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. ×

Comment Re:Resonating with Americans (Score 1) 92

The Rust Belt in particular began its decline decades ago. You might as well blame Carter and Reagan if you're looking for targets. And what exactly would killing NAFTA do, other than hike prices massively, screwing over consumers. If you're going to attack any trade relationship, get general agreement with the NAFTA and EU countries to nail China's balls to the wall for its cheap steal.


WikiLeaks To Its Supporters: 'Stop Taking Down the US Internet, You Proved Your Point' ( 151

MojoKid writes: The Internet took a turn for the worst this morning, when large parts of the DNS network were brought down by a massive distributed denial of service attack (DDoS) targeting DNS provider Dyn. If you couldn't access Amazon, Twitter, and a host of other large sites and online services earlier today, this was why. Now, if a couple of additional tweets are to be believed, it appears supporters of WikiLeaks are responsible for this large scale DDoS attack on Dynamic Network Services Inc's Dyn DNS service. WikiLeaks is alleging that a group of its supporters launched today's DDoS attack in retaliation for the Obama administration using its influence to push the Ecuadorian government to limit Assange's internet access. Another earlier tweet reassures supporters that Mr. Assange is still alive, which -- along with a photo of heavily armed police posted this morning -- implies that he may have been (or may still be) in danger, and directly asks said supporters to stop the attack. WikiLeaks published this tweet a little after 5PM: "Mr. Assange is still alive and WikiLeaks is still publishing. We ask supporters to stop taking down the US internet. You proved your point." It was followed by: "The Obama administration should not have attempted to misuse its instruments of state to stop criticism of its ruling party candidate."

Comment Re:First lesson (Score 3, Interesting) 105

NAT may do a good job obscuring internal topology, but it does saw at considerable cost; breaking the end to end concept of the original ARPANET structure, requiring more resources, and creating far greater complexity for routers. Yes, a flat address space that sits in the public address space might, on the surface, expose more devices, but this is where firewalls come into play. I can still have a rather complex topology, but now I have to worry less about routing and connection tables, and can use less resource expensive techniques like tagging.

It was never IPv6's intention to be more secure, and you're right that many existing issues will remain with IPv6, and there will likely be new ones, but one thing is certain, if the solution is NAT, then that solution is worse than the disease it purports to cure. And it isn't as if NAT can't be vulnerable in its own way, and the only way to make it less vulnerable is, you guessed it, firewalls, authentication, and other security measures which are also needed in an IPv6 world.

Comment Re: Mars is difficult (Score 1) 96

He claimed "mission to Mars", not just a lander. Excluding flybys, the first US mission to Mars was Mariner 8, which had a failure of the launch vehicle and crashed into the Atlantic (you can decide for yourself whether failure to leave the Earth constitutes a failed mission to Mars or not). Mariner 9 was the second attempt at an orbiter, which succeeded, and was the first spacecraft to orbit another planet. Mariner 9 beat the Soviet craft Mars 2 to orbit by 13 days, and Mars 3 arrived less than a week after Mars 2. Both Mars 2 and Mars 3 had landers, the one for Mars 2 crashed but was the first spacecraft to reach the surface of another planet, and the Mars 3 lander operated for 110 seconds on the surface. Several years later Viking 1 returned the first images from the surface.

India's first (and only) mission was a success, and you could also consider the first EU mission a success, even though the Beagle 2 lander failed.

Comment Re:Incredible opportunity (Score 1) 96

Opportunity has moved a total of about 27 miles in its entire 10 plus year mission.

That's because the goal has been to look at everything it can, not move to a particular place far away.

But chances are the crash site is considerably further than 50 miles and the rovers wheels/motors/solar panels/batteries would never survive the trip.

Yeah, the odds of failure have really beat up on Opportunity, haven't they? How about a 6-month trip that is more leisurely and would still provide time to look around a little on the way?

Comment Re:There is still a way to get science out of this (Score 2) 96

They aren't even that far from each other, relatively. They tried to put Opportunity onto a position to image the descent and landing, although apparently it didn't actually see it. Still, the place where it crashed is not that far from Opportunity, although the little guy can't move very quickly. It might take years before it shows up to get some pictures. I think they should re-designate their mission targets.

Comment Re: 'Genuine' is how luxury brands protect themsel (Score 2) 170

Having worked with a chinese company that did this sort of thing before, the 'easiest' way to do it is just use the same assembly line, machinery, and workers to roll off a duplicate version with the exact same materials from the exact same material providers.

That's not always the way, but it is the easiest.

Comment 'Genuine' is how luxury brands protect themselves (Score 1) 170

I have very little insight into the world of fashion, but I do know that since there are no laws against creating the exact same dress, shirt, purse, or whatever, luxury brands tend to plaster their name or logo all over their products. You can't copy the name because that's trademarked.

As a result, you have folks seeing the popularity of an item making knockoffs. These vary in quality, of course, but in some cases, they're made from the exact same materials, in the exact same plant that the originals are made. The only difference is they have to print a different brand name on them or risk criminal activities, so a Coach bag becomes a "Loach" bag, with the mark spelled out in the same font with an extra curvy 'L'. Sure, technological devices are usually protected by more than trademark - patents and such which are often ignored by certain eastern markets - but since a piece of paper half a world a way isn't an actual barrier to producing a physical product, so it often comes down to the same thing.

The funny thing here is that even with off brands that may exceed the quality of the item, the original brand is still much more highly prized. Why? Because of marketing generating a social expectation that a 'genuine' object affords prestige. It could just be that it's expensive, or that it's advertisements paradoxically indicate that you must both be beautiful enough to wear it and simultaneously that you must wear it to be beautiful (like Abercrombie & Fitch, for example). It says, "Even if it's not as high quality, I both went through the trouble to find it AND paid more, and I passed through the filter that says I'm worth owning this, and that says something positive about me as a person!"

Sound like any company you know? Starts with an A, ends with A -pple, nothing in the middle?

This is just Apple selling it's product not as a piece of technology, but as a lifestyle accessory, as they've done ever since they realized that was the way to success. The claims of technological merit are just fluff, but necessary fluff to keep up their brand pretension and justify their walled garden environments.

Comment Re:Great! (Score 1) 249

Paying money to paypal for the privilege of paying. Paypal fees are f**ing ridiculous

Ha, you should check out the bank fees.

Bank fees are quite reasonable and easily avoided.

I can only assume that you meant to say credit card fees. They're the killer for a business. Seriously, go and look at how many parties take fees out of a credit card transaction.

Besides this, PayPal's fees stack with bank fees and credit card fees.

When you introduce more parties into the mix, each of them has their hand out for a piece of the pie and no-one is willing to give up the tiniest fraction of their slice for the new guy.

Comment Re: Great! (Score 1) 249

This is the nihilism that online anonymity and toxic 4chan culture has engendered. They're terrorists who are simply too lazy to leave their moms' basements.

Calling them "Terrorists" is giving them way too much credit. Terrorists typically believe strongly in something. These people are just losers who have too much time and a far to comfortable life*. They're just losers and idiots with an internet connection. They're not even proper nihilists, they're not contemplating the futility of their own existence... in fact they think the end of the world is running out of pop tarts.

* Please note, I don't think our society needs to be harder/more authoritarian... in fact I believe it needs to be less authoritarian... but we need to be able to call proper idiots, idiots whilst collectively ignoring the shrill cries of "SJW" and "PeeCee gone Mad" or whatever thought terminating cliche they like to defend their stupidity with. Every now and then, even I have to agree there is an arse missing a boot though.

Slashdot Top Deals

Brain off-line, please wait.