Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
Get HideMyAss! VPN, PC Mag's Top 10 VPNs of 2016 for 55% off for a Limited Time ×

Comment Re:Why not? (Score 1) 787

Translation: I'm ignoring the idiocy of Trump's statement, and inventing a rationale that allows me to not feel like a contemptible moron for supporting the man.

Well, you're ignoring the obvious joke in Trump's statement and inventing a rationale that allows you to continue to hate him. I mean, if it's the "damn ruskies" who hacked the DNC to help support Trump as the Democrat theory goes, then why wouldn't they support him by divulging Hillary's illegal emails? It's poking a very big hole in the "Russian" conspiracy, reminding people as well of Hillary's "vast right wing conspiracy" theory.

I think the dead giveaway is the bit about being "rewarded mightily by our press". If you can't see the sarcasm in that statement you are, as gurps puts it, a fool. The US press doesn't give a damn about Hillary and her issues with handling secret documents. After all, the FBI guy said she was innocent, right? (Reminder: no, he didn't, but that's how the press spun it.)

You sound like the kind of guy who would jump up and down shouting how much a liar Trump is if he answered "banana" when you asked him "who's there" as part of a knock-knock joke. He's not a banana, he must be INSANE! It's TREAASON to say you're a banana! It's racist towards true banana republics!

Comment Re: Never happen (Score 1) 44

satellites were considered economically impossible for quite a while.

Satellites were economically impossible for quite a while. When "satellite" consisted of Echostar, it was impossible for there to be enough ground stations to deliver a service like Dishnet.

It got better.

That doesn't mean that the economics or physical constraints on using drones to deliver stuff are going to "get better" to the point that it makes sense to use such a system. There are things where technology can be perfect and it still doesn't make sense to deploy. Like high speed raid outside a high population density area.

Comment Re:Drone deliveries already happening in US (Score 1) 44

And, of course, Part 107 doesn't say that "delivery by drone" is years away. Recent rules from the FAA mean that the requirements for certain commercial uses have been relaxed. It doesn't mean that all other commercial uses are "years away". Part 107 did not eliminate 333 waivers or COA, just make them unnecessary for some uses.

Hyperbole in TFS is getting tiring. As is the consistent failure to link to the actual source instead of some muckraking story about the source. For example, "Recent rules" links not to the actual Part 107 rules, but to a slashdot story where the headline itself is patently false.

Comment Re:Wrong solution (Score 2) 167

that's why you evac. and who cares about trophy mansions in the forest?

And when there's a fire in a city, just evac and let it burn. Who cares about trophy mansions in a city?

How about "the people who live in them, and have paid their money to build them?" When did a house in a wooded area become a "trophy mansion"? A lot of the houses out in the woods are lived in by people who don't have a lot of money and have moved away from the cities because they prefer a different lifestyle. They're hardly "mansions". Sometimes they're barely livable by most people's standards. Sometimes it's an old mobile home. Sometimes it's not even that.

But it is someone's home. And their children live there. What arrogance to ask "who cares".

Comment Re:You've got to appreciate the irony... (Score 1) 80

If they deleted it from their drafts folder, I would expect it to be clobbered from the backup system after the expired time

What is the "expired time"? Is there an RFC that defines this term?

simply because it is only in backed up files of the entire email database.

Drafts are not email, and are not necessarily in the "email database". I've written plenty of drafts that really are "just files", imported to the email client later. is in a separate database just for drafts (or all non-sent, non-received data)?

You mean, like, "files"? I think people want their files backed up. Yes, I'm pretty sure that most people would be unhappy were the server to crash and their files are all lost.

Comment Re:Just because you have access (Score 1) 94

So it must be verified at the server end too, anyhow.

Most people are not going to know how to modify the javascript, and it isn't trivial anyway. The code isn't verifying the address, it is validating the syntax. You can't verify an address without actually trying to send to it.

It's not for the sender to decide what's valid.

If you can properly manage RFC5322, there is no reason not to flag invalid syntax as soon as possible. The failure is people who ignore the standards, or are working in a job where knowledge of the standards is critical and they just don't care.

Comment Re:Just because you have access (Score 2) 94

In those cases, I have always wondered why the devs try to do this in the first place. In almost all cases, you can ask the e-mail server whether it's a valid address.

The web page designers are pushing the test onto the client so 1) there is immediate response as the user types it in and he can fix it if it truly is a mistake before moving on, and 2) it puts the computation onto the client and doesn't waste a PUT and their server's time with what may be invalid data.

I've looked at the javascript source for this on several pages. It's all the same. And I've given the correct code to at least one site, telling them "add the following lines". It's a virus coming from somewhere that they are copying and assuming it must be right and their customer (who has done this kind of thing for more than two decades) must be wrong.

It can't be pushed onto a mail server, because the javascript has no standard way of asking one. There is no way to even guarantee that the client system is running a mail server to ask.

It's not doing the routing or delivery and has no business telling anyone what's valid e-mail or not.

I have had lengthy email exchanges with the support people at such websites, and it is always fun for them to tell me that "+" is not a valid character in an email address when they are happily conversing with someone who has a "+" in his email address. Obviously it is valid; obviously they are idiots.

Comment Re:Just because you have access (Score 2) 94

It's generally done by some dead-end user that CC's instead of BCC's

You should be aware that BCC is not a guarantee that others will not see addresses. RFC5322 says: " The "Bcc:" field (where the "Bcc" means "Blind Carbon Copy") contains addresses of recipients of the message whose addresses are not to be revealed to other recipients of the message." This SOUNDS like it should be safe to use for sending messages to a lot of people without anyone knowing who else got it, but it isn't. RFC5322 talks about three common ways that mail systems deal with BCC, and says:

In the second case, recipients specified in the "To:" and "Cc:" lines each are sent a copy of the message with the "Bcc:" line removed as above, but the recipients on the "Bcc:" line get a separate copy of the message containing a "Bcc:" line. (When there are multiple recipient addresses in the "Bcc:" field, some implementations actually send a separate copy of the message to each recipient with a "Bcc:" containing only the address of that particular recipient.)

The last sentence implies that some mail systems contain the full BCC line in copies sent to those BCC addresses. (Only "some" create individual BCC lines.) It does not use the mandates of "MUST" or "MUST NOT", so conforming implementations can actually show you, as a BCC recipient, the entire list of other BCC recipients. And I've seen that behaviour.

This is one of those areas where people assume the standards say one thing but actually don't. Like idiot web page designers who think they know the list of acceptable characters in an email address and yet they prohibit "+".

Comment Re:You've got to appreciate the irony... (Score 4, Insightful) 80

I'd say a draft is an email that just hasn't been sent yet.

Drafts do not need to meet any of the standards for Internet messaging, and therefore are not "email". They might contain enough header information to meet the standard, but they don't have to, and many of the drafts I've written certainly do not.

would you argue that what I wrote isn't actually a letter because it's still sitting on my desk?

Would you argue that the federal laws regarding US Mail attach to a piece of paper that you are thinking about maybe someday sending through the US Mail system? I.e., yes, I would say that your piece of paper is not yet mail because it has no stamp, has no address, and hasn't been deposited into a mailbox for sending.

Every sent and received email is also "just a file,"

No, it may be saved in a file, but it is also email. "Just" is an important word here. It conveys the concept of "only". How they are stored is irrelevant when determining "email" status. Your system may save all email as files, but that does not make all files email.

Comment Re:data mining miners mine my mined data (Score 2) 80

If you give your email to a data broker company such as Yahoo, Google, Microsoft, LinkedIn, or whoever... then they have it.

Or even your local Mom and Pop ISP. My ISP decided to outsource email to Google. The day they did that, email I had deleted THREE YEARS PRIOR showed up again.

There is simply no more excuse for not having even the most basic comprehension of how it works.

Of course there is. Because of Eternal September there is a huge number of people who are using at tool without the need or desire to know how it works under the hood. And that analogy is deliberate, both because of the slashdot car meme and the fact that the vast majority of people who use automobiles have no clue how they work under the hood.

Comment Re:You've got to appreciate the irony... (Score 1) 80

Yahoo says this is impossible, then Yahoo does what they claimed was impossible.

It wasn't an email, it was a draft of what could have become an email. As such, it was just a file.

One word: backup. I have tapes on the shelf of files from a decade or more ago. Long deleted from the computer. Still recoverable.

Especially if I was innocent and Yahoo faked emails

It wasn't an email. And there appears (at least in TFS) to be any claim it was faked. In fact, "the means by which Yahoo recovered the emails in question" wouldn't be "recovered email" if they simply faked a file.

Once you hand your files, any files, over to a second party, you have to know that you have lost control of them. And if you expect them to be able to recover your files from a hardware or software failure, then you KNOW they have copies of them in safe places that you don't have direct access to.

Comment Re:Caller id spoofing already broke that. (Score 1) 120

I'm in an Indian call center returning your call to my employer who has a US-based customer support number.

Too many idiots ignore the explicit telephone number they are told to call and simply use the caller ID as the callback. Do you think corporations who are trying to honestly provide good customer service should be forced to provide an international callback number? Will it be better for those who are trying to resolve a product issue to wind up calling an expensive international number if the call from customer support drops for some reason and they "call back"?

Comment Re:Caller id spoofing already broke that. (Score 1) 120

How about some variation on holding the telephone company responsible for the falsified CallerID information?

I, for one, welcome US regulation of my telephone company. Will you be sending in the SEALS, or just a predator with a warhead, to enforce your rules?

Signed, N'gtanga Achmed G'wan N'try, CEO, Big Angolan Telephone Exchange And Coffe Shop, LTD.

Comment Re:While you're at it... (Score 2) 120

Remove the 31-day wait when a number is added (Seriously, WTF? I'm not buying a gun here. I don't need a cooling-off period.)

The 30 day wait is not for you. It's to keep the system from being overly onerous for legitimate users. You can't make the addition effective immediately because that forces the people you WANT to use the list to look at it every five minutes or so. There has to be some time delay between being added to the list the government manages and it being used by the callers to filter their lists. You can argue that 31 days is too long and that ten days is better, but you can't call for the removal of any wait.

And crank up the penalties for violations such that it will hurt even a SuperPAC... maybe add in some criminal penalties too.

Robocallers are ignoring laws against credit card fraud, unauthorized computer access ("your computer has a virus, type the following command..."), and other federal crimes. They're already ignoring laws regarding the DNC list. What new law would they suddenly decide to honor when their entire operation is a violation of many other laws already?

Slashdot Top Deals

Retirement means that when someone says "Have a nice day", you actually have a shot at it.