Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



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

Comment This is insanely obvious (Score 1) 311

Manning should get a full pardon and a medal of honour. S/he has done more for this country than Biden ever did, and that was after getting a forcible deployment against regimental doctor's orders.

The worst Manning is truly guilty of is exploiting severe violations of DoD regulations by the unit s/he was in. Those violations, and not her actions,compromised national security, as did Manning's superior officer. Those people were under strict orders on not deploying the severely mentally ill into Iraq and to withdraw clearance from such folk, but violated those orders in order to look pretty. That is a serious crime. A crime they, not Chelsea, are guilty of.

Under DoD regulations, computers holding top secret information may NOT be secured by just a password and may NOT support USB devices. I was working for the military when they did the cutover from passwords to passwords plus Class III digital certificate on a smartcard. The USB restriction has been there more-or-less from the introduction of USB, as it violates Rainbow Book standards requiring enforceable multi-level security.

I should not have to point this out on Slashdot, half the three digit IDers were probably involved in writing the standards! And the rest know all this because we had to look the bloody stuff up to get the NSA's SELinux working!

She was also under orders, remember, to ensure that no war crime was concealed by the military. Concealing a war crime, even if that's your sole involvement, is a firing squad offence under international law. Has been since the Nuremberg Trials. Nor is it acceptable to be ordered to carry out such a cover-up. You are forbidden from obeying such orders on pain of death.

Those are the rules. The U.S. military's sole defence is that nobody is big enough to enforce them. If someone did, the U.S. population would be noticeably smaller afterwards. We know that because of Manning.

But Manning's service doesn't end there. Military philosophers, tacticians and strategists will be poring over those notes for decades, running simulations to see when, where and how the U.S. was eventually defeated in Afghanistan and Iraq. They will compare actions carried out with the military philosophies the U.S. officially abandoned in favour of modern theories. They will search for ways in which the new approaches worked and where they should have stuck with the traditional.

Because modern computers can run millions, even billions, of tactical simulations in just a few hours, it is certain that, inside of a decade, someone will have done this and published a book on where the military went wrong and where the Taliban and Iraqi army went wrong as well. This core material allows for that.

These wars may turn out to be our Sun Tzu Moment, when through cataclysmic defeats at the hands of, essentially, barbarians (and make no mistake, they're defeats), a systematic analysis of all that went wrong will be conducted in order to produce a guide on how to have things guaranteed to go right.

Without Manning's data, this couldn't happen. Direct footage, real-time tactical information, logistics, international political interactions, there's enough there to actually do that.

I'd prefer it to be us, because nothing stops the next terror group to form from performing the same study. Historically, it has been shown that a smart army can defeat a confident opponent with superior technology and ten times the numbers, or with inferior technology and a hundred times the numbers. No reason to assume these are hard limits.

If it is us that figures it out, the Pentagon (still fixated on Admiral Poyndexter and his psychic warriors) won't be involved, it'll be people on the outside with more nous and fewer yes-men. And for that, Manning deserves the highest reward.

Besides, it'll annoy the neoconservatives and that's worth their weight in gold-plated latium.

Comment Re: Bradley Manning needs a HOSTS file (Score 1) 311

Define "male". Not in terms of social norms - those vary between societies. And, since you didn't accept the suggestion of a genetics test, you don't get to use that either. Historical records are of no interest, you weren't there when they were made so you can't vouch for them. Besides, plenty of species have individuals change gender. History proves nothing.

You could try a neurological test, but I'll wager you that it shows Manning to be female. The feelings come from the brain, there's no such thing as a spirit outside of hard liquor.

So what have you got to offer?

Comment Re:Double-dipping Nintendo (Score 1) 157

Wow so now they are fucking them in the ass for PATCHES, patches? Really?

With the Internet full of "Have a killer gaming PC for just $350!" videos there really is no point in putting up with their sheeeit anymore, and its obvious they have zero respect and no fucks to give about their customers. Man what dicks!

Comment Re:Users: Win10 fails at common sw compat (Score 1) 471

Actually they've broken DX12 as well, all the latest benches show that at best you gain 5% while the majority of games LOSE performance on DX12 over using DX11. meanwhile Vulkan has been giving some crazy performance gains, currently between 12% and as high as 30%.

Lets face it since Nutella took over they haven't been worth a piss, he is just going "cloud cloud cloud, data data data" the way the sweaty monkey used to try to ape Apple, but the big difference is while it was easy enough to just rip out the bad Apple rip off bling bling from Windows OSes released under the sweaty one Nuutella has baked in his cloud spying data mining bullshit right into the kernel, making the OS unsuitable for purpose for many of us. Here is hoping nutty Nutella gets the boot faster than the monkey did and that they finally get a CEO that accepts MSFT is a mature company and goes back to releasing OSes people actually want to buy.

Comment Re:Expected /. response (Score 1) 471

Well, I don't think staying on Windows 7 is a losing battle, for reasons I've described in my other comments in this Slashdot discussion. Short version: It works just fine for now and for the near future. I hope Microsoft will change their strategy before the Windows 7 option eventually ceases to be viable, but if they don't, yes, we will look at migrating to some other platform.

Another comment I was writing prompted me to look at how much of the software we use in my small businesses these days is still proprietary native Windows applications, and it's actually a very short list these days. Most of what we run natively on the desktop and literally everything we run on our servers is now freely available and widely portable to different platforms. The rest of what we run is hosted either on those servers or online and accessed via browsers and sometimes also mobile apps. The number of software packages we depend on that are actually Windows-only is trending to zero, and might well reach zero within the useful lifetime of our current Windows 7 systems.

Comment Re:What a bunch of whining ninnies! (Score 1) 471

And that is absolutely no different than with FOSS, where you are subject to the whims of a myriad of corporate dev teams and corporate interests so sit down and STFU. You cannot even be sure there is no malware or backdoors baked in because not once has a modern Linux desktop had a top to bottom security audit (which just FYI would be frankly impossible because before you were even halfway through with the audit the packages you had already audited would be 2 to 3 versions behind and no longer relevant) and it has been shown more than 85% of the source code for the guts of your average Linux desktop have never been checked out by anybody but the ones maintaining it.

I would argue the entire Linux "you have the source code" philosophy is nothing but a giant is ought fallacy in that it assumes because there IS source code available it OUGHT to have been audited by someone who 1.- Has the years of experience in programming to understand what they are looking at and 2.- Has enough deep level knowledge of the Linux internals to understand by looking at that source how it is gonna interact with other packages (so as to tell if it has a hidden payload for another package) and whether those interactions will be safe or insecure....and there is absolutely zero evidence to back this up, in fact recent announcements like 20 year old Bash bugs being exploited give us ample evidence that the opposite is true.

So I'm sorry but it doesn't matter whether your corporate master is MSFT or Red Hat you ARE at the mercy of the whims of a large corporation who doesn't give a flying flipping fuck what you want and unless you have the skills to write your own OS from scratch? Your choice is no different than with Windows, take it or move to a product from another vendor and be subject to their whims instead..

Comment Re:Expected /. response (Score 1) 471

You can run the browser and applications in a sandbox in Windows 7 and not have the baked in malware of Windows 10. I'm sorry but there is nothing you can say that can mitigate the fact that Windows 10 takes control away from the user and is sending encrypted data to a party out of your control.

Now where have I seen that before, software that is out of control of the user, hides itself,sends encrypted or obfuscated data, and constantly changes to keep from being disabled or removed? Oh yeah...MALWARE.

Comment Re:Expected /. response (Score 2) 471

Obvious, but possibly naive. Small businesses in first world economies typically make more money, employ more people, and basically do and contribute more as a group than large businesses. And as the saying goes, every successful large business was once a successful small business. Also, small IT businesses, independent professionals, and "prosumer" geeks are disproportionately influential when it comes to IT decisions. Playing to the huge enterprise customers at the expense of the little guys may be a successful strategy for the short term, but in the longer term, neglecting the little guys will surely come back to haunt them.

Comment Re:People agree that Windows 10 has better tech (Score 1) 471

It's easy to say you have better tech if you ignore the complaints about it.

That's been Microsoft's SOP for a long time. Remember when they said they hadn't broken the networking in Windows 7, even though it suddenly took minutes or hours to copy large numbers of files over in Explorer that would have taken seconds or minutes on XP, or even from the command prompt on the same Windows 7 box?

Comment Re:Upgrade refuseniks are idjits (Score 1) 471

Not necessarily. For example, we're good for another hardware cycle at this point, and our software base is all paid up and permanently licensed to go with those machines, to the extent that we're still running proprietary local applications anyway.

For business planning purposes, we are assuming that by the time we get to our next major upgrade window, either Microsoft will have come to its senses regarding the Pro version of Windows typically used by smaller businesses like ours, or some other platform will be more attractive anyway.

Unless some of our businesses expand significantly more rapidly than anticipated after the possibility of buying new PCs and using downgrade rights has run out but before we migrate to some other platform, we're fine.

Comment Re:More like... (Score 4, Insightful) 471

Quite. I read this:

Microsoft says that continued usage of Windows 7 increases maintenance and operating costs for businesses.

and my immediate thought -- as someone who runs a few small IT businesses and is typing this on a Windows 7 PC -- was... well, it would be impolite to write my actual immediate thought at the time, so let's paraphrase it as "No, it doesn't".

With Windows 10, we offer our customers the highest level of security and functionality at the cutting edge.

The thing about cutting edges is that if you're not careful, you get hurt. And I have little interest in helping Microsoft's security at the expense of my own businesses.

Oh, and just for completeness while we're debunking every single statement in TFS, we bought a final round of PC gear just in time to still get Windows 7 preinstalled, and so far the total number of devices or software products we wanted to use that haven't been compatible with it has been 0, and the number of malware infections we've had to deal with has also been 0. Literally the only thing we've had to do with drivers that was even slightly awkward was slipstreaming USB3 drivers in when installing because PCs tend to have all USB3 ports these days, in contrast to the numerous reports of driver compatibility problems with Windows 10. We're far more concerned about the potential security, reliability and confidentiality risks fundamentally built into Windows 10 than we are about any threats Windows 10 is supposedly better equipped to defend against than Windows 7.

Ironically, the single most annoying and time-consuming thing in setting up those new PCs was applying the latest Windows security patches, because Microsoft have made such a dog's dinner of Windows Update in recent times that you basically have to use one of the alternative channels instead of the built-in one. And they want us to move to a new OS that relies on their update infrastructure and gives even less control over when it runs or what it does? Don't make me laugh.

Slashdot Top Deals

If this is timesharing, give me my share right now.

Working...