Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Bah! They lost Michigan recount &... (Score 1) 285

She's running a scam you fucking rube.

Are your bollocks ok? I only ask because your pants are clearly on fire.

I bet you can't point to an incident where she's used money in a manner other than what she said she'd use it for. Since you're the resident crazy-bloke here, I expect a bunch of links to irrelevant articles where you demand I dig through a further 3 layers of links to find information you insist exists.

Comment Re:Translation (Score 1) 164

Translation: "If you do not censor anti-government statement, we will censor you".

The best way to make people ignore a good point (e.g. about censorship) is to engage in hysterical lunacy.

Various European countries have had hate speech laws on the books for ages. I'll bet you can't point to a single incident ever where it's been used to censor anti-government statements.

The thing is, if you open with clearly false fantasies, people will quite rightly dismiss you as an idiot (as opposed to here where your username is sufficient). Any valid points you might then have about the perils of censorship will be lost.

Comment Re:Happy ending, but (Score 1) 207

If it came down to allowing someone from remote to lock the vehicle, preventing egress and disable the starter versus just making a claim to the insurance company, I'd rather forgo the remote locking and if the item is stolen, deal with the insurance company and see about a replacement vehicle, for a few reasons:

1: Usually a recovered vehicle is trashed big time, and you never know if sometime down the line you might have a dog search at a checkpoint (anyone travelling on I-10 knows about this) yield something the thieves put there in the way of illegal substances.

2: The vehicle can have a failure and lock someone in. At best, it means smashing a window to get out.

3: Most importantly, right now, it might just be a vehicle maker that can do this from remote... but it is only a matter of time before someone hacks that, and in a 104 degree day, someone decides to stall and double-lock all BMWs on the roads, forcing rescue teams to go vehicle by vehicle to get people out before they expire. Or, even more insidiously, during an evacuation, disable and lock all vehicles, ensuring nobody is able to exit a city before a hurricane strikes. The hacking team that manages to do this to OnStar will be forever immortalized.

And this already has happened on a smaller scale. Here in Austin a few years ago, a disgruntled employee logged into a used car dealership's system and disabled 100+ vehicles that were sold by that dealer, where they stalled in the road and started honking their horns. If a guy with a former employee username/PW can do that, imagine what a state sponsored group can do if/when they feel like that, especially with the mindset of most US companies being that security has no ROI.

tl;dr, keep the remote kill switches. It is only a matter of time before that stuff gets hacked, and perhaps used for ransom ("pay us 2 BTC, or else your car will be disabled and your engine's ECU fried in 12 hours.")

Comment DK-impervious = DK-permeable (Score 1) 287

One of the most important things is knowing when you don't know enough.

TAoCP is a never-fail personal Dunning–Kruger removal tool.

I never finished the mathematics degree I once started, but I always found the larger concepts easy enough to understand when sitting beside a real mathematician.

I certainly would have difficulty completing most of the HM exercises (this despite also owning Concrete Math). I rarely have difficulty understanding the form of the solution if I cheat and look it up.

Another book I'd put into the same category, roughly, was the original Applied Cryptography where it ought to be far more obvious that one shouldn't naively roll one's own, but somehow, for too many DK-impervious DK-permeable programmers out there, it isn't. (I'm looking at you, Wi-Fi Alliance; and every idiot who ever used the speedy MD5 to hash a password database, with or without salt, or worse.)

There's little wrong with Knuth's exposition that actual competence wouldn't fix.

You do the math.

Comment Re:Read the first volume (Score 1) 287

It describes the very low level of a program and a computer.

No it doesn't. It describes the very low level of a program running on a computer from 30-50 years ago. The lessons that it teaches about algorithmic complexity are still valid, but the low-level stuff is not. Once you get to limits of the implementation, rather than of the algorithm, artefacts of caches in pipelines are far more important to performance. Not only will you not find, for example, Hopscotch Hash Tables in TAOCP, you also won't find an explanation of the underlying reasons for their performance.

Comment Re:"Kill all white people" are ok! (Score 1) 164

What is considered "hate" speech is what gets the most outrage. I'm not saying it is right or wrong- but you won't find as many people "outraged" by racism against whites so it doesn't get the same motivation to censor.

Call a white person a "honky" or a "cracker" and they're more likely to be amused than outraged. Same thing happens if you post a thread saying "kill the whitey". The sentiment is probably just as bad but the outrage is less (and probably justifiably less since white people DON'T have a history of being persecuted by other races).

So yes, hating white people is probably as bad as hating black people, but because there is less public outrage, and because there is less credible threat of it resorting in violence, very few people are going to act as strongly against it.

Comment Re:Russians didn't cause Hillary! to lose (Score 1) 285

True. Very few people bother to come out to vote against someone. They come out to vote for someone. The only arguments I could ever get from Hillary supporters was "she's not Trump" and "experience."

I have always voted third party for President. I didn't like any of the third party candidates this time. Better than Trump and Hillary, but I still didn't like them. I was rather ambivalent about our local elections, none of them bothered me enough to want to vote (kinda pointless here anyway, the same party wins everything).

If I had to pick my favourite candidate it would probably have been Evan McMullin, he was the only guy who I saw as not dangerous for the job. Seemed to not be an ideologue, but based his ideas on common sense. I think he would have been the best candidate that would have made the most people happy. Still, he didn't get me out to vote...

What made me vote? Trump, not for but against! I consider him a potential threat to democracy itself, I wouldn't be surprised if elections were "put on hold for our safety" in 4 years time. I considered voting for his main rival, Hillary, therefore, a civic duty. I really don't like Hillary. Bill was probably the best president America has had in recent years, but I don't like Hillary one bit. I probably would have voted almost anyone else other than Hillary given another option, I consider Trump that bad.

So yes, in my case (and I'd be surprised if not many more cases) I voted to vote against someone (Trump) not for someone. I don't think it's as unusual as you think, lots of people show up to vote to vote against someone not for someone. You are correct about the only reason I voted for Hillary was she is not Trump though.

Comment Re:Surprising? Not so much. - they're stupid (Score 1) 130

Exactly. Is there extra funding for ISPs to add extra security for politician's data? If not, then it might not be easy to get with a search warrant, but you can bet that some of it will be leaked. Do MPs have some special sign-on for all Internet access? If not, then you can bet that some hotspot or mobile provider won't know that they're MPs and so will hand over the data when someone goes fishing for data on a particular IP address. Do MPs have their own Internet accounts that they don't share with their family? If not, then you can bet that someone will request the data on their husbands or wives and get the results indirectly.

Slashdot Top Deals

UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, because that would also stop you from doing clever things. -- Doug Gwyn