Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


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: Why should anyone trust the report? (Score 1) 404

Show me actual proof that no Russian was involved.

Not having access to the raw data, I myself cannot show proof of Russians inferring with the election to get Trump in the White House. However, that is totally irrelevant. Had they preferred to see Hillary elected and had they therefor sabotaged Trump, my opinion of the matter would be exactly the same as it is now.

Let me spell it out: Putin doesn't care about Trump and even less about making America great again. Putin cares about himself, about his power, and how he can make Russia Great Again. If he considers that Trump gives him the better chance of doing that, he';ll support him, If he considers that somebody else is better suited, he'll change camp in less than a second. If he needs strong allies, he'll support them. If he rather needs a weak opponent, he'll support those.

Anyone who does not understand that hacking into computers is both a matter of national security and a way to achieve an objective without openly saying what that objective is - whoever is at the helm in Washington - is a dangerous fool. Trump for sure will get access to the data - assuming he's not selectively blind to things that he doesn't like. The big question is what he will do with it. Or actually, it is not a big question, because he's right now. busy undermining the security services that he'll come to depend on; the country, and his ability to react appropriately the next time something like this happens. The man is therefore incompetent for the job.

And no, I'm absolutely not a DNC voter.

Comment Re:Why should anyone trust the report? (Score 0) 404

Very true. It's absolutely shocking how half the country is ignoring a real threat to the US just because it is easier to blame the other half for not knowing how to loose. If someone (be it the Russian or not) can attack the DNC in this way, they - or anyone else with similar expertise - can also attack the GOP. and plenty of other organizations and can do much damage irrespective of which party is in power..

This, my friends is a sign of a country that will (continue to) spiral down in decline. It is not how one makes America great again.

While I can understand some "randomly selected" Trump supporters to react like this, it is shocking to see Trump and his soon-to-be administration do the same in public.Such behavior is a sign of incompetence - irrespective of which side of the debate displays it..

Comment Re:And yet (Score 1) 412

preventing the distribution of information relevant to the candidates, Ecuador effectively allows the influence to be heavily one sided.

So what? They are a sovereign nation and are fully within their right to prefer Hillary over Dump. Or maybe just anyone and she's considered to be the best (or least bad) they can hope for"... Putin is on record for preferring Trump. That's his right as well.

As long as foreign governments don't try to actively interfere, they can do whatever they like. Especially within their own embassy that is part of their national territory. The task pf the Equadorian government is to take care of Equador and its people in the best way possible..Nothing more, nothing less.

Comment Re:Once upon a time, Wikileaks mattered... (Score 1) 377

No. I support him when he does things that matter in the big picture. Not when he's on a personal vendetta. The spoiled brat e-mail is excellent proof that he's not anymore about government officials who lie to the public If he still would be, he'd focus his revelations on Hillary's big lies and cheats - of which I'm sure there are. Nobody - I repeat nobody - reaches this level in politics without lying about something big on the course of their career and/or election campaign..

PS: You clearly have no clue what the word liberal means.

Comment Once upon a time, Wikileaks mattered... (Score 3, Insightful) 377

... because it revealed things that truly matter to the freedom of the people of the US and the world. And yes, even because in doing so it put some people's lives in danger for what it and its supporters consider to be a good cause. Not everyone agrees to the latter, but at least the debate about what was right and/or wrong fundamentally mattered to the citizens of this world and will continue to matter for decades to come.

Nowadays, Wikileaks has degraded itself to being a mere tool in Assange's personal revenge vendetta against Hillary Clinton. He doesn't care about right or wrong (anymore).. All that he wants these days is to damage his personal enemy by any means possible and if achieving that implies potentially handing over the US nuclear arsenal and its economic power - and therefor the entire world - to a raging lunatic, then apparently so be it.

Now, if these leaks there would actually reveal a substantiated serious accusation... But no...The fact that Wikileaks now thinks that it must inform the world of the galactically shocking fact that someone finds Chelsea a spoiled brat says more about Assange's character and insignificance than it says about the Clintons..He used to get media attention by doing things that mattered. It seems that he as run out of such things, but can't accept that he too doesn't matter anymore and the media therefore moved on to other hunting grounds..

I'm no fan of Trump, but even if I were one, I would still hold the same opinion of what Assange is doing. Who wants to be president because someone considers the daughter of one's opponent to be a spoiled brat?

Submission + - Keccak is the winner of NIST's SHA-3 competition (nist.gov)

fintler writes: "The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is pleased to announce the selection of Keccak as the winner of the SHA-3 Cryptographic Hash Algorithm Competition and the new SHA-3 hash algorithm. Keccak was designed by a team of cryptographers from Belgium and Italy, they are:

* Guido Bertoni (Italy) of STMicroelectronics,
* Joan Daemen (Belgium) of STMicroelectronics,
* Michaël Peeters (Belgium) of NXP Semiconductors, and
* Gilles Van Assche (Belgium) of STMicroelectronics.

NIST formally announced the SHA-3 competition in 2007 with an open call for the submission of candidate hash algorithms, and received 64 submissions from cryptographers around the world. In an ongoing review process, including two open conferences, the cryptographic community provided an enormous amount of expert feedback, andNIST winnowed the original 64 candidates down to the five finalist candidates – BLAKE, Grøstl, JH, Keccak and Skein. These finalists were further reviewed in a third public conference in March 2012.

NIST chose Keccak over the four other excellent finalists for its elegant design, large security margin, good general performance, excellent efficiency in hardware implementations, and for its flexibility. Keccak uses a new “sponge construction” chaining mode, based on a fixed permutation, that can readily be adjusted to trade generic security strength for throughput, and can generate larger or smaller hash outputs as required. The Keccak designers have also defined a modified chaining mode for Keccak that provides authenticated encryption. Additionally, Keccak complements the existing SHA-2 family of hash algorithms well. NIST remains confident in the security of SHA-2 which is now widely implemented, and the SHA-2 hash algorithms will continue to be used for the foreseeable future, as indicated in the NIST hash policy statement. One benefit that Keccak offers as the SHA-3 winner is its difference in design and implementation properties from that of SHA-2. It seems very unlikely that a single new cryptanalytic attack or approach could threaten both algorithms. Similarly, the very different implementation properties of the two algorithms will allow future application and protocol designers greater flexibility infinding one of the two hash algorithms that fits well with their requirements. NIST thanks the many people in companies, universities, laboratories and organizations around the world that participated in and contributed to the SHA-3 competition, especially the submitters of all the candidate algorithms, and the many others who contributed expert cryptanalysis, and performance studies. NIST could not have done the competition without them.

A detailed report of the final round of the competition will be published in the near future. Information about the SHA-3 competition is available at: http://www.nist.gov/hash-competition"


Submission + - Microsoft Co-founder Dings Windows 8 as 'Puzzling, Confusing' (computerworld.com)

CWmike writes: "Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen has called Windows 8 'puzzling' and 'confusing initially,' but assured users that they would eventually learn to like the new OS. Allen, who co-founded Microsoft with Bill Gates in 1975, left the company in 1983 after being diagnosed with Hodgkin's disease. In a post to his personal blog on Tuesday — strangely titled in the third person as, 'Paul's take on Windows 8,' Allen said he has been running Windows 8 Release Preview — the public sneak peak Microsoft shipped May 31 — on both a traditional desktop as well as on a Samsung 700T tablet, designed for Windows 7. 'I did encounter some puzzling aspects of Windows 8,' Allen wrote, and said the dual, and dueling user interfaces (UIs), were confusing. 'The bimodal user experience can introduce confusion, especially when two versions of the same application — such as Internet Explorer — can be opened and run simultaneously,' Allen said."

Submission + - SHA-3 winner announced (nist.gov)

An anonymous reader writes: National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has just announced the winner of the SHA-3 competition: Keccak, created by Guido Bertoni, Joan Daemen and Gilles Van Assche of STMicroelectronics and Michaël Peeters of NXP Semiconductors.

“Keccak has the added advantage of not being vulnerable in the same ways SHA-2 might be,” says NIST computer security expert Tim Polk. “An attack that could work on SHA-2 most likely would not work on Keccak because the two algorithms are designed so differently.”

For Joan Daemen it must be a "two in a row" feeling, since he also is one of the authors of AES.

Comment Several (Score 1) 867

Manual-no-distro (ref my signature) => SLS => Slackware => Manual (OK, some Slackware files &structures were left, but I compiled literally everything from the original sources (i.e. bypassing slack to get whatever version I wanted) and reconfigured just about everything) => Suse (very briefly) => OpenSuse.

In parallel also RedHat for many years, once I managed to have Linux accepted at the office. These days also some UI-less Ubuntu.

Comment Re:Cue the loonies -- uh no, not on Slashdot (Score 1) 398

OK, check out my UID for starters. Yes, that's a 3 digit number. And I could have had a 2 digit number if I'd have registered as soon as registering was an option, because I've been around here from before there were UIDs. With that fact out of the way, I'm definitely not in GW denial and never have been, because I'm in essence always taking the scientific approach to everything and the GW evidence has been around for a very long time.

Sorry to punch a hole in your scientifically unproven theory :-), but always willing to study the evidence for it if you can provide it after all.

Comment Re:Some people think bilingualism causes confusion (Score 4, Insightful) 221

Writing as a Belgian and thus intimately familiar with language wars: Over here the people who argue against multilingual education are indeed most often the "monolingual zealot (typically of the borderline racist kind)" type. Since they don't want to be labeled as such, they will typically use the "it confuses the child" argument, ideally using a young child that uses two languages in a single sentence as evidence (as if uni-lingual young children never make grammar mistakes). The "it's confusing" claim has the additional benefit that it can be used to convince non-racists who don't know any better. Never mind that the whole argument has been scientifically disproved a ton of times. Never mind even that every single multilingual child/adult walking the place is a perfect example that no harm was done. (Well, of course from the point of view of the zealots, harm was done. But I refuse make them my to reference point.)

Slashdot Top Deals

All the simple programs have been written.