Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Trust the World's Fastest VPN with Your Internet Security & Freedom - A Lifetime Subscription of PureVPN at 88% off. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. ×

Comment TOR: not only for illegal stuff. (Score 1) 60

It's like holding up a sign that says "Totally nothing illegal here investigate the hell out of me!"

The Pirate Bay it self doesn't hold any copyrighted item. It just lists torrent hashes, and comments and metadata about the content associated with those hashes
(again, the content isn't hosted there. Only the comments and the hashes).
In several jurisdiction, that's not even considered illegal.

You're not using Tor to access illegal material (say non consensual porn, like child porn ; or to access a platform to buy banned goods like weapons and drugs)
You're using tor to get around a blockade.

That's completely fine and that's what Tor was designed for (getting around blockade, as much anonymously as possible. E.g.: to circumvent censorship like China's great firewall).

The more people use tor for anything, the better the chance that tor will be considered normal traffic on the internet, instead of the tell-tale sign of a criminal sharing child abuse.

Comment FM Radio in Europe (Score 4, Informative) 205

Honestly, I don't even use the radio in my car anymore. It's been ten years or more since I listened to the radio.

On the other side of the atlantic pond, radio in cars tends to be used a lot, specially for traffic information.
Last time I listened to the car's radio has been lat time I drove it :
the car automatically suspended the music we were listening to announce some traffic jams and incident on the highway.
Most GPS (specially the in-car built-ins) are also able to leverage the digital information (TMC signal on the RDS on FM radios) to also display and take into account such traffic information.

So radio on portable devices can be useful for such traffic informations.

The only thing is, as far as I know, most smartphone with disabled radio chips only have *FM*-Radio (i.e.: plain old analog. Sometimes not even with support for digital metadata over RDS).
Whereas lots of European regions are moving to DAB/DAB+ Radio (digital radio, transmitted as MP2 or AAC digital stream respectively), which is not directly supported on purely FM chips, and would be quite taxing on the battery life if attempting to decode on CPU in software (SDR - software defined radio).

Comment Tons of them got it right. (Score 1) 113

My android phone has two "soft" buttons next to a physical home button, and I hate those little fuckers.

Other device did it better :

- more recent android device have no physical button or touch zone, just a bigger screen. It's either 3 clickable button displayed at the bottom of the screen.
Or full screen, with the button appearing if you touch the screen (used for gaming and movie watching). They are handled by the same code that handles most UI button on the OS, so a little bit better handled than the "a fly could click on it" older softbutton you mention.

- before that, Palm/HP WebOS used to produced devices that started using gestures on the touch area under the screen.
Harder to confuse a touch with a gesture, than a touch with a click.

- Sailfish OS (Meego/Maemo/Mer descendant, cousin of Tizen, full blown GNU/Linux under the hood) has completely abandoned system button. Applications always display full screen, and users use some type of swipes (starting for the screen's edge) to do commands that would require buttons on other phones.
(Except when running android apps in the emulator that still require button. For those it goes to the software displayed soft button like android)

My preference goes for the later 2 (webOS and Sailfish)

Comment Autopilot != Self-driving (Score 2) 225

Note that, neither Tesla's Autopilot, nor the countless other camera/lidar based solution sold by countless other manufacturer nowadays are self-driving.

At best, they are exactly what is called an Autopilot for planes and ships : some travelling is automated up to some level by the onboard electronic, but the vessel still must remain under the supervision of the plane's/ship's captain. (i.e.: the captain can't go take a nap. only the electronics is relieveing them from needing to mind the minute detail of piloting).
Hence the logical name "autopilot" used by Tesla marketing. Though stupid people are stupid and somewhat mis-interpret what "autopilot" means.

At worst, they are simply collision avoidance technologies (the driver is in full charge of steering the vehicle, but the car is able to sound an alert and to an emergency braking to avoid a crash).

Self-driving is *still* limited to small scale experiments (google cars and similar technologies tested by startups)

Comment Already working. (Score 1) 225

Will it work? No idea, but at least he's trying.

With Musk the right question is never 'will it work?" but 'will it make any sense factoring in the costs?'

Well, at least it did made sense for several European cities that decided to have their highway bypass *underground*.

And that not counting the huge number of cities that have their public transportation underground.

So yeah, definitely worth a try.

Now will Elon manage to bring something new to the table (e.g.: similar to how SpaceX brought back the idea of reusable space vessels) ?

Or at least open a new market for some current technology?
(e.g.: similar to how Tesla manage to introduce the north-american market - much more range-anxious than the densely populated areas (eu/japan) where electric cars where previously being deployed) (though elon Top-down instead of bottom-up approach was innovative : he went with big ranges from the beginning, while progressively building progressively cheaper (more affordable) normal-range cars (roadster -> Model S/X -> Model 3) whereas European constructor usually went for a range of normal vehicle (e.g.: the whole Zero-emission platform of Renault) with prograssively bigger batteries and better ranges (all companies ended-up meeting half-way at same price and mileage category than Model 3)

Or will it be a giant "meh?"

who knows ? nobody until he tries.

Comment Wrong analogy (Score 2) 103

java applet sandboxing is (in theory) granted by the virtual environment provided by the JVM.
In theory, all the applet could be running in the same process.

chromium's sandboxing is hardware segragation provided by the CPU hardware itself (memory protection, and similar bread and butter of multi-processoring)
from the CPU 's perpesctive, each tab sandbox is an entirely different process.

and if you check the links of patent mentioned here around on this /. thread, this is exactly what is covered : using hardware multi-processing to isolate tasks.
so the prior art isn't Java in 1995, but much older big iron mainframes of past era.

BUT, I suppose that, because the patent says "...but on a home computer/workstation" (in claim 1) suddenly all the prior art on mainframes and minicomps doesn't count.
(Kind of like all the "...but on the internet !" business patents).

Case in point that the whole idea of software patent is completely b0rked.
(Happy to live in a european country !)

Comment [On a computer]-style patent (Score 1) 103

The fundamentals behind sandboxing and hardware virtualisation date back from the time of big iron mainframes.

The only novel thing is that this is applied to a personal computer/workstation (to a newer type of hardware that didn't exist back then, but is basically just smaller).

Comment Patreon for porn (Score 1) 255

I pay $5,000 for a shoot and 24 hours after I put it on the site some asshole puts it on the tubes

Definite proof that what they need, is some sort of patronage/crowd-sourcing.
Get 200 guys pay an average of 25$, the highest bidders get to make request (so they can fullfill whatevet they want they could not easily find elsewhere) - biggest bidders get to take a small part in production (either technical, like holding light. Or a small cameo in a scene. Whatever floats their boat)
Then it doesn't matter if the film is on porn hub the next day, he already got his 5000$ back before he even started.

Kind of how the request for weird fetishes on the image board work.
(Or some niche-fetish porn site offer paid requests)

If he cannot get 5'000$ in *advance* then there's slim chance that he'll ever be able to them after-ward.
If nobody is interested enough to pay to have him film it, he should instead try to think of something original enough to attract attention (and money).
Or switch job.

Comment Experimental setup (Score 1) 82

In an over simplified-way that might make physicist angry... ("I am a doctor, Jim ! Not a quantum physicist !")

Design a machine that fires approximately 1 photon per second.
Measure and confirm rate of photo firing.
Then put double slit in front.
Expose picture.
As during any given second, there's (an avarage) maximum of only photon,
then (in average situation) this single photon should not have any other to interact with.
Classic physics should predict only a (predominant) picture of the slit with (nearly no) pattern at all (except for the few outlier situation where 2 photons ended up in flight due to imprecision, but then their pattern should be much fainter).
Quantum physics should predict that even if (most of the time) only one photo is in flight, you still see a diffraction pattern predominantly. (and not only faintly for the couple of mis-firing)

In short : do the measurement AND the experiment at 2 different times, otherwise the measurement will destroy the photo.

Now again, this is NOT my area of expertise, so I probably made have of the physicists on /. cringe (and the other half laugh uncontrollably).

Comment Validity of data (Score 1) 110

There is also a difference in the way you interpret the data.

Redlight and speedcams work very precisely because each vehicle has a license plate, matching an entry into a vehicle database.
Either you have a matching number, that should match an exact vehicle (or a counterfeit license plate), or you don't.
Identity is binary.
Also the devices are usually calibrated to guarantee precise results regarding measurement.
in other words, you can at least reliable trust the information (platenumber ; speed) coming out of photo by a speed-cam
(then, whether the license plate matches the actual car or was tampered with, and whether the car's registered owner was driving or some 3rd party, is an entirely different question)

Image analysis only give you a likelihood of resemblance.
Footage of person may or might not look like the suspect.
It has the same kind of imprecision as any visual witness. Some are better than other at identifying suspect, but nobody is perfect.
The only certitude you have is that the person doing crime on the video tape looks more or less like a given suspect.
The suspect *might be* the perpetrator.
But the suspect *might also be* a random look-alike that looked close enough to the person on the tape to fool the algorithm by chance.
That's valid both for visual clues (and that even if technologies becomes better at distinguishing people's image than regular witnesses) and for DNA clues (given a big enough pool of DNA samples, any methodology - short of full genome sequencing and that doesn't take into account twins - will eventually start to show random matches)
So information from cam can only be used as clues ("a person with a description matching the suspect has been recorded on tape to perpetrate a crime") and compared with other information (alibi: the suspect was at a party at that time and everyone else there saw him. The tape recorded a look-alike).

TL;DR: Technology is never going to replace good old detective work, only give extra information and tools.

That's unless government makes it mandatory to shave everyone's head and tatoo a QR-Code with the SSN.

Slashdot Top Deals

"What I've done, of course, is total garbage." -- R. Willard, Pure Math 430a

Working...