Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:You cannot fine that which does not have a numb (Score 1) 614

I don't understand why there's all this focus on finding the caller via technical means. Just listen to the calls and fine whoever is being advertised.

Scenario 1: Slashdotter:
RoboCaller: Hello, I would like to tell you about the fantastic new insurance policy from RiskAway Inc!
Listener: Dammit! Another robocaller. We need to have a carrier-administered party authentication system regulated by the FCC to ensure that all calls can be traced back to their origin.

Scenario 1: Regular guy:
RoboCaller: Hello, I would like to tell you about the fantastic new insurance policy from RiskAway Inc!
Listener: *Looks up RiskAway Inc in the whitepages*

Comment Re:Failsafe encryption requires no MitM (Score 1) 121

Aah yes, you are correct from a trust point of view. However, from a trust point of view, how can you really ever be truly sure of whom you are talking? Impersonation is always a problem, and then there's the issue of double agents and infiltrators. Then there's the whole sci-fi aspect like in the movie Face Off.

Comment Re:Failsafe encryption requires no MitM (Score 1) 121

Actually, that's not correct. You do not need even one guaranteed interaction in order to establish an encrypted channel. Diffie-Hellman key exchange is pretty secure, as long as your encryption protocol is not broken.
Whatever the circumstances, you need trusted endpoints, and you need a viable encryption protocol. You need those two. Not two out of a set of three, which include those. Untrusted endpoints means you're open to side channel attacks or simple bugging. Even if you have bulletproof protocols and 100% trusted interaction, it's no help if your endpoints have keyloggers sending their data to Eve.

Comment Re:Windows 8 (Score 1) 229

This of those are "DRM and other features that were friendly to manufacturers" ?
I scanned the list, and saw a few that might qualify, but I had to stretch.
Your initial assertion that Vista was somehow Microsoft's foray into a walled garden and represented an exploratoy policy which was abandoned in Win7 but will come back in Win8 is nonsense and not supported by the evidence that you have provided.

Comment Re:When Microsoft did it, it was evil. (Score 0, Flamebait) 255

Yea, 90% of the world uses Windows, therefore it is a de facto standard. So it's a good thing when MS puts pressure on OEMs to ensure that they do not ship PCs or laptops running non-standard, obscure operating systems which would only fragment the marketplace for applications and confuse users.

Comment Re:Apple stifling innovation in lawsuit (Score 1) 1184

Retina displays aren't, weren't and probably never will be manufactured by Apple themselves.
Multitouch predates the iPhone by decades.
The idea of centralized software installation is not new. Debian springs to mind immeidately. Apple just was the first to charge for it.

But please, do try again.

Slashdot Top Deals

Have you reconsidered a computer career?