D2.

No, it doesn't make sense. I can respect the desire to avoid cheating and to emphasize solid MP gameplay. But from a technical perspective, how hard would it be to give you a choice of local or server storage for your character at the beginning of a single player game? If you choose server storage, you need an Internet connection and you can use that character in online games. If you choose local storage, no connection required but that character can only be used for single-player games.

If you don't like it, don't buy it. It is not aimed at those who have trouble with the internet. Your troubles with the internet does not supersede the design and direction of the game.

Of course I have the option of not buying it. I also have the option of bitching about a stupid requirement to play a game. My bitching is not aimed at players who see no problem with the requirement. It's aimed at Blizzard, to let them know why I won't be a customer for this game. Your irritation with my bitching doesn't supersede my right to bitch or to let Blizzard know that they have potential customers who are not actual customers because of this decision. If you don't like my bitching, don't read/listen to it.

For what it's worth, my perspective is influenced by serving twenty years in the US Navy. When you're stuck for six months on a ship at sea with no personal Internet connection possible, games become a great way to pass the time. As more and more games make an Internet connection a requirement for playing even single player games, it'll soon get to the point where you aren't choosing to not purchase a particular game but are being forced to give up gaming entirely.

Comment Re:No. (Score 1) 1486

Faith is trusting/believing in something you don't understand. Like in many religions, faith often relates to a supernatural mystery (above natural). Regardless if you personally believe in one religion or another, he's talking about the believing in something one doesn't understand. That IS a matter of faith for most people with regard to science.

For most people, science fall into this description. They trust or believe in something they themselves don't really understand.

No, faith is a belief in something which is either not understandable or for which no evidence exists. Trust is, in part, a belief in something you don't understand. The two should not be confused - they are not synonymous.

I don't have faith in the scientific process; I trust it. I don't trust it to be infallible, but I do trust it to be self correcting and to trend towards generating increasingly accurate models of the issues under study.

I have known preachers and ministers whom I trusted. They were good people, earnest in their beliefs. I did not and do not share their faith in religion, but that doesn't stop me from trusting them as individuals.

Comment Re:1st A... (Score 1) 338

They're not passing a law, they're making rule of employment. You want a job with us, you don't badmouth us. That's perfectly reasonable, whether a private or public employer. If an employee doesn't like it, they can quit. It's that simple.

No, it isn't. They're a government entity, not a private entity and courts, including the SCotUS, have already ruled that public employers have limits to what rules they can enforce.

Banning "anything negative or embarrassing" would include many things that are of "public concern" and be over the legally established lines of what public employers may do.

Comment Re:Which is the sane thing to assume (Score 5, Insightful) 239

What I can't fathom is that there is still people out there believing that a firewall is all the protection they need. Or that it is a protection they need, even.

A firewall is reasonable protection for most people, just as a dead bolt on the front door is reasonable protection for most homes. If you're the online equivalent of a jewelry store - that is, a high profile target - then obviously you need much more than that.

Submission + - Allegations regarding OpenBSD IPSEC

B'Trey writes: Theo de Raadt, of OpenBSD fame, has posted an email which claims the FBI paid open source developers to implant back doors into the OpenBSD IPSEC stack. The email also alleges that these back doors are the reason that government is promoting OpenBSD for use in VPNs and firewalls. Theo is calling for an audit of the code involved.

Comment Re:Blasphemy! (Score 1) 814

I do two spaces, except on my iPhone. It does one space automatically after double tapping the space bar for a period.

On my Blackberry, hitting the space bar twice automatically enters a period. It's the same number of keystrokes but easier to hit than hitting the Alt and then the M key.

Comment Re:And this folks... (Score 3, Informative) 571

How is dropping a text file in the same folder as wordpress creating something that is "part of WP"?

It doesn't. I can take a copy of this post and drop it in a WP folder and it's not affected in any way.

What causes it to be "part of WP" is the fact that the contents of the file in question literally become part of WP. From the last linked article:

There is a tendency to think that there are two things: WordPress, and the active theme. But they do not run separately. They run as one cohesive unit. They don't even run in a sequential order. WordPress starts up, WordPress tells the theme to run its functions and register its hooks and filters, then WordPress runs some queries, then WordPress calls the appropriate theme PHP file, and then the theme hooks into the queried WordPress data and uses WordPress functions to display it, and then WordPress shuts down and finishes the request. On that simple view, it looks like a multi-layered sandwich. But the integration is even more amalgamated than the sandwich analogy suggests.

Here is one important takeaway: themes interact with WordPress (and WordPress with themes) the exact same way that WordPress interacts with itself. Give that a second read, and then we'll digest.

Comment Re:Well? (Score 1) 981

It's wrong. Suppose that you randomly selected 100 families with two children. We're ignoring all the things that you mention above and assuming that gender distribution 50:50. Statistically speaking, our 100 families would consist of 25 boy/boy, 25 boy/girl, 25 girl/boy and 25 girl/girl. We assign a number from 1 to 100 to each family, write that number on a series of cards, and you randomly select a card and hand it to me. I look at it, see the number, and announce that the family has at least one boy. What are the odds that they have two boys? What are the odds that they have a girl and a boy? There are 25 girl/girl cards, but you know you did not pick one of them, so they can be ignored. So you know you picked one of 75 cards. Of those 75 cards, 25 are boy/boy, 25 are boy/girl and 25 are girl/boy. So there is a 25/75, or 1 in 3 chance that you picked a boy/boy card. There's a 50/75 or 2 in 3 chance that you picked a card with a boy and girl combination.

Comment Re:Ordering and Convergence (Score 1) 981

The fact that the number of days in a week is arbitrary is completely irrelevant. If there were eight days a week, then could make the same calculations, substituting the number eight for seven in the calculations. Yes, the results would be different but that's because the information you were provided is different. In this case, the day the son was born is narrowed to one in seven. If there were eight days a week, it would be narrowed to one in eight.

The number of sides on a die is arbitrary as well. There are dice with 4 sides, 8 sides, 10 sides, 20 sides, etc. On a six sided die, the chance of rolling a one is one in six. On a ten sides die, it's one in ten. Just because a six sided die is an arbitrary choice doesn't mean that one can't calculate odds based on that number. So long as you know the size of the die being used, the odds are directly calculable. So long as everyone understand the number of days in a week, the odds can be calculated based on that as well.

Comment Re:THIS IS NOT A PROBLEM !! (Score 1) 139

Not sure what you're saying is not a problem - the change to TACO or the forked Beef TACO. If you're talking about the changes to the original, I sort of agree with you. I can understand people being upset over the size expansion, particularly if it slows down Firefox or significantly increases its memory footprint, but is there any real problem with the changes that makes this some sort of malware? So far as I can tell, there's no malicious activity associated with the update. It's just big and bloated but does offer some significant new and useful functionality. Assuming that to be the case, I think the hysteria is a bit overblown.

Comment Re:What a schmuck. (Score 2, Informative) 680

This isn't domain hijacking. Hijacking is when you impersonate the legitimate owner to have the domain transferred, use some sort of DNS poisoning attack to redirect the traffic to an alternate site or use some other nefarious method to deprive the legitimate owner of the use of the domain. The domain owner allowed the domain to expire. McCrary purchased it legally and legitimately. No high jacking involved.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Spock, did you see the looks on their faces?" "Yes, Captain, a sort of vacant contentment."