Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. ×

Comment Yes but funding per movie (Score 1) 79

For a big movie with complex effects?
To make a really big US movie you need to get your actors and script to a low cost "Canada" to really enjoy the tax issues.
Then move the product back to the US to have more expensive US staff work on the project with really expensive US private sector super computers.
The script is easy to find. Actors exist in every state in the US with great talent and skills.
The super computers are still too expensive per frame per artist in the USA.
The ability to transport an entire crew to an international "Canada" like location to enjoy complex tax considerations is also a cost with the risk of local currency changes over the duration of the project.
The risks for the USA are:
Other nations with good support, gov "funded" private sector super computer services and lower all taxes on new movies.
If other nations can get that per frame art work cost down, parts of the trendy, creative USA could face real cost issues per project.
Ireland, England, Australia, New Zealand, Canada could just make that low cost happen by funding local artists, experts with the projection that long term tourism covers the digital "students" art costs.

How to win:
Anyone can find US actors, a new script. That US only super computer network that makes nice art still per movie is still too expensive.
So make movies that don't need a lot of fantasy, avoid the advanced computer work on every frame or get other nations to pay for the complex art.
Thats limiting. Find other ways to cover computer costs.
Invest in nations that welcome artists making complex movies and have the gov assistance to really prove their support of the arts. Nations that will do anything to create new hi tech local jobs.
Don't hire any actors from such nations but use all their services and see what gov support is on offer. A US company has more control over US actors who get strange ideas about wages, conditions, work place safety, the later "sharing" of profits... Local actors might have too many legal rights or even access to expert lawyers, unions in their own nations.
Enough US actors to pass as a US movie. Enough of an international crew to get international tax rates and art support in nations desperate to tax payer fund their own computer and art students.
Return to the USA with a product that will sell domestically and enjoy the international tax rate and low cost "educational" support other nations give away.
Its not gov funded art in some other wealthy nation. The project helped poor computer students in a poor nation with their first big "special effects" movie. It just needed free super computer time the gov had on offer for their poor students for a few months, years ...
In a historical perspective why stay in the USA and pay for a Video Toaster team when another nation will totally fund a complete 3D animation and rendering package?
No more US artist/engineers needed per frame, the costs are lower, the product can sell in the USA and globally.

Comment Re:Time for a new search engine? (Score 2) 73

AC why try and filter the vast internet with all the comments about illegal migrants, blasphemy, news results about Tiananmen square and 1989?
Why not just create a safe space with an internet list? All the Hero Brigades SJW teams could add the few news sites they think are politically and culturally appropriate.

Focus on the ability to build a new internet. Why try and hold back all the sites that are not inclusive in real time?
Think of looking up authors or composers.
With a SJW list of approved arts sites the users would be only ever be presented with inclusive diversity.

Comment Re:So it wasn't the Russians, for once? (Score 1) 25

The BND works with the NSA. The BND really don't want too many people in the EU or Germany or German gov working out their skill set or what they do with/for the NSA. (16.02.2017)
So the constant political talking point of the "Russian" ip range, timezone, code litter is politically better to have in the international and local tech media.
If not Germans might ask about the quality of data protection and network security in Germany.
Talking about Russia keep Germany asking about new German data protection laws, German funding to counter all advanced private sector crypto, networks, security funding, domestic politics, jobs, domestic telco security issues.
Then reality finally emerges and the tech media talking points are exposed.

Comment Hearts and minds (Score 1) 41

The US mil faced the same issues after ww2 in 1945 Germany.
What to do with all the people wondering around/captured by the US mil in 1945 Germany with skills that the French, UK, Soviet Union, nations in South America showed great interest in.
The US had the option in 1945 to walk away from all German science, to convict a lot of evil people in Germany for what they did during ww2 or fund what was Operation Paperclip .
The thinking in the US gov/mil on open source and its integration with US gov contractors is complex.
The US mil has a few options:
Ban open source at a gov/mil level as it is of no use to contractors and their sale of services to the US gov/mil. Fully support US contractors and their efforts to find US staff to work on any US gov/mil project.
Ignore open source and risk other nations attracting some US developers for unexpected dual use projects. The risk of an open source gap. A brain drain to nations that support open source and make it trendy, safe, fun.... and offer full funding.
The suggestion that a full security clearance to keep working on a dual use project in the USA might be needed?
A smart person in the USA is then lured to another nation that does not demand a security clearance and is very happy to see the complex "open source" project funded?
Attract open source code talent into the US gov/mil and have some oversight and say in the direction dual use projects.
The total funding of developers and staff can sway an open source project or even slow or halt a dual use project in interesting ways.
Or just have US mil/gov funding hidden by a charity or foundation with lots of grants. Staff can then be fully funded without direct links to decades of US gov/mil funding.
For that open source has to be accepted within the US mil/gov.
A bit like the way the US gov funded and always looks after US crypto studies :)
Efforts by the GCHQ with Linux could allow the UK to be less dependant on the NSA long term.
Better to have the GCHQ asking for NSA help with any and all "open source" efforts rather than a US gov ban on open source allowing the UK to fund its own projects without NSA advice, help and guidance.

Comment Time for a new search engine? (Score 3, Interesting) 73

A search engine that still searches the internet?
Less effort on creating Hero Brigades and more effort on been a search engine?
If a US search engine wants to be a safe SJW protected service with lots of ads, what would the results look like?
The rest of the internet can create a real search engine that finds results. Not having SJW approval to show results would make for some fun marketing.
The internet is not a problem. SJW filtering of the internet is showing less results and users expect a working search engine.
The news is good, as one global search engine becomes more of a safe space, better search brands are been developed and funded.
All a search engine has to do is search. If people want safe party political results why not set up a "safe" space list site?
Everyone can then be happy. The SJW teams get their reporting and banning projects funded. SJW approved political and culturally safe link lists.
Back to the early 1990's with the entire safe internet presented as a link list in 2017.
Just list the very best in safe sites? No filtering, no questions, no comments. Just safe news and party political talking points.
No blasphemy, no faith related cartoon sites, no mention of Tiananmen square and 1989. Think of how safe that limited list of sites could be.
No links to any news sites that allow comments about illegal migrants?

Comment Re:Can't sue cops *personally* for requesting ID (Score 1) 168

If the person is not on police property?
How far back is that "in bushes" or "across" zone? A street, a few streets? One block? Given a zoom on a better quality video camera?
Does a person need to be in the bushes? What if they are smart and are not really hiding? Standing next to a tree? Walking near a tree that they could hide behind later? Member of the press looking for the bush where the person got handcuffed? A tourist? A member of the public? Another First Amendment audit near the bushes after what happened to the last person with a camera in that area?
Is the bush on public or private land? Is everyone near that bush stopped? Just some people? Or only people with a camera?
Most police just follow a person back to their car or home and get their ID that way :)
If the police don't want cameras then do want police have always done. Have a drive in area with two gates. The gate opens to a closed in area, drive in, gate closes. Any camera can only capture what any one walking by can see. A very low cost sally port.

After the city keeps on going to court, the supervisor will have to have a meeting about how people can still wonder around in public with a camera.
The cheap option for the city is to send out a person to talk to and photograph interesting person hiding/in the bushes. Use the facial recognition and see how the person hiding responds to been talked, confronted to and been photographed.
No uniform, no police ID, no handcuffing. Just a talking and standing in front of the persons camera.
Just two random people with cameras.
The First Amendment audit person, tourist will soon request police help after such an unexpected and very direct interaction with a total stranger.
The resulting need for police interaction will be a very easy way to ID the interesting person.
No expensive rights issues, no handcuffs needed.

Comment Re:No you dont (Score 2) 168

A persons rights cannot be taken.
But if the chat down results in photo ID voluntarily been shown or the dslr/camera been handed over?
If the chat down is loud, direct, friendly, helpful the person on public land might just show ID, stop filming or even hand over their camera.
Been surrounded by mil in uniform, private security and/or local police on public land all suggesting it might be a good time to show ID and to turn off the camera?
That police would like to or want to or need to know who a person with a camera is for their paperwork as they got called out..
The ability to suggest that its now very normal, helpful, good to stop filming and hand over photo ID? Or just give up the media/storage to be a helpful as an investigation could be started..
That line between under arrest, conducting an investigation, talking, been free to go, is having a dslr in public on public land reasonable articulable suspicion of a crime?
Another attempt is to suggest press ID, local police press ID gives permission to film in that area or city... that all land in the state is state property and not really public land :)
That very special permission is always needed to film "on" a mil base. "In" a court building due to informants or people in jail... or due to under cover officers..
Anything to keep the conversation going and the person speaking about their rights...
The hope is the person will then show photo ID just to have the ability to walk away after such creative talking points.

Comment Re:No you dont (Score 5, Interesting) 168

You have the right to film from public land.
Police will try a few mind tricks at the more interesting sites. Courts, mil base, vital infrastructure, jails, prisons will usually create a chat down event.
A demand, request for photo ID and the reason for walking on public and, having a camera on public land.. .
Anything from a friendly request to "help" with the paperwork, a request to give a name, to a direct almost legal sounding demand for photo id.
Other chat down methods are Who are you working for, Will this be on the net, under what account... Do you have police press ID?
Mil, contractors and private security will often try the same with "chat downs" about been near their site. Still on public land but they have some "power" to ask who a person is well beyond their fence line...
That the jail, base, court "extends" out onto public land past any fence, sign and that the ability to film from public land is not allowed is often attempted.
The other trick is to let the person have their "rights" and follow them back to their car and get the plate and id..
Other more direct methods is the undercover talking point. Not to show faces.
Or a federal official with no ID or uniform might grab a camera to induce local police to be called. To report the crime a name will have to be given.
The crime will be reported but later FOIA will never ID the person who reached out for the camera.
A lot of chat down ways around a lack of clear Stop and identify statutes.

Comment Re:How is FILMING "speech"? (Score 2) 168

The US protects the right to collect information from public land and then talk about it.
Freedom of speech, freedom after speech, freedom of the press to gather information for a story.
Also a person does not have to invoke their rights by "speaking" a word or requesting their rights every time they are out in public.
The police can attempt a chat down to request/demand/induce photo ID depending on the state.

Comment Re:Are two hashes better than one? (Score 1) 140

Argentina tried a few ideas like that in the 1980's knowing the skills the UK's GCHQ had Argentina needed a lot of fast, real time communications using equipment that was in place.
The GCHQ has most of the worlds mil grade export crypto decryption computer ready thanks to most brands and firms been happy to help the UK gov. Real time decryption was easy and any efforts to link two layers of junk export grade crypto was detected and useless.
The only aspect that slowed the GCHQ down was that Argentina had some South Africa crypto devices that the GCHQ did not know a lot about. That took an unexpected 24h to break given early 1980s' UK computers facing a new mil crypto task.
All communications was then plaint text in real time.
Other nations then equip their mil with that junk and think they have the best the private sector has to offer :)
So that is not really what your asking about, but shows how governments attack crypto. Govs go to the origins of "export" "brands" that sell mil grade crypto and get the keys. Consumer crypto efforts get the same police or international telco requests for keys. Most govs just ask the designers within their nations to help.
That consumer grade, police friendly product is then a tested, trusted global crypto standard.
Almost all crypto for sale was junk.
South Africa during the 1980's was one of the few nations to have working crypto that was not shared with the US, UK, Soviet Union as designed.

Comment Re:Practical? (Score 1) 140

Thats why so many nations allow things like VPN. The home router been used for all networking that can hide everything? No calls for VPN bans or to stop CC payments for all consumer VPN services?
Governments might have found another easy way in and all a VPN service cert will do is make a gov tracking easy.
Use a VPN, the users must be interesting, crypto funding and gov computer time was not an issue.

Comment Re:How about traveling without? (Score 1) 143

Any gov will have a passport photo. Travel without a phone, laptop and get asked, about social media?

As a citizen a person can invoke their nations laws, ask for a lawyer, articulate legal protections during the friendly chat down.
Federal, state, city, public/private partnership, charity, NGO efforts to collect and index all social media over the years will then get a facial recognition request.
Past hours, days, weeks, months could be recovered and presented during a chat down or held back to see how a person responds.
Facial recognition is fast so the interview will seem normal, with a short break, change of interview rooms, different staff needed, shift change.
All cover to sort what was found. Or wonder why nothing useful has been found...
If nothing is found is the person in a cult or member of some faith group? Often used as spies as they have no normal online past?
A citizen might walk free hours later but how interested are local/federal officials in that person now?
If a person is not a citizen, one lie and the paperwork is different. A flight back to their own nation.

Slashdot Top Deals

Anyone can make an omelet with eggs. The trick is to make one with none.