Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


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

Comment Re:Snowden also did something illegal (Score 1) 320

What exactly constitutes incitement to violence is a matter of great (legal) debate.

I'm talking about ordinary usage of words, not what rises to a crime under legal code.

It would be silly for us to get into that debate and I will not entertain it any further

Good, because I'm not interested in it either, and you're the one who brought in the legal angle late in the game, not me.

even more so because you are ignoring and deflecting from my main points. Either respond to those or fuck off.

It's your fault for trying to use overly broad terminology as an excuse for what occurred.

That does not mean that Foval's group [actively incited violence | pick whatever term you like that describes what you know I mean]

I already did choose unambiguous and correct terms. Why do you feel the need to revert back to terms that are at best misleading, and at worst deceitful? The phrase I used is accurate, and I agree that they did not do this: "directly advocating others to commit violence".

Don't get me wrong: It's certainly a nasty tactic to deliberately try to influence the image of the Trump campaign by throwing a bunch of red meat in between his dogs and watch them tear it up

Yes, it is a nasty tactic to deliberately incite violence. I'm glad you can acknowledge that.

A sizable portion of Trump-supporters are still mean-spirited violent assholes.

I asked you what sizable was. Because if it's so significant and deserves all this attention, why is most of the violence and interruption of rallies coming from the other side with very little attention in comparison? Where are the mass demonstrations interrupting Clinton's rallies? Where's the violence against her rallies? Funny how that works out.

You don't get to pretend they are not and you don't get to claim that "we now know the violent rallies to be staged".

All I know about a handful of cases, and while the violent acts themselves weren't staged, the incitement to violence was.

By the way, I'm not the original poster who made the "staged" comment you responded to. Like you, I responded to one particular statement that was an overreach in your comment. If it's ok for you to do that, it's ok for me.

Comment Re:how about 4A (Score 2) 365

force them to arrest you

So, effectively ruin your life? By doing that, you not only get into databases that you might have had some chance avoiding otherwise, you also fuck over your chances of ever having a decent job again (unless you happen to be in a career such as activist or journalist where getting arrested is respected instead of condemned). HR departments are too stupid and lazy to know or care about the difference between getting arrested because you're a criminal and getting arrested because the police are criminals.

In the totalitarian police state of America, it's injustices all the way down.

Comment Re:gloves? (Score 1) 375

Pretty much this. Aren't these the FIRST areas where I'd WANT a personalized gun? Rifles that cannot be looted by the enemy and be used against you? Undeniable proof who used the pistol to fire the shot in a shootout in a seedy neighborhood?

That is where anyone who puts his money where his mouth is would WANT such personalized and traceable guns.

Comment Re:Snowden also did something illegal (Score 1, Troll) 320

lets not get into a fruitless semantic discussion

I'm not giving you a free pass to use words in contradiction with their actual meaning.

Driving around a bad black neighborhood in a car with KKK-markings and slogans printed on it.

And how do you think the media would have reacted if the Trump campaign did something like this to elicit a violent response?

only one of them is actively inciting violence

And this is where I insist you use correct terminology. What you are trying to say is only one of them is directly advocating others to commit violence, but you're using much looser language that actually describes what happened and then saying it didn't happen. Words have meaning, use them correctly.

you agree that a sizable portion of Trump-supporters are still mean-spirited violent assholes

What is "sizable"? My point, since you're trying to score political points against Trump, is that the anti-Trump violence is worse and gets much less coverage. You haven't disputed that.

Comment Re:Snowden also did something illegal (Score 0) 320

That does not mean that Foval's group actively incited violence

Umm, yes it does. They took deliberation action to elicit a violent response. Do you have a problem with basic definitions?

A sizable portion of Trump-supporters are still mean-spirited violent assholes.

And yet the worst of the violence was directed at Trump supporters in places like San Jose, their have been countless death threats publicly posted on Twitter against Trump, people posting pictures of themselves stealing Trump signs, etc. But you don't get wall-to-wall coverage about that, do you?

Comment Re:If the point was ... (Score 4, Insightful) 317

There's no proof that it has anything to do with Wikileaks, but in a world of IoT devices with no thought toward security, anyone who cares to do so can mount DDOS with the power of a national entity.

What's the point of doing what Assange and Wikileaks have been doing without any moral position? He isn't helping his own case.

Comment Re:Legal? (Score 2) 264

No, of course it is not legal to set a trap to intentionally hurt someone, even if you expect that the trap could only be activated by the person committing property theft or vandalism. Otherwise, you'd see shotguns built into burglar alarms.

Fire alarm stations sometimes shoot a blue dye which is difficult to remove or one which only shows under UV. Never stand in front of one when pulling the lever! But they are not supposed to hurt you.

And of course these booby traps generally are not as reliable as the so-called "inventor" thinks and tend to hurt the innocent.

Comment Re:Snake oil salesman (Score 1) 49

Ha ha. That's a common joke about the security industry. There is some truth to it.

What's great with bug bounty programs is that customers pay for results. You pay for valid and useful vulnerability reports. You don't pay for reports that are not useful. For hackers to make money (and the best ones make a lot of money), they must produce useful and relevant vulnerability reports.

That's a HUGE difference compared to traditional security products and services and it explains why bug bounty programs are becoming so popular. They are much more effective than any other method of finding vulns in live software.

Comment Re:70,000 white hat hackers? (Score 1) 49

Yep, 70,000 is a lot! The number keeps growing, and we hope to get to a million. To serve all companies and government organizations worldwide who will be needing bug bounty programs, we need a lot of excellent hackers.

It should also be noted that it takes a lot of hacking to find even a simple vulnerability. Of the 70,000 hacker accounts we have, about 1 in 6 have filed an actual vulnerability report. To help them get going, we have an ebook on hacking that we give to new hackers. Once new hackers get the hang of bug hunting they can advance fast, earning more and more reputation points. When you sign up at HackerOne, you start at 100 points. Our most prolific hackers have reached 10,000 points. You can do it, too!

Comment Re:Second coming of teams of ethical hackers (Score 1) 49

Yep this is true. It is also a common situation that humanity has dealt with successfully many times. To keep a ship afloat, you must find and fix every hole. Even one hole might sink it. To keep an aircraft safely flying, similarly every safety aspect must be in shape. Shipping and airlines have great safety track record these days.

To keep software secure, you must attempt to fix all serious vulnerabilities. You may never get to 100% vuln-free software, but the closer you get and the faster you can asymptotically move towards that goal, the more you reduce your cybersecurity risk.

Comment Re:Minefield (Score 1) 547

Islam is a religion, although one I"m not fond of.

Repeating yourself doesn't address my argument. It's also a political ideology.

That it's not an inherently evil religion is shown by the historical record.

The historical record shows that it is inherently militant, expansionist, and authoritarian. But you'd actually have to look at the historical record instead of burying your head in the sand. I provided two links in my last post, and I'm certain you have not perused them, because they show the exact opposite of what you are claiming.

They don't necessarily share Western values, but I don't see that that's a problem.

That's because you are a useful idiot. You'll gladly bash Trump over perceived bigotry, while giving a free pass to a political ideology straight from medieval times.

This suggests that Muslims will adapt their religion to their environment, and come to share Western values.

You've got it wrong. Muslims are not integrating, especially when they arrive in numbers. But again, you'd rather just bury your head in the sand and ignore reality on the ground.

The West isn't fragile

It can be, when taken over by a political correctness gone mad and an unwillingness to say no to destructive immigration policies or be too afraid to have an honest discussion about Islam.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Ask not what A Group of Employees can do for you. But ask what can All Employees do for A Group of Employees." -- Mike Dennison