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


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:I'm gonna assign a unique IP address to each at (Score 2) 250

Hopefully everyone in this thread is joking, but it's worth noting that it's not quite that clear cut. The smallest assignment that an ISP can hand out is a /64, so you can really only have 2^64 sites. IPv6 has 2^128 addresses, but a lot of the design works around having sparse routing tables. You really want each /64 to correspond to a broadcast domain, and you don't want to fragment the routing tables too much to get to the /64, so you've actually got a lot fewer addresses. A /64 per human is not enough to assign one IP per atom in the person, but it likely is enough for every device that a person may reasonably want to own and give an IP to, even if that person has a lot of injected sensor nodes.

Comment Re:OR (Score 1) 250

Offer a discount for services that are willing to use v6-only. If you're hosting some back-end services in Azure, you can use v6. If it's something for only accessing within your organisation then you can possibly use v6, depending on your local connectivity. If it's something for the public then you can probably make a certain percentage of the servers v6-only and send customers with working v6 there (does Windows still set up v6 tunnels by default?).

If companies start to pay less for v6-only hosting than for v4-only or dual stack, then they're going to start pushing their customers towards the v6 servers, or making certain features v6-only to penalise ISPs that don't provide v6 connectivity by making their customers complain. That's what's going to trigger mass movement to v6.

Comment Re:Please, please just stop... (Score 1) 270

I switched from Chrome to Firefox on Android because as far as I can tell (after trying a load of them) Firefox is the only Android browser that doesn't have a completely fucked-up cookie management policy. It's made even nicer by the self destructing cookies addon, which lets me whitelist sites with cookies I want to keep (i.e. ones where I log in), but destroys tracking cookies and HTML5 local storage as soon as I close a tab or navigate away from a page (keeping them for a little bit in some storage that isn't visible to the page, so I can hit an undo button if I realise it's just deleted something I want it to keep).

Comment Re:Are they arguing Occam's Razor? (Score 1) 245

The thing that seems to be overlooked in all of the NSA illegality discussion is quite how much the recent revelations point to their incompetence. For example, consider Heartbleed. The NSA claims that they had no knowledge of it. If you assume that they're telling the truth, then this means that they either failed to identify OpenSSL as a critical piece of software to review (odd, given how much US and other government infrastructure uses it), or they did review it and still failed to find the vulnerability. Given how obvious the vulnerability was to anyone who looked at the code (the only reason it survived so long was that there wasn't adequate code review), this implies that the people that are doing code review are incompetent. Alternatively, we can assume that they're lying and they did know about it in advance. Given the amount of government and civilian infrastructure that depends on OpenSSL, and the probability that foreign governments (and organised crime syndicates) have identified that OpenSSL is critical infrastructure and are busy fuzzing it and reviewing the code, that's somewhat problematic. So, the options are:
  • Their strategic analysts are incompetent for failing to identify that OpenSSL is a critical piece of software.
  • Their core reviewers are incompetent for failing to spot the vulnerability.
  • Their threat analysts are incompetent for failing to identify that defending against Heartbleed and similar attacks is more important than holding them for attack.

Comment Re:MIT sure has fallen far (Score 1) 135

The idea behind lobbying is that politicians are not experts in everything and so it makes sense for them to listen to domain experts before making their decision. The first problem is that it's hard for someone who isn't an expert to differentiate between an expert and a vested interested (or an expert providing impartial advice and one providing advice promoting self interest). The second problem is that money found its way into the system and so now it's just about vested interests, experts need not apply...

Comment Re:Intel once made ARM processors... (Score 2) 230

With ARMv8, a lot of companies have this kind of license. I think there are six independent ARMv8 implementations that I'm aware of, but there may be more. Well, I say independent - they all had engineers from ARM consult on the design, but they're quite different in pipeline structure. This is the problem Intel is going to face over the next few years. They could compete with AMD by outspending them on R&D: Intel could afford to design 10 processors and only bring 3 to market depending on what customers wanted, AMD couldn't afford to throw away that much investment. This is how the Pentium M happened: they rushed to market one of their back-burner designs. Now, however, they're competing with half a dozen companies all of whom have ISA-compatible chips and all of whom are content to heavily optimise their designs for a particular market segment.

Comment Re:They all do this (Score 1) 142

Here's one that's easy: outright lying. Unless you're arguing that fraud shouldn't be illegal, because it's just an expression of free speech. Astroturfing is a form of fraud: you're trying to present views as coming from someone else. If the cable companies want to say 'net neutrality is bad because it will cost us money', then that's fine. If they lie and pretend to be a consumer group, then that's not.

Comment Re:Mmhmm (Score 1) 382

So when the 'gambling addicted nutjobs' take their commission on every trade, that doesn't harm anyone by increasing costs for investors? When they cause a flash crash, that doesn't harm anyone by making it harder for companies to raise capital? When they lose all of their money, cry that it was an algorithmic error, and get the exchange to reverse the transactions so that they can keep gambling but other people take the risks, they don't harm anyone? Good to know, thanks for clearing that up.

Slashdot Top Deals

I like work; it fascinates me; I can sit and look at it for hours.