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

 



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

Comment Scripts (Score 1) 126

I run incognito on occasion, but as a rule i'm on Firefox+NoScript+ABP and not actually in 'Private' browsing mode.

I suspect this leaves me much more trackable, but if i am browsing untrusted sites (read:ANY sites), i am way more worried about remote 0day compromise of the week than i am tracking.

Still, if i could auto-incognito and whitelist from that mode or cognito-reload at will (without enabling anything else) I would likely add that to my mix. But again, i run scripts disabled all the time so i'm willing to be a bit more involved in my browsing than most.

Comment Re:Consumers should be informed. Period. (Score 1) 470

I had a child with a corn allergy (thank God she grew out of it...) I get the pain of avoiding corn in the modern diet.

The right answer, however, is proper labeling of CORN as it is a common allergen, though not typically causing as violent a reaction as say, peanuts.

As it stands those with this particular allergy are subject to a brutal game of epi-roulette identifying foods with corn in them.

Submission + - Why Did The Stars Wars And Star Trek Worlds Turn Out So Differently?

HughPickens.com writes: In the Star Trek world there is virtual reality, personal replicators, powerful weapons, and, it seems, a very high standard of living for most of humanity while in Star Wars there is widespread slavery, lots of people seem to live at subsistence, and eventually much of the galaxy falls under the Jedi Reign of Terror. Why the difference? Tyler Cowen writes about some of the factors differentiating the world of Star Wars from that of Star Trek: 1) The armed forces in Star Trek seem broadly representative of society. Compare Uhura, Chekhov, and Sulu to the Imperial Storm troopers. 2) Captains Kirk and Picard do not descend into true power madness, unlike various Sith leaders and corrupted Jedi Knights. 3) In Star Trek, any starship can lay waste to a planet, whereas in Star Wars there is a single, centralized Death Star and no way to oppose it, implying stronger checks and balances in the world of Star Trek. 4) Star Trek embraces egalitarianism, namely that all humans consider themselves part of the same broader species. There is no special group comparable to the Jedi or the Sith, with special powers in their blood. 5) Star Trek replicators are sufficiently powerful it seems slavery is highly inefficient in that world.

Submission + - SPAM: NASA's Juno spacecraft approaches Jupiter for a 4th of July arrival

MarkWhittington writes: July 4, if all goes well, will be an occasion for celebration at NASA as the Juno spacecraft, after a nearly five-year voyage, will go into orbit around Jupiter, the largest planet in the solar system. Juno will spend its time in a zone of intense radiation, against which it has been armored, in an effort to ferret out Jupiter’s secrets. By so doing, NASA hopes to gain insights into the origin of the solar system as well as gaining more knowledge of the gas giant, comprised mostly of hydrogen and helium with trace elements of carbon, nitrogen, and sulfur.
Link to Original Source

Comment Re:This is a big bitchslap to Mozilla (Score 5, Interesting) 288

"The only advantage Firefox gives is that one can run NoScript to block all scripting completely."

However, that's a pretty significant advantage.

I would love to see how firefox compares with that one addon in place since that's how I run.

Possibly a 'hardened browsers' version of the competition?

Comment Re:The elephants in the room (Score 1) 244

That's typically the case.

i suppose you could rely on local AV and Outlook's built in filtering for smaller installations. But there are a lot of things you can do on small installations that don't scale to enterprises.

MultipleAV engines and more comprehensive spam and malicious email filtering in line seems to be the best and common practice however.

1) Postini did not go away un-replaced, Google worked to migrate users to their new filtering service. Basically Gmail, but you could have it pass through to your on-premis environment. It was wonky and they didn't get all the features and capabilities in place in time and we went elsewhere.

2) General market shrink is the reason for loss of some email filtering vendors. Filtering has been integrated in services such as Google Apps for Business and O365, and invariably if you go with those services you go with the included filtering. These services have been growing gangbusters and include email hygiene as part of the base service.

if the included service is good enough it is a difficult business case to make to spend on a standalone filtering service.

Submission + - Tech Professionals' Aggravations Rise, But So Do Salaries (dice.com)

Nerval's Lobster writes: Despite some concerns over the stock market and whether the so-called “unicorns” will survive the year, it’s apparently still a good time to get into tech: New data from Robert Half Technology suggests that salaries for various tech positions will increase as much as 7 percent this year. Which is good, because tech professionals have confessed to a host of aggravations with their lives (Dice link), including too-expensive housing, lengthy commutes and gridlock, inability to achieve work-life balance, and a disconnect from their jobs. It’s neither the best nor worst of times, but the money could be pretty good.

Submission + - Study Finds Correlation Between Students' 'Attractiveness' and Higher Grades

An anonymous reader writes: HughPickens.com writes

Scott Jaschik writes at Inside Higher Education that although most faculty members would deny that physical appearance is a legitimate criterion in grading, a study finds that among similarly qualified female students, those who are physically attractive earn better grades than less attractive female students. For male students, there is no significant relationship between attractiveness and grades. The results hold true whether the faculty member is a man or a woman. The researchers obtained student identification photographs for students at at Metropolitan State University of Denver and had the attractiveness rated, on a scale of 1-10, of all the students. Then they examined 168,092 course grades awarded to the students, using factors such as ACT scores to control for student academic ability. For female students, an increase of one standard deviation in attractiveness was associated with a 0.024 increase in grade (on a 4.0 scale).

The results mirror a similar study that found that those who are attractive in high school are more likely to go on to earn a four-year college degree. Study co-author Rey Hernandez-Julian says that he finds the results of the Metro State study “troubling” and says that there are two possible explanations: “Is it that professors invest more time and energy into the better-looking students, helping them learn more and earn the higher grades? Or do professors simply reward the appearance with higher grades given identical performance? The likely answer, given our growing understanding of the prevalence of implicit biases, is that professors make small adjustments on both of these margins."

Slashdot Top Deals

As in certain cults it is possible to kill a process if you know its true name. -- Ken Thompson and Dennis M. Ritchie

Working...