Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
Compare cell phone plans using Wirefly's innovative plan comparison tool ×

Comment Re:How does that work? (Score 2) 63

That is how it works in a police-state: Even if the police rapes, pillages and murders wholesale, they get at most an inquiry that finds they did nothing wrong. Actual "rule of law" says the law applies to everybody and the police are held to an even higher standard. These days, many of them are thugs with no accountability at all.

Comment Re:It's not Linux (Score 1) 291

They also happen two to be two different technology-clusters, one below the kernel interface and one above. They do interface very well though and that has made the Linux-revolution possible. But, for example, nobody in their right mind would call a Cygwin installation "Linux", but it is powered by the GNU toolset.


FBI Authorized Informants To Break The Law 22,800 Times In 4 Years ( 63

blottsie quotes a report from the Daily Dot: Over a four-year period, the FBI authorized informants to break the law more than 22,800 times, according to newly reviewed documents. Official records obtained by the Daily Dot under the Freedom of Information Act show the Federal Bureau of Investigation gave informants permission at least 5,649 times in 2013 to engage in activity that would otherwise be considered a crime. In 2014, authorization was given 5,577 times, the records show. USA Today previously revealed confidential informants engaged in "otherwise illegal activity," as the bureau calls it, 5,658 times in 2011. The figure was at 5,939 the year before, according to documents acquired by the Huffington Post. In total, records obtained by reporters confirm the FBI authorized at least 22,823 crimes between 2011 and 2014. Unfortunately, many of those crimes can have serious and unintended consequences. One of the examples mentioned in the Daily Dot's report was of an FBI informant who "was responsible for facilitating the 2011 breach of Stratfor in one of the most high-profile cyberattacks of the last decade. While a handful of informants ultimately brought down the principal hacker responsible, the sting also caused Stratfor, an American intelligence firm, millions of dollars in damages and left and estimated 700,000 credit card holders vulnerable to fraud."

Comment Re:The name says it all... (Score 2) 151

It's not mispronounced; the first screenshot in this article shows that the menu item (third from the left) is in fact spelled "manbang" and pronounced (using X-SAMPA) as /man.baN/, equivalent to how a conservative English accent would say "man bang" (with open front unrounded A) Here's the Wikipedia article on Korean phonology if you want to analyse it yourself.

...Is it possible you're salty because someone forgot to invite you to participate in Manbang?

Comment Re:"More Professional Than Ever" (Score 2) 291

World domination for Linux has been achieved a while ago and it is obvious that it has been. All the Linux-haters seem to have some pathological mental condition where they are blind to reality. Possibly it is a combination of fear of the unknown and fear of losing the illusion of being the master of their machine, that makes them leash out irrationally.

Comment Re:More professional than ever (Score 2) 291

Linux is not a Unix. The proper term is "Unix-like". Same for QNX and some others. Unix-like OSes are not "based" on Unix, they do not share source with Unix. They do have a compatible API though. And that is really the success-story here: The Unix kernel API (and the GNU tools that use it). Lean and mean without the bloat and > 1000 API calls (most redundant) that the Windows kernel comes with.

Comment Re:"More Professional Than Ever" (Score 0) 291

Indeed. And the rot has set in, for example with systemd. The kernel is still clean though, so maybe it is time for another Linux distro that is specifically targeted at people with a clue and that uses things that are well established and are known to work well, instead of the commercial hype of the day. Debian used to be that distro, but not anymore.

Comment That is how a surveillance-state does it (Score 4, Insightful) 88

The next step is, of course, to dispense with the need for forensic "evidence" on people's computers and do this fully with "intercepted" communications. And here is the real danger of a surveillance-state: They can send anybody, any time to prison for as long as they desire, and there is no possibility to defend yourself unless they screwed up massively (as they did in the case at hand).

Comment Re:Open source is more secure (Score 1) 63

Fascinating. A new level of ignorance and stupidity is reached. Ever heard about known vulnerabilities that get not fixed for a long, long time in closed-source software? And ever heard about the same thing in open source software? Well, with the fuzziness of your thinking, you probably have heard of the second and not the first, but that has not even a distant relation to actual reality.

Comment Re: Open source is more secure (Score 1) 63

The ignorant here is you and massively so. First, this is about what to do once a vulnerability is known. You, know, the time when it becomes really, really dangerous to leave it unfixed because all the script-kiddies start attacking it. And then, whoever said anything about you having to come up with patch yourself? That is the closed-source mind-set where every modification of software is almost a criminal act, to be committed in solitude and secrecy. Yes, somebody has to come up with a patch, and there are people out there that have a lot better skills at this than you (and yes, I mean you specifically) and can do it, and that still do not work for the vendor. If any one of them publishes a patch, the worst you have to do is verify it solves the problem, but even that is in basically all cases replaced by peer-review among those that have the required skills. This process works and has worked for decades. It is the main reason Linux exists.

Your hostility towards open source does one thing: It makes you look very, very stupid. It also makes you look like somebody that enjoys being at the mercy of a vendor, like a good little follower that submits to authority because that obviously is how one must live.

Comment Re:Windows 2000 called, said Linux sucks (Score 1) 522

Poettering said USB does not work. Anybody else did not have a problem. Until now...

That's funny, I read the blog post and I didn't see anything anywhere about USB not working.

Fundamental engineering principle: If it is not broken, do not fix it. Hence either it was broken, or Poettering is even more incompetent.

Slashdot Top Deals

There is hardly a thing in the world that some man can not make a little worse and sell a little cheaper.