Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Comment Bound to fail due to human nature (Score 1) 560

Apart from the fact that this whole thing is ethnically ill-conceived, I will never believe it's going to be safe against being exploited in any way. Regardless of whether or not these machines are capable of storing actual images, the operator would always find a way to 'store' body scanner images given enough incentive. Imagine those images surfacing on the web, showing some child, some known celebrity - imagine the lawsuits, imagine the public outcry...


The program is designed to respect individual sensibilities regarding privacy, modesty and personal autonomy to the maximum extent possible...

Yeah, go maximum extend your mom!

Humans will always find a way - This shit is bound to fail simply given the troubled nature of the ordinary human being...

Comment While not move and fix it? (Score 2, Informative) 222

This may be a far thought, but if stochastic CPUs allow for increased performance in a trade-off for correctness, maybe something like following description may reap the benefits while keeping out the stochastics right away:
Suppose those CPUs really allow for faster instruction handling using less resources, maybe you could put more in a package, for the same price, which on a hardware level would give rise to more processing cores at the same cost. (Multi-Core stochastic CPUs)
Naturally, you have the ability to do parallel processing, with errors possible, but you are able to process instructions at a faster rate.
On the software side, the support for concurrency is a mayor selling point, of course, there has to be something able recover from those pesky stochastics gracefully. I come up with the functional language 'Erlang'.
This is taken from wikipedia

Concurrency supports the primary method of error-handling in Erlang. When a process crashes, it neatly exits and sends a message to the controlling process which can take action. This way of error handling increases maintainability and reduces complexity of code

From the official source:

Erlang has a built-in feature for error handling between processes. Terminating processes will emit exit signals to all linked processes, which may terminate as well or handle the exit in some way. This feature can be used to build hierarchical program structures where some processes are supervising other processes, for example restarting them if they terminate abnormally.

Asked to 'refer to OTP Design Principles for more information about OTP supervision trees, which use[s] this feature' I read this:

A basic concept in Erlang/OTP is the supervision tree. This is a process structuring model based on the idea of workers and supervisors. Workers are processes which perform computations, that is, they do the actual work. Supervisors are processes which monitor the behaviour of workers. A supervisor can restart a worker if something goes wrong. The supervision tree is a hierarchical arrangement of code into supervisors and workers, making it possible to design and program fault-tolerant software.

This seems well fit? Create a real, physical machine for a language both able to reap its benefits and cope with the trade-off.
Or maybe I'm too far off (I'm bored technologically, allow me some paradigmatic change at slashdot).

TamedStochastics - Hiring.

Yes, checksumming on dedicated hardware was my first thought as well.

Comment Re:Stop, belay that headline... (Score 1) 563

I'd do the following if I was a musician / musician representative group in Germany:

1. Hire cracker to gain access to networks with with verified information about the owner.
2. Download 'your' IP from said network access.
3. Write a nice letter to said owners and urge them to pay up for the damage done.
4. Profit!!!

Now if only there were botnets, insecure routers / OSs and so on.
Oh wait...

Comment Anti scalpers scheme that works... (Score 4, Interesting) 574

In his Glitter and Doom tour, Tom Waits pioneered an effective anti scalpers scheme.

Tickets for Waits' summer shows were limited to two per person but, in an effort to beat ticket touts, a valid I.D. (passport or driving licence) matching the name on the ticket was required to gain entry. Any concert-goer who did not have a valid I.D. or was found to be in possession of a ticket that had been resold – electronic scanners were employed – was not allowed in and did not get a refund.


Comment Re:FUD (Score 1) 596

I'm trying a different angle here, bear with me for a moment:

While the effort of securing software (e.g. detection and removal of bugs) in a commercial closed source setting is taken out by staff which needs to be paid for, there needs to be a budget to be able to do that.

If a piece of software becomes good enough capitalist incentives leave no reason to commercial software vendors to continue improving the security of that particular piece of existing software. In a commercial closed source setting, there is a natural constraint to who may access and work with existing code and when this is allowed; it will hardly ever happen that the staff of a commercial software vendor improves existing software without being designated a concrete, funded task.

In an open source setting, commercial or not, this constraint does not exist.

We're besically free to do whatever we please, even if this includes improving our software.

In this regard, I don’t see any reason why the open source approach to software should be fundamentally broken.

Comment Re:Not at all. (Score 1) 532

Nothing like being handed a steaming plate of spaghetti and hearing about how much of a "genius" its creator was.

Far too many *programmers* have become invaluable assets due to their reluctance to write maintainable code, ignoring the most basic rules of software development, not to mention design patterns, etc. Needless to say, these individuals get handled with the utmost respect, often being the only ones who can make sense of the mess they have left.

Indeed, geniuses they are.

Comment Re:Other distros? (Score 1) 220

If I can put ubuntu on it I will be interested.

To a limited extend, Ubuntu is already available for the ARM architecture; see for reference. I have a ARM based BeagleBoard which runs Ubuntu *nicely* (I don't do fancy GUI stuff, though). Installing Ubuntu on ARM is not hard, but it's not (yet) as trivial as on PC - I'm confident this will improve once more ARM based netbooks, etc. become more common. Also, some of the packages are (yet) missing, but like my previous point, that is only a matter of time too.

Comment Re:kind of makes you wonder (Score 5, Insightful) 141

That is the main problem with closed source software; in the event of a security hole, you as a customer / company are left to the mercy / arrogance of your software vendor to patch the flaw. Until he does, you can do nothing but become increasingly concerned, since you're left to the increasing danger of having your machine compromised in the meantime. This might be the right time to educate people about the main merit of open source software: As soon as a security hole is discovered, virtually anyone can contribute to a timely resolution. 0day? Fixed tomorrow!

Slashdot Top Deals

"Go to Heaven for the climate, Hell for the company." -- Mark Twain