Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Norton (Score 2) 77

The difference now is that many hackers have developed tools for MITM attacks on https.

Yes and the same tools work with a self-signed cert or with HTTP. To make them work with HTTPS and a signed cert, you need to have a compromised CA signing cert. This is still currently mostly limited to nation-state adversaries.

Comment Re:Norton (Score 1) 77

Step one: Any browser that cares about security MUST stop regarding https with CA certificates as any more trustworthy that self-signed certificates or plain http.

Why? Plain HTTP can be compromised by anyone on a hop between you and your destination. HTTPS with a self-signed certificate can be compromised by anyone on a hop between you and your destination, but can be detected if you do certificate pinning or certificate transparency. HTTPS with a signed cert can only be compromised with cooperation from a CA. The set of people that can compromise signed HTTPS is significantly lower than the set that can compromise self-signed HTTPS.

Comment Re:Uh.... what? (Score 2) 197

2. Collective or other shared accommodation, often combined with studies.

It's pretty common to move accommodation for each year of a degree, so this can easily be 3-4, more if you do a PhD or similar (though people often find a place for the whole of their PhD). I can remember the second and third places I lived as a student (I stayed in the same place for two years of undergrad and then for the whole of my PhD), but the first was university-owned accommodation and I don't recall the exact address - I certainly don't remember post codes for all of them.

Comment Re:"vacation" (Score 4, Insightful) 197

It's been over a decade since the US tightened the visa restrictions so that everyone wanting to come into the country as a practicing journalist must have a visa, even if they're from one of the visa-waiver countries. You can bet that if you tick that box, you're already going to come under a lot of extra scrutiny (and if you don't, but then publish anything written about your time in the USA, expect to be denied entry the next time).

Comment Re:That's stupid. (Score 2) 258

It depends on how you arrange the lights. In the UK, there's a delay in between one set of lights going red and the next going green. In a number of US cities that I've visited, one set turns green at precisely the same instant that the other turns red. This means that going through the lights as they turn red is potentially very dangerous, because you will still be crossing the intersection while cars from other directions go. Adding a small delay, larger than the grace period, would likely improve safety considerably.

The USA has 7.1 fatalities per billion km driven, whereas the UK has only 3.6. It's tempting to blame the drivers (and the difference in driving tests in the two countries lends some support to this), but the road designers have a lot to blame. The US statistics are likely even worse for in-city driving, because the totals are skewed by the fact that you can drive far further in the US without encountering another vehicle than in the UK.

Comment Re:I'm all over this (Score 1) 128

So you're saying you don't even want to watch the film, you just want to be able to talk about it later (but only in the next few days)? The problem with that idea is that it only works if you surround yourself with other keep-up-with-the-Joneses types who insist on watching the latest blockbuster as soon as it comes out and have limited other conversational topics.

Comment Re:I'm all over this (Score 1) 128

I don't get it. Given the choice between paying $30 now, or $1-3 in a few months once it's out on rental / streaming services, you'd pick the former? I can't think of a single film in the last decade that I've wanted to see so much that I'd pay an order of magnitude more to see it now. Plus there's a reasonable sized backlog of things that I want to watch, so even if I watch them in release order they're all available to rent cheaply by the time I get around to them.

Comment Re:Open Source is Evil (Score 1) 128

We are trying to do to movies what we did to software with open source. Reduce its value so much that the people working in the industry struggle to survive

Huh? That's not what open source did at all. It shifted the value from copying software to creating software. People are still paid to write open source software, it's just that now most of them are paid by companies who want the features added (or the bugs fixed) directly, rather than by some middlemen that want to charge per copy.

Comment Re: Why Not On Release Day And For A Regular Price (Score 1) 128

Eventually the movie industry will learn that the damage that it's doing to itself trying to prevent piracy is significantly greater than the damage that piracy is doing to it. It took Apple taking control over a very lucrative slice of the distribution market before the music industry learned that DRM does little to prevent piracy, but does a lot to create distribution monopolies outside of their control. I wonder how long it will be for someone like Amazon or Netflix to grab a sufficiently large slice of the distribution market that they realise that allowing DRM-free downloads from multiple other sources is the only way to regain their bargaining power.

Comment Re:sell movie theatre stock now (Score 1) 128

Except it's not competing with going to the cinema, it's competing with watching the same film a couple of months at home later for a tenth of that price. The problem for the movie industry is that they're entirely focussed around first-week profits (to the extent that they set up contracts with cinemas such that they get almost all of the takings from the first week and close to none after a couple of weeks). This means that they have to spend a huge amount of money on advertising to try to get everyone to watch the film at the same time and don't get to take advantage of slower word-of-mouth (or online) recommendations. The advent of decent-quality home cinema systems means that a lot more people are watching films a few months after they came out in the cinemas, which causes problems for the studios' business model.

Comment Re:Misleading and false (Score 1) 133

Exactly. It's interesting research, but it hits diminishing returns very quickly. Cheap solar panels have gone from 8% to 16% efficiency in a few years. That's a huge win, because you get double the power output for the same investment. Getting up to 32% for the same cost will be a similar win, but that's a long way away.

Slashdot Top Deals

Quark! Quark! Beware the quantum duck!

Working...