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


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Yeah... (Score 1) 732

I think it's more like 'cars will drive themselves before people accept bullshit like that'.

They want the car to make the decisions on how to drive, I'm fine with that, as long as it's smart enough to do it safely. Which basically means smart enough to drive better than me. But if the car's driving, I'm going to sit in it humming along after several pints at a pub after work.

Comment Re:Awesome (Score 1) 582

Wether they want to see opinions they agree with or not is up to them; if they up moderate both things they agree with and those they don't they'll get connected to people who moderate the same way.

Trying to force people to moderate without bias doesn't work very well, a significant portion will always downmod things they disagree with and things like metamoderation only affect the most excessive raters. This way you limit the damage so the subjective moderations only affect those who want it to affect them.

Perhaps you will end up with most discussions containing people who barely ever even see eachother. Much like real life. Or networks of groups who like having meaningful conversations will form. But which one you'd be part of would depend upon your preferences, not on what random people you have nothing in common with think about a specific conversation.

And, perhaps, just perhaps, there'd be a bit less of screaming for censorship anytime anyone gets offended by idiots if the easily offended got separated from the rest.

Comment Re:Awesome (Score 2) 582

Opinions vary wildly on what is good moderation so personally I think a social moderation system would be the ultimate in moderation. Make it exceptionally easy to rate comments, then create a connection network where users get connected to and trust each others moderation based on how similarly they rated various comments.

You'll have an incentive to moderate and you bypass the entire problem of trying to objectively rate comments; each user gets to see what they prefer. Don't want the utter crap deleted? Then don't downmod it and you'll start trusting the moderation of others who enjoy the utter crap. Hate racist comments and don't want to see them at all? Eventually you'll build up enough connections to people who always downmod them to have them rapidly filtered out.

The difficult part will be building enough of a user base that most people get decent amounts of close matches.

Comment Re:Duh (Score 3, Insightful) 325

Self driving is the single feature that would ever get me to shell out for a new car. Nothing like having your own car drive you home after a couple of beers after work.

Ultimately, the huge capacity to save lives and the economic advantages of self-driving cars and trucks are going to drive this step very fast. Tens of thousands of lives every year, hundreds of thousands of injuries, tens to hundreds of billions in insurance costs, tens to hundreds of billions in savings on transportation, etc. In the face of the possible gains I think the regulatory aspects will get resolved faster than most people think.

Comment Re:How about (Score 1) 282

Well, unless you actually act on the tool and treat those 150085 people as terrorists, in which case 10% of them will actually become terrorists and each will drag at least one other person into it through loyalty and/or family ties. In which case you now have more than 30k terrorists of which only half is believed to possibly be a terrorist.

Not a solution, no, but part of the problem.

Comment Re:Not sure I understand the question. (Score 4, Insightful) 410

Of course, the part that the NSA et al seems most interested in is the source and destinations of your mails to map your associations. By sending via your ISP smarthost you're still handing them that info, so if you want to cut them out of the loop you need to vpn the mail relaying outside their grasp and ensure encrypted smtp/tls direct between endpoints.

Your random mail idea does screw with them in a nice way tho as it'd mess up their social graph and probably get yourself classified as an uninteresting spammer after which you can freely inform islamic insurgents how they can enlarge their manhood and obtain large fortunes from Africa by sending a small upfront payment.

But for actual secure comms it's probably better to use i2p or some other darknet. And traffic on that screws with the snoops as well.

Comment Re: Yeah, it's those politicians who are corrupt (Score 1) 177

You do realize that the definition of taking means that the one whom the thing is taken from no longer has it? If I take your apple you don't have it. If I take your book you no longer have it.

If I pirate your book you still have it. Because I copied it. I neither took it, nor stole it, I copied it. And if you didn't see it, you'd have no idea it had happened, nor could you demonstrate or even experience any loss, while had you been robbed you'd certainly notice it.

See, physical property rights are actually demonstrably real and arguable as part of natural law, while imaginary property rights cannot be demonstrated or argued without their own previous existence.

Comment Re:Yeah, it's those politicians who are corrupt (Score 3, Insightful) 177

If it's society's job to ensure that someone can benefit from creative works, why is it handing the creators something which is utterly worthless? The right to control copying of an abundant product is worth nothing without the distribution network which is not owned by creators.

Oh, right, because copyright is intended to benefit the distributors and not the creators. The creators are merely a cheap excuse and as they are not particularly scarce and most cannot independently gain access to end consumers to a significant degree, they hold no bargaining power and thus have the choice of between getting screwed or getting nothing. Perfect. For the distributors.

If 'copyright' had actually been about incentives for producing creative works it would have been constructed to automatically hand creators a significant portions of the end user transaction. A guaranteed significant cut would actually be worth something and would actually let someone focus on creative works full time.

But it's not. And most 'creatives' would have a better chance of striking it rich by working selling fries with that and investing their proceeds in the lottery than by playing a game which is intentionally stacked against them every step of the way.

Comment Re:Wireshark (Score 1) 923

And by nailing this family they're up to 59! Well, maybe not this one (today at least) as they seem to have gotten to the newspaper faster than they could run them through a secret court. But I'm sure there are other serious googling terrorist plotters when the stats need padding and the budget needs justification.

Comment Re:What? (Score 2) 139

This. Don't respond to crazies like this, if you're not forcing them to serve you a notice physically or at least via mail you're encouraging their crazy. Don't argue with them, don't cave to them, dont send any reply of any kind. If the guy is coherent enough and tenacious enough to actually engage in a valid serving then it might be worth either caving to or letting a lawyer take a look at it and reply to it, but in no way engage the asshat in an argument that you simply cannot in any way benefit from.

Comment Re:Self signed? (Score 3, Interesting) 276

There's always the Convergence project (based on the previous Perspectives CMU work).

Basically, instead of CA's you have notary servers that track changes to certificates and that you (your browser) contacts to verify that they and you are seeing the same certificates.

That way, if a MITM attack is ongoing it will, if targetting you specifically, probably show a discrepancy between the certificate presented to you and the one presented to them. If targetting the specific website and MITM'ing all connections to it the only demonstration of a problem might be that the site suddenly appears to have a new certificate, but that would still most likely alert site operators who may be surprised to note a change they didn't do.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Of course power tools and alcohol don't mix. Everyone knows power tools aren't soluble in alcohol..." -- Crazy Nigel