Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
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:If you want Ubuntu without unity...Linux Mint (Score 1) 382

Ah, yes, Linux Mint. The distro that can't even be arsed to sign its fucking repositories.

In the comments section, an anonymous person said: “The only thing that I really didn’t like is the same for all of the Mint systems and that is the poor security you get by using their unsigned packages and repositories.”

–> It is the same for all Mint systems indeed. It’s a feature though and it’s even a condition for our ISOs to pass the QA tests. Both the main Mint repositories and LMDE are signed and secure. The warning you see is because we set APT to allow unauthenticated repositories. This follows our philosophy that if you told your system to do something, it should listen to you and do it promptly. If for any reason you decided to add an unsigned repository, then Mint should accept it and do as it’s told. You already have a warning, if you don’t like it, use sign repositories, if you do already, remove the setting from /etc/apt/apt.conf. This default setting is there to warn people and to let them do what they want, as opposed to something that fails when you need it most. You’re not more exposed than on any other system. If something has the rights to modify your /etc/apt/sources.list it surely has the rights to modify /etc/apt/apt.conf as well. Warnings are good things and unlike errors they’re here to let you know about things without getting in your way. This is not poor security. This is a signed and secure system which lets you add additional sources, signed or not, the day you feel like it.

Comment Re:Ideology (Score 1) 253

I always wonder why Americans treat regulation as something inherently bad.

Have you seen the assholes doing the "regulating?"

What is clear

This phrase may as well read "bullshit ahoy." (To whom?)

is that in the Western world, there are strong positive correlations

[is a single correlation]

between the amount of regulation of the economy and societal equality

Define both terms. With "regulation," you refer to this entity: a contradictory labyrinth of so-called rules, written vaguely, enforced arbitrarily, and interpreted politically. If you cannot disagree with this assessment of reality, it should be obvious "societal equality" is a chimera.

Once you concede the "regulators" are, in fact, a bunch of bastards too, it's only reasonable to examine the forces at work: could I replace them with lesser bastards? If not, why?

The underlying morality is this:

The character of some people is to work hard, in order to achieve their vision of an improved world.

The character of lesser people is to draw an income for bullshitting, more or less swindled from the bullshitee.

It is the character of still others to draw an income under threat of violence, bullshit optional.

Finally, there are those whose character is to bullshit, and draw an income under threat of violence, and convince you to join their team.

It seems to me this last personality is the worst imaginable sort, and it happens to define elected rulers precisely. To imagine you, personally, had input into the miserable system these characters have set up, and therefore ought to abide it, is perfectly delusional.

and societal equality and general happiness.

Does an individualist still, in the 21st century, have to wheel out the corpse catalogue of every starved "communist" "national experiment" [read: power grab] to put this miserable piss-and-moaning (I only have two iPhones and a 47" flatscreen, and I serve time in an air-conditioned office doing unskilled labor, it's really hard, I want a new SUVVVVVVVVVV!) to bed?

Assuming that the free market is good, and therefore regulation is bad, however, is a purely ideological stance.


Suppose you observe politicians and politics (de facto "regulation") are bad.

Then what?

While I understand that treating the government with suspicion is a healthy attitude that makes degeneration into tyranny less likely, but that is more an argument for government transparency

It's hard to formulate an analogy between two radically different sets of concepts, but here goes: say Linus announces The Kernel is no longer open.

Wait: say it just stops being open, and he won't say why.

Hmm... Say it quit being open a very long time ago, and if you suggest it was better that way, you're some kind of revolutionist nutball.

No! Say Microsoft and Apple partner up to eradicate the idea there ever was such a thing as openness, and you'd better get in line, because the hired help don't have any qualms about shooting your dog or daughter.

"Government transparency" is an oxymoron: we claim the authority to imprison and/or kill you, but we're sure we'd just be delighted with any program you care to run through us, pal!

Why the hell would anyone pretend to discover, or be surprised, the government is opaque?

Comment Re:A game? (Score 1) 208

The game is actually being developed by Virtual Heroes and from what I understand is being offered as a educational tool for 9th graders and they are encouraged to use development tools to build content for the game themselves.

In point of fact, they're being encouraged to go buy UT: "We want anybody that can go pick up a copy of Unreal Tournament III for probably $19 at the store now to be able to get content that could be submitted for inclusion in the game," said Heneghan.

If this isn't a good investment for our country - not sure what is

That much is clear. I had more sciencey stuff to learn about in 9th grade than fooling around in a 3D construction set, not that the school's hardware could have run it.

Comment Re:A deal with the devil? I hope not. (Score 1) 414

I don't mind the government promoting the spread of broadband, but I hope... This is potentially one of those "deal with the devil" situations, so let's make sure it's done right.

There is no such thing as a deal with the devil, done right. It's the whole damned point of the analogy.

Let's make sure free-speech and privacy rights are well protected from the very beginning.

Good idea. We ought to put them in the Constitution somewhere, to ensure they're never violated.


Pirates Find Proper Way to Crack Vista's Activation Schema 213

El_Oscuro writes "A genuine crack for Windows Vista has been released by pirate group Pantheon. The exploit allows a pirated, non-activated installation of Vista (Home Basic/Premium and Ultimate) to be properly activated and made fully-operational. 'It seems that Microsoft has allowed large OEMs like ASUS to ship their products with a pre-installed version of Vista that doesn't require product activation — apparently because end users would find it too inconvenient.'"

Slashdot Top Deals

The price one pays for pursuing any profession, or calling, is an intimate knowledge of its ugly side. -- James Baldwin