Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



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

Comment Simon says no (Score 2, Interesting) 260

The cities and towns who want to regulate this and Uber and the like are doing so not because there is some sort of crisis or need for regulation. By their own admission, they do not have control over it now and yet there are very few reports of problems, which strongly suggests there aren't many issues.

No, they don't want to solve anything. They're just mad that somebody is doing something without asking permission and paying for licenses and other crap. An awful lot of government is devoted to making people ask for permission to do things and making them pay fees to get that permission.

If people realize they can do things just fine without permits, then all hell will break loose of people doing stuff on their own for free! How can bloated bureaucratic governments survive and justify their own existence if people just DO stuff?

Comment He needs a Mattel Footbal, nothing harder (Score 1) 729

This guy is a total pussy.

Building PCs is not something you do once; you do it at least often enough that none of the shit that surprised him matters AT ALL. I barely paid attention to the last system I built ~6 months ago, in part because all I needed to know was which RAM banks were preferred and the board header pinout. But they supplied a marked module for that. Flawless assembly.

I have no idea how many PCs I have assembled. Dozens. Maybe a hundred. What the fuck ever, even if I didn't know, there are tons of how-tos on Youtube because every dork seems to love doing an assembly video. OMG maybe the board will be a different color this time. Otherwise they are mostly the same.

Anyway this schmuck has NO CLUE how it used to be when IDE drives from different brands would not cooperate, and hell you had to have an ISA serial/parallel/drive controller/game port card AND know how to deal with interrupts and IRQs and Sound Blaster INITs. All this guy has to fucking do is put in some screws and plug in some drives and Windows fucking 10 will do all the rest.

But he broke a sweat (!) so here's a goddamn article on how HAAARD it was.

If you want to game you will find a way. My balls must be bigger. I spent the day figuring out how to download and install and sign up for a PC MMO that's only in Chinese. There is no English patch. There is scant English info on it at all. I don't speak Chinese. I can't fucking read it. But I still got the damn game installed and running beautifully AND helped a friend get it setup on their PC 700 miles away via Skype. So I am remotely helping someone else in a language neither of us understands, to play a game we want to play so badly, we will fucking play it in Chinese.

If you want to play a game badly enough, you will find a way. That's a gamer.

If all you want to do is bitch about fat fingers and how HARD it is to use a damn screwdriver, well, we know he's somebody's little bitch. Give him an etch a sketch or one of those old Mattel LED football games. Wait, those were hard to play. A coloring book and crayons. He can't cope with more difficulty.

Comment Re:I Know Where The 22,000 Went! (Score 1) 474

Get ready for much bigger changes that make production automation look like nothing. First, the various fast food operators are all looking at robotics and eventually someone will do it and millions of low-end jobs are going to vanish as machines make the burgers and fries.

It's fine to say people who failed to learn skills have only themselves to blame, but there are large areas where there are no serious job options for kids and young adults without college hopes, except flipping burgers. What are these people going to do when there are few if any jobs? There will be a LOT of these folks, and people out of work and having no options and nothing to do tend to gravitate to crime and other similar things. We've already seen thse happen all over in areas where there are lots of people and no jobs.

The other big change is going to be due to automated driving. Suddenly, your car won't have any urge to stop on the way home for an impulse burger or pack of smokes. Cars that can totally drive themselves won't stop for gas at random gas stations; they'll have some sort of fleet fueling station. Or they will be electric cars. Bottom line, a lot of gas stations (read: more low-end jobs) will go away.

Automated cars will have less accidents too so people who work on cars like body shops, towing companies, mechanics and so forth will also be out of work. A lot of semi-skilled workers who stepped up from flipping burgers moved into jobs like auto repair. It pays well. Good, steady work. Until cars don't need repairs as much. So now a lot of these folks will be out of work, and these are people who thought they had a career. Wiped out.

Insurance agents, bus drivers, taxi drivers, chauffeurs and hired drivers are also going to see far fewer jobs.

All of these different levels of people will still be here. They will still have bills and need to eat and have shelter, but WHAT are they supposed to do when their jobs go away? Even if you don't think society has any obligation to try to fix these problems, we all need to understand there will be a lot of unhappy, hungry unemployed people and unless we come up with something for them to do, society is going to have to deal with whatever consequences develop.

Comment Re:The Taste must have been fired also (Score 4, Interesting) 474

Assuming you don't have issues with Walmart, you may want to check out the fruit pies they are selling, two for a dollar I believe. They come in a little square box, each pie in a metal pan. Just enough for one serving. Usually multiple flavors of these things are stacked on a table somewhere in the bakery section.

The notable thing is a real award-winning pie bakery is the supplier for these things and they actually, astonishingly, taste like homemade pies. They're not frosted like the old Hostess pies but the pie itself is much better.

If you really need the Hostess style of pie, the ones made by Tastykake are good. Flowers Bakeries, the owners of Tastykake, also own Wonder Bread in the US. Flowers is known for being much more focused on quality than some other companies.

Comment Red Herring (Score 1) 451

This debate is a red herring. An automated car would use its software and resources to avoid hitting pedestrians or other cars, but in the event it cannot avoid a collision, the safety of the passengers would come down to the construction and safety features of the car itself.

This is what we have now and it won't change once the driving is automatic. The physical structure of the car and things like seat belts and airbags will be responsible for protecting the occupants as best it can, but of course there are no guarantees. Safety features can only do so much. Physics is what it is.

I rather LIKE the odds of an automated car facing a pedestrian or obstacle like a fallen tree. Because right now, human drives tasked with such a scenario often choose the WRONG outcome.

For example, not far from me a driver found themselves at excessive speed suddenly coming upon a transit bus stopped to load passengers. The driver had three choice: hit the bus, dodge left into oncoming traffic, or dodge right to the sidewalk side of the bus. The driver chose to jump the sidewalk and did avoid a collision. Unfortunately that meant the car slammed into all the people waiting to board the bus. Several died and many were injured. It was a very violent and devastating crash.

Had that car driver chose to hit the back of the bus, instead of trying to avoid it, there would have been significant vehicle damage and the car driver might have been injured or killed -but nobody on the bus would have been seriously injured. The people killed would not have had a scratch on them. The car driver chose the worst possible wrong solution and it cost lives.

Similarly, when one driver sees a dog in the road and reacts by crossing into oncoming traffic, they've now created a very dangerous situation where a head-on collision is likely. When people are faced with that sort of sudden problem and have to react fast, they often DO make the mistake of hitting another car rather than hitting the dog, which would be bad of course, but nothing like killing all the occupants of both cars.

I strongly suspect automated drivers will make far fewer bad decisions like that.

Comment Re:You missed a couple of sections (Score 1) 309

In finding no Fourth
Amendment violation, the Western District of Washington noted that "in order for [] prospective
user[s] to use the Tor network they must disclose information, including their IP addresses, to
unknown individuals running Tor nodes, so that their communications can be directed toward
their destinations." Id. at *2. The Western District of Washington noted that under "such a
system, an individual would necessarily be disclosing his identifying information to complete
strangers."

Sounds like it makes sense to me

Thus, hacking resembles the broken blinds in Carter. 525 U.S. at 85. Just as Justice
Breyer wrote in concurrence that a police officer who peers through broken blinds does not
violate anyone's Fourth Amendment rights, jd. at 103 (Breyer, J., concurring), FBI agents who
exploit a vulnerability in an online network do not violate the Fourth Amendment. Just as the
area into which the officer in Carter peered - an apartment - usually is afforded Fourth
52
Case 4:16-cr-00016-HCM-RJK Document 90 Filed 06/23/16 Page 52 of 58 PageID# 1134
Amendment protection, a computer afforded Fourth Amendment protection in other
circumstances is not protected from Government actors who take advantage of an easily broken
system to peer into a user's computer. People who traverse the Internet ordinarily understand the
risk associated with doing so

Well yeah if you don't patch your system, you know you're going to get hacked right? So, boohoo, you got hacked by the gov should have been surfing kiddy porn

Comment Re:You missed a couple of sections (Score 1) 309

"Furthermore, the Court FINDS suppression unwarranted because the Government did not need a warrant in this case. Thus, any potential defects in the issuance of the warrant or in the warrant itself could not result in constitutional violations".

This language is particularly specific and narrows the ruling to this case and only this case. The fact that the FBI got a warrant to allow them to run remote exploit code on an individual's computers that had downloaded the exploit (which was only available on PlayPen) means that they didn't need a warrant.

The individual was exposing himself to this exploit of his own actions, and thus didn't require a warrant. Let me put it this way, the FBI takes over a drug dealer, and has him continue sale, but under the new watchful eye of cameras that collect identifying photos of individuals who purchase drugs. (Not only that, but the person has to go into a room that specifically says, “illegal drugs” on it in order to even end up on camera.)

Do law enforcement REALLY need a warrant when the person is incriminating themselves?

This is like arguing that law enforcement had no right to put a tracker in the cash bag of a bank that they took. It's BS. It required active agency in acquiring the exploit code, and a clear intent to obtain child pornography.

a) You do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy when you're committing a crime, and b) if you walk into someone else's house and demonstrate direct intent to commit a crime without knowing that you're identifying yourself to police, well, TOO BAD

Comment Re:The message is clear: (Score 1) 309

The site was actually protected by the Tor network (and despite an error in configuration allowing it to be accessed outside of Tor for a bit) was only available through the Tor network.

They then attached the callback program to trigger upon downloading known child porn, and voila your computer happily reports to the FBI that you've just downloaded child porn.

This is actually pretty solid law, and entirely reasonable warrant and execution of that warrant

It looks like (so far, I'm only part way through the actual ruling) one of the chief objections is that the warrant identified the website with the wrong type of logo. The text on that logo, had however stayed the same. This is not a good argument for why a warrant shouldn't be valid

Comment Re:What Constitution? (Score 1) 309

Even though the warrant authorized the FBI to deploy the NIT as soon as a user logged
into Playpen, SA Alfin testified that the Government did not deploy the NIT against Mr. Matish
in this particular case until after someone with the username of "Broden" logged into Playpen,
arrived at the index site, went to the bestiality section - which advertised prepubescent children
engaged in sexual activities with animals - and clicked on the post titled "Girl 11YO, with dog."
In other words, the agents took the extra precaution of not deploying the NIT until the user first
logged into Playpen and second entered into a section of Playpen which actually displayed child
pornography. At this point, testified SA Alfin, the user apparently downloaded child
pornography as well as the NIT to his computer. Thus, the FBI deployed the NIT in a much
narrower fashion than what the warrant authorized.

I dunno, that's pretty compelling reasonable suspicion there for a warrant which is what they actually had

Comment Re:We need a penalty for retarded judges (Score 1) 309

The Court FINDS, for the reasons stated herein, that probable cause supported
the warrant's issuance, that the warrant was sufficiently specific, that the triggering event
occurred, that Defendant is not entitled to a Franks hearing, and that the magistrate judge did not
exceed her jurisdiction or authority in issuing the warrant

So you think supporting the validity of a warrant that was issued prior to the search to be subversive?

Comment Re:What Constitution? (Score 1) 309

To any sane person, if they need a warrant to come through your door to seize the data, they need a warrant to seize the data over the wire.

Let's examine that, let's see

The Court FINDS, for the reasons stated herein, that probable cause supported
the warrant's issuance, that the warrant was sufficiently specific, that the triggering event
occurred, that Defendant is not entitled to a Franks hearing, and that the magistrate judge did not
exceed her jurisdiction or authority in issuing the warrant

Oh, they did have a warrant.

Comment Regular G2A customer (Score 1) 104

Well, I've been a G2A customer for about a year, using it for Windows 8 licenses, antivirus licenses, Steam games, and a few other things.

Their "how do we do this" stuff always seemed a bit fishy but none of the license keys I bought has ever had any issues. I assumed it was legit or it would have been shutdown by now.

But now I see how G2A is able to stay hands off far enough to say it's not their fault, the same way pawn shops avoid being responsible for stolen goods that they end up reselling. I mean it's totally not the shop's fault if the entire neighborhood is being burgled for pawnable stuff. /s

Why are they/we all still using this sort of software key model? Why not do more authentication of purchases and tie them to email addresses or some other thing that can't be resold?

Comment Not just insurance under threat (Score 1) 299

Auto insurance isn't the only industry under threat.

With reduced accidents, body shops and mechanics, paint shops, towing services, even traffic reporters will have less work and there will be job losses. Automated cars are liable to break down less due to diagnostics so fix-it mechanics will have less work than they already do, and dealers will see reduced traffic in their repair bays, and what work there is will resist having stuff added to repair bills because the automated cars will know what is wrong.

Automated cars are going to need far fewer roadside breaks and an automated car won't feel the impulse to stop for snacks or fast food or smokes, so swaths of businesses that depend on passing traffic to see the business and pull in will suffer huge reductions in sales. Your car won't care if you pass a hamburger shop, and by the time you see it and perhaps want to stop, you won't have time to tell the car to stop.

Gas stations will probably also suffer greatly as cars will probably have some way of optimizing where and when they need to refuel. Automated gas pumps have been in the works for a couple decades and had been developed to the point where it was a finished machine but it was expensive and, well, most people pump their own gas for free so why pay for a robot to do it? But perhaps that will change now that an automated car might automatically drive itself to get fuel from an automated gas pump.

Comment Re:Shifting the burden (Score 2) 23

The record companies are always trying to make it someone else's responsibility to police their own property, but this is ridiculous because no one else *can* properly monitor for infringement.

This is because copyright infringement relies on a lack of permission. If someone has permission from the copyright holder to upload something, it's not infringement!

They have repeatedly shown they don't even have a grasp of this. For example, multiple cases where videos or music content has been obtained from YouTube videos, which is then incorporated into another broadcast program, which is followed by a DMCA takedown to YouTube to remove the original videos that were the source of the clip or music, which are items the broadcaster does not own.

There have been cases of musicians doing original songs which they post for sharing or enjoyment, and the music is noticed and used in a production either under creative commons, or under an actual license to use the music, or sometimes no license. Then they come back to YT and demand a takedown on content they didn't create and don't own and have no right to suppress. Except their copyright filter says they did and demands it.

One recent case was where old video game footage found on YT was picked up -and I recall this was without permission- by the Family Guy show and used in an episode. Fox then went back to YT and demanded DMCA takedown on the ORIGINAL video they stole to use on the Family Guy episode. Because, you know, the clip they stole does match a few seconds of a particular episode, because it was the same footage, because they took it and used it. The creator of that game video was threatened with having his Google account suspended for copyright infringement on material he himself had created and recorded. As I recall, the DMCA was reversed and then reimposed again, followed by more appeals and public outcry.

From time to time, I work with a music company who sells royalty-free music. You pay once for a non-exclusive license and you can use it in that production forever. The customers buy a license but NOT the copyright. That's retained by the music company and the rights holders for the actual songs. The same music clips get licensed and used in various different projects all over the world. SO, Company A licenses a particular song and uses it in their show. Company B and C and D come along and wow they all also license it. It's a popular bit of music.

Company B asserts copyright over the music and attempts to DMCA the music company and several of the other customers also using it. The music company says no, you don't OWN the music, you licensed it. This goes on for a long time until finally lawyers from both sides sit down and clear it up. Company B apologizes and the matter is dropped.

And of course there have been several cases where Sony DMCA'd their own company for using Epic music in other Sony projects. It's a huge company and the branches often have no clue who is doing what. I wonder what the hourly rate is for suing yourself.

Slashdot Top Deals

Anyone can do any amount of work provided it isn't the work he is supposed to be doing at the moment. -- Robert Benchley

Working...