Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


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

Comment Re:Small dick russians (Score 3, Funny) 249

On the topic of Russians, I'm going to assume that this is Putin trying to help his employee Trump win. If Trump can't tweet, he can't keep reminding voters of all the reasons they want to vote against him. And the only way to keep Trump from tweeting is to take out Twitter.

It's mainly affecting the east coast, sure, but also Ohio which Trump needs to win.

Seems like a much more straightforward than using trolling to help him win.

Comment Re:Account Recovery (Score 2) 104

Google no longer supports non-security questions for account recovery.

FTFY. Security questions are a joke. The answers are almost always easy for an attacker with a little bit of information about you to find, and a lot of the time the legitimate user can't remember them. Moreover, those two traits are strongly correlated: the harder it is for an attacker to find the answers, the more likely it is that the user won't be able to find them either.

Everyone should stop using them.

Comment Re:Reason (Score 1) 104

Google doesn't actually want your phone number for security. Google wants your phone number so that they can link the account in their database to other information that contains your phone number.

The number is to make account recovery possible in the event you've forgotten your password. The assumption is that attackers won't have access to your phone. That assumption is violated if your telco will transfer your number to the attacker's phone, of course.

If you prefer not to give your phone number to Google, don't. Just turn on two-factor auth using a non phone number-based auth method, either the Authenticator app or (better yet) a security key, or both. Then download and print out some backup 2FA codes and keep them somewhere safe. Google won't have your phone number and you won't be vulnerable to mistakes by dumb telco customer service reps.

Comment Re:Is that all (Score 1) 499

It's inevitable that a certain fraction of people go off the deep edge. People are irrational, even (or perhaps mostly) people who are convinced they are entirely rational. Rationality is a fragile thing because emotion and confirmation bias are deeply woven into everyone's thinking.

For normal people are few more powerful emotional impulses than the urge to protect children. It should hardly be surprising that children come to harm from it.

Submission + - ICANN recommends TLDs like .txt -- and .exe ( 1

fyngyrz writes: ICANN says, in part:

Given preliminary feedback that there is not a technical need to prevent file extensions as TLDs, as well as the lack of an authoritative source of common file extensions to draw from, staff determined that it is not workable to prevent common file extensions from being used as TLDs.

To summarize, it is the recommendation of the ICANN technical staff to allow applications for TLD strings that may also be commonly used for file extensions.

But will ICANN approve such applications? If so, we can all look forward to opportunities to click on...


Submission + - Wired says Google's Pixel is the best phone on the market

swillden writes: The reviews on Google's Pixel phones are coming in, and they're overwhelmingly positive. Most call them the best Android phones available, and at least one says they're the best phones available, period.

Wired's reviewer says he used to recommend the iPhone to people, but now he says "You should get a Pixel." The Verge, says "these are easily the best Android phones you can buy." The Wall Street Journal calls the Pixel "the Android iPhone you've been waiting for." ComputerWorld says "It's Android at its best."

AndroidPolice is more restrained, calling it "A very good phone by Google." The NY Times broke from the rest, saying "the Pixel is, relatively speaking, mediocre", but I'm a little skeptical of a reviewer who can't figure out how to use a rear-mounted fingerprint scanner without using both hands. It makes me wonder if he's actually held one.

Comment Re:DCMA Fair Use / Parody (Score 1) 214

Ah, but is it a parody of the copyrighted elements? That's the tack I'd take if I were Samsung's lawyer: this is not parodying Samsung's IP, it is quoting Samsung's IP in a literal, non-transformative way that is not actually parody.

Of course in my heart I'd hope to lose, but that argument is no more ridiculous than many others that have become established case law. Issues like privacy and IP are where fundamental values we have as a society cut against each other and generate innumerable weird corner cases.

Comment Re:So it appears . . . (Score 1) 177

It's not just how hard you check, but how incisively. It's easy to satisfy yourself that software's anticipated failure modes won't happen. What's tough is discovering ways of screwing up that have never happened before.

That's why there's no substitute for experience. This gets back to the very roots of rocket science: the path to success passes through many, many failures.

Comment Re:Your car is not your car (Score 1) 300

...and the "cloud" -- if it's in the "cloud", someone else owns it. Even when they tell you you own it.

It's not on your hardware, it's not on your software, it's not in your storage, it's not on your premises, and you have zero control over any of the actual foregoing locations / instances.

But hey, everyone, keep that cloud-ward stampede going. They love ya for it.

Comment Tesla has control (Score 1) 300

All they could do to stop you from doing is voiding your warranty.

Perhaps not. As I understand it, the car is connected in order to facilitate software upgrade / maintainance. So they could tell the car it couldn't drive the next time you parked it for ten minutes, for instance.

I imagine that would land them in court -- but technically speaking, they could do it.

Slashdot Top Deals

All constants are variables.