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


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

Comment Re:Hmm (Score 1) 210

Quotation needed. And no, Ukraine does not count. They had a vote and voted to be part of Russia; that's a far cry from rolling in the tanks and taking it by force.

They did send in their military, that's who the "Little Green Men" were. Even Putin has publicly admitted this. The "vote" was held under occupation, not internationally recognized, boycotted by significant segments of the population, and even Russia at one point accidentally released the "real" numbers from the vote which didn't match the official ones.

Do recall that Russia is a country where Chechnya "voted for" United Russia (Putin's Party) 99% in 2001. Some parts of Grozny voted for "The Butcher of Grozny" by well over 100%. You seriously think that's legit?

Amazing how many apologists for Russia there are here. False equivalencies are clearly alive and well.

Comment Re: Hmm (Score 2) 211

could very well end democracy.

I'd argue that the forces that created the possibility of a Trump/Sanders presidency are more dangerous than those candidates individually. As such, a vote for Hillary is probably worse in the long term. At least Trump would be such a disaster that it would force change. Trump might not be back next time, but someone adept at harnessing pent-up frustration and anger sure will be.

Comment Re:Two candidates (Score 1) 211

If you want your voice heard, you should probably vote for the person who you align with best.

Or to put it another way, you wouldn't tell a Trump voter in Massachusetts not to vote. Trump has a zero percent chance of winning in Massachusetts, but millions will still vote for him even though their vote is "wasted". You can say the same thing about Hillary voters in much of the south. Their candidate can't win in their state, but they'll still go out to the polls and make their voice heard.

The two-party lock-in is pure rhetorical garbage. I can't in good conscience vote for a completely unqualified demagogue or someone who is the closest thing to a living embodiment of the establishment.

Comment Re: Hmm (Score 1) 211

I'm not a fan of Stein, but she seems like a reasonable alternative if you liked what Bernie was saying, and she's definitely not a career politician if that's a turn-off. She has no experience, but neither does Trump. Johnson is a pretty solid ticket. Yeah, he was a Republican governor, but in a Democratic state. And he apparently was not polarizing, getting elected to a second term and working hand-in-hand with the Democratic legislature to leave the state in good shape. His running mate Weld has a similar story in Massachusetts.

Comment Re:Why? (Score 1) 211

Your ire is directed to the wrong countries. The USA has been reducing it's nuclear stockpile since the 70s. Russia since the late 80s. The same is true of France, the UK - hell, even China has been stable since the 80s. The countries that you criticize have been doing the right thing, more or less, for decades. India, Pakistan, and North Korea are the ones building new capacity. Modernizing existing capacity is necessary - you can't very well maintain 50-year-old missiles in perpetuity.

Comment 99.9% (Score 1) 182

What you're describing is called a packet filter, not a router.

For 99.9% of the "average joe 6-pack" users, the packet filter is running inside [the linux kernel on the firmware of] their home DSL/cable/FITH router.

So yeah, for most of the clueless user who would be benefiting from NAT, they will be also benefiniting from the fact that the router sitting in their living room is doing packet filtering.

The "security" of NAT comes as a by-product of the fact that multiple devices NEED to be on a private RFC1918-style network (assuming we're talking typical consumer-grade NAT), and hence no single device does - by default - receive inbound traffic because they're not addressable in the first place.

And I'm telling you :
- you DO NOT need to be on an unaddressable private address (192.x.y.z or fxxx:::) to not receive any traffic.
The [packet filtering running inside the linux kernel in the firmware of the] router could be all the same blocking inbound traffic even if the target address happened to be addressable (e.g.: 2xxxx::: )

So please stop with this "NAT increases security".
It's the packet filtering that does.
And most sensible modern routeur (that have a not too much lousy firmware) do.

Comment Re:Hmm (Score 1, Insightful) 211

Because they want to remain a sovereign nation going their own way

Which is why Russia is invading Ukraine and supporting terrorists when Ukraine wanted to go their own way and have closer trade relations with the West, right? Because the sovereign nation of Ukraine didn't want to live under the thumb of Russia any longer.

Why the fuck the rest of the European leaders don't go the same way as Russia I have no fucking clue.

Because people don't want to live under a dictatorship where the guy at the top can steal your business on a whim and hand it over to one of his oligarch friends.

Nor do they want to live in a place where the dictator decides who can and cannot run for political office and where, if you become too popular with the people or reveal the corruption endemic in his rule, he'll have you killed.

If you can't see the obvious, you might be a Russian troll.

Comment Re:Ummm... (Score 1) 73

Amazon Prime's video selection was quite horrible for the several years that I had it, at least an order of mangnitude worse than Netflix's current selection, and the streaming performance was pretty bad too. Has that gotten any better lately? That's the main reason I didn't bothering addressing Amazon until you brought it up.

The selection is now pretty good, while Netflix's has decreased to only being pretty good. And yes, the streaming performance is now better than Netflix, at least here it is. In the evenings I can barely use Netflix. And I have the bandwidth setting set to be inoffensive.

Slashdot Top Deals

... when fits of creativity run strong, more than one programmer or writer has been known to abandon the desktop for the more spacious floor. -- Fred Brooks