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 Re:Translation (Score 3, Insightful) 360

A vote for Trump would be a vote against Democrats, Republicans, and the biased media who fall all over themselves trying to elect anyone who would validate their editorial lines. A vote for Trump means there will be a whole bunch of rich people and companies who will see the billions of dollars they have pumped into their candidate of choice has been wasted. The Democrats and Republicans need a serious timeout to reflect on how bad they have fucked up the country.

The office of the President doesn't allow any candidate to actually accomplish anything they say while campaigning. The policies Trump speaks about cannot be dictated by the President. Trump is hated by both Democrats and Republicans equally. Does anyone see Congress approving anything Trump asks for? Dissolution of signed international treaty's cannot be abrogated by the President alone. Even declaring a war needs to be justified and unless someone lobs a few nukes at the US the legislative branch will never fund a war. For all those wishing the US would stop wasting money protecting foreign ingrates then Trump is your man. If he was to even come close to exceeding his Presidential authority he would be impeached in an afternoon since he has no party support. Anyone wanting to see a President tell some foreign leader to fuck off and defend themselves on their own dime than Trump is your man. The bottom line is a President cannot destroy a country without help from lots of others in the Legislative and Judicial branches.

Comment Re:Star chamber justice (Score 3, Interesting) 174

"civil judgment under this subsection" Civil judgment means the case has been adjudicated in criminal or civil court proceedings before any penalties as imposed. This allows an individual to contest the charges in court. However, this new bill is part of the Patriot Act. The government has tried to use provisions in the Patriot Act twice to prosecute a defendant. In both cases the judge threw out the governments case on constitutional grounds. The government has never attempted to use the Patriot Act since then because of fear that the entire Patriot Act could be declared unconstitutional. There's a reason the government is fighting so hard to keep the residents of Gitmo out of the US court system. Congress can pass any law they want using in-house council to vet the legality of the proposed law which is mostly a rubber stamp process. To challenge the law requires someone to actually be charged under the law and then the law can be challenged in court. Then the process of vetting the law can be moved up the judicial ladder usually ending up in the Supreme Court when constitutional issues are involved. If the government passes an unconstitutional law but never uses it against anyone it becomes meaningless. If you want to complain about something that actually matters try wrapping your head around the powers that the IRS has had for a long time. The government can access the IRS databases anytime they want without a warrant of any type. The IRS also has the ability to seize assets, levy fines, and even put people in jail for tax fraud.

Comment Re:Correction.... (Score 1) 138

If they did do it I would call it beginners luck. However, just because Iran said they brought it down doesn't mean they are telling the truth. Remember these are the same idiots who tried to pass off a model plane as their new stealth jet fighter. And the US has flown thousands of drone sorties in that part of the world and if Iran could actually do what they claim there would be drones falling out of the sky all over the place.

Comment Re:The FTC is to blame for this (Score 1) 150

"Apple has been tying its products together for years:" They have been doing this since day one. There are just more products today. This business model was almost their undoing back in the mid 90's. They were within weeks of bankruptcy when MS invested $150 million which allowed Apple to consolidate their Mac business and put their cash flow into the iPod and iTunes products and the rest is history.

Comment Re:That vile ACLU (Score 4, Insightful) 76

The law abiding citizens who happen to be gun owners are the ones who are ultimately tasked with upholding their gun rights. The efforts of the NRA just represent the non-violent method of upholding gun rights. And unlike the corporate lobbyists the NRA doesn't buy political support with money they buy political support with the number of voters they can deliver at election time. The anti-gun crowd is shrill at times and relish turning every gun related death into an extinction level event but they are vastly outnumbered by gun owners who only need to vote when they feel their gun ownership rights are being reduced.

Comment Re:Growth market for the titans of Silicon Valley (Score 1) 85

"Maybe the time is here to step up and create our own solutions for better security" There is nothing stopping anyone from doing this right now. There are 3 main areas that will need to be addressed to create better security. The first area would be the hardware This includes the data communication infrastructure and making sure any devices connected to a network can support the new security paradigm. If implementing better security model requires the replacement of routers, firewall appliances, and basically any other piece of connected hardware the cost would be staggering. Software would be the next area and this would be the easiest and relatively cheapest area to implement the new security related changes. And finally the most difficult and most likely impossible area is the users. And by users I would include system administrators, developers, and the general public user base. It is possible now to secure your systems and encrypt your data communications to the point that it would take a substantial effort by the government to access.

Comment Re:Oh yeah? (Score 1) 240

So you think they would release all the source code and put future enhancements and bug fixes in the hands of a public foundation just so they could play the old security through obscurity game? This would also imply that there is a way to compromise the TOR security model so they need to hide their traffic. If the US government knows how to compromise TOR you can be pretty sure other governments can do it as well. The government computer security capabilities are an embarrassment. They can't secure their systems, granted most of the breeches and data disclosers have been released by insiders. They have no internal cooperation between all the various governmental and military agencies. Every thing from e-mail, civilian database servers, and even some drone communication systems have been publicly breeched over the past 10 years. And that doesn't even count all the compromises that were never disclosed publically. The government has a hell of a lot more to lose than your average citizen does when it comes to poor computer security. The public should be more concerned about all the criminal syndicates who hack systems to steal and profit. Those guys are evidently the best computer security gurus on the planet seeing as no one can stop them. All the high dollar security research companies do little more than conduct a post mortem analysis after the damage is done and add a few new signatures to the virus and malware scanners.

Comment Re:Oh yeah? (Score 1) 240

No, the discussion was about building a more secure Internet alternative than exists today. It doesn't matter what protocol you use because any protocol can be compromised just like the protocols used today. And I never said Arpanet was being built to survive a war it was network package switching technology that was used in the first generation of routers that could continue to process data traffic if some of it's nodes went down. War could possibly cause this but natural disasters, sabotage, equipment failure, and power outages could take down network nodes.

The ARPANET packet switching technology combined with the TCP/IP protocol created the technical foundation of the Internet.

ARPANET stands for the Advanced Research Projects Agency of the United States Department of Defense.
DARPA stands for the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.
Both ARPANET and DARPA are funded by military and national defense budgets. ARPANET and the technology built on top of that early research has provided benefits to both the public and military sectors. No doubt the US military makes full use of these technologies so claiming the research was not for "war" is wrong.

Comment Re:Oh yeah? (Score 3, Insightful) 240

You think the government doesn't monitor the dark web? I think they would allocate sufficient resources to monitoring the dark web out of the belief that anything going on there has a good chance of being illegal. And the US Naval Research laboratories created TOR looking for a secure way of transmitting highly encrypted military communications. They released their work to the general public because it did not meet their stated goals. Just like DARPA did the initial research to create a distributed network that could continue to operate if pieces of the network was destroyed. This little project was also released into the public domain and was eventually called the internet. Anyone, and I mean anyone can build their own version of the internet any time they want. All they would need is billions of dollars, some how create the mythical secure network, and then get anyone to actually use it. If want to save some time and money by piggybacking on the existing infrastructure they would still be susceptible to the same security problem the internet has to deal with. And think about this. The general public may be susceptible to government misuse but the government is even more susceptible to having the Internet used against them. It's painfully evident that the government has no clue on how to build a secure system but no one in the public domain can do it either.

Comment Re:Good luck with that (Score 2) 148

"automatically assumed to be doing unproductive work by their immediate supervisor" If your job description is not related to IT security you are being unproductive in the eyes of your supervisor. For example, if you are getting paid to develop and support applications that is what you should be doing. You can work on your security concerns after hours or get a job in IT security.

Comment Re:who decides what is "hate speech"??? (Score 2) 405

If you are a lawyer you should understand that there is no true international law, established or otherwise, because there is no enforcement mechanism that can be brought to bear equally in every corner of the world. Even countries with advanced rule of law have all kinds of problems defining jurisdiction, extradition rights, and problems leading towards sovereignty issues. Only a few countries have the ability to enforce there definition of international law and that relies on political pressure backed up by economic and ultimately military power when things truly escalate. The EU seems well on it's way towards a thought police state while simultaneously bending over backwards to accommodate people holding beliefs that would have seemed extreme even back in the 12th century. The only permitted hate speech in the EU is anything denigrating and insulting to the US and everyone living there. While the EU chattering classes were hyperventilating over the NSA they failed to notice whose national security and intelligence services were actually collecting their data and then sharing it with the NSA. Do they think all that data was deleted from the servers located in Europe after the hand over?

Slashdot Top Deals

He's dead, Jim.

Working...