Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



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

Comment Re:Aha, so here's the problem: (Score 2) 304

Well, YouTube and the record labels did figure this one out a while ago. They have various forms of advertising along with the content when it's served from YouTube, they're all getting some cut from it, and listeners are free to enjoy the music.

It's reasonable to claim that the ripping tools are undermining that, reducing YouTube usage by promoting illegal copyright infringement as an alternative, and that they are doing so on a commercial scale for profit. So the businesses who have the legal rights are suing, and I can't imagine any likely ending for this that doesn't involve an injunction and significant damages being awarded.

Comment an infection is as an infection does (Score 1) 153

Despite the brass ring TOS of whatever version you were previously running, an infection is as an infection does.

Also, read your antibiotic prescription carefully.
* may include systemd[**]

[**] First we keep Berlin, then we take Warsaw, someday soon we annex Prague, and eventually perhaps we'll incite the Arabs to cut Manhattan down to size.

All hail PC-BSD: the systemd-free libertarian antibiotic of last resort.

Comment public routing table vs connection tuple (Score 1) 125

Even a 64-bit address would have been seen as doubling memory requirements of routing hardware for no good reason.

There could have been an optional 32-bit client sub-address ignored by the public routing backbone.

Then, for most purposes, non-backbone routers need two routing tables: a routing table for the public network (if more complex than a few simple gateways), and an organization-local internal routing table (with 32-bit addresses, just like the public table).

The actual problem is that each TCP/IP connection would require for the connection tuple (src_IP, src_port, dst_IP, dst_port) not 12 bytes, but 20 bytes.

Probably something could have been done to mitigate that, too, as things stood long ago, but I don't feel like speculating further just now.

Even without mitigation, let's suppose you have an FTP server and you want to guarantee at least 16 kb/s for each active FTP connection (circa 14.4/28.8 modem technology). You need to provide nearly a kbit/s network bandwidth per byte of connection tuple held in system memory (we'll ignore the messy nature of FTP, much of whose ugliness could have been averted by a better original IP design).

At the same time, NAT isn't all bad. It does help to conceal the internal structure of your network from the evil public network (and makes exposing your non-firewall hosts more of a sin of commission rather than a simple sin of omission).

NAT also erects a barrier to ultimate host fingerprinting and traffic analysis, at least until HTTP came along to ruin things with user agent strings and cookies.

Some people are quick to point out that a low barrier is no barrier at all, but I like to force my adversaries to at least put on their ballet shoes before attacking my network, and then to stay alert for people with trunks full of tools good at hopping low barriers.

My proposal doesn't much complicate the backbone routing table, except for Sandvine, who would have—once we got there—been pissed in a big way (counterfactually), to much rejoicing.

Comment digital assistant final selection challenge (Score 1) 68

For this one, no pretense of family language.

This post will cover first the competition fine print; then the long-term relationship; and, finally, the lamentable low bar responsible for this Tourettic outburst.

***

To qualify for certification, the DA candidate must be able to distinguish when I'm searching something deserving to bring it more fully into my consciousness, and when I'm searching something horrawful to determine the appropriate size of BFBM (big fucking black marker) required to cross that POS—along with any predictable next of kin—out of my life For-Fucking-Ever.

Digital assistant, read my lips: having now surveyed the top twenty search results in any extreme lather of sudden aghast attention, be it resolved that I hate this thing per the aforementioned For-Fucking-Ever. Please eradicate with extreme vigilance, or crawl back on your pathetic digital stomach to the corporation that brought you into this world with no goddamn balls.

YouTube, for example, keeps on suggesting styles of videos I explored for a tawdry half hour at some point in the distant past, long after a sane AI would have wooshed that bowel movement down the egress funnel, around the septic hair pin, to swirl and merge into the collective effluent.

But no, Google has settled for the derp, derp, derp algorithm in which it presumes that if you ate it once, you'll surely eat it again—forgetting, I suppose, that it gave you the major shits—so long as we continue to wave it under your nose until the end of time.

Nicely done, YouTube.

Comment Re:Can we get something like windows 10.01 10.02 (Score 2) 221

What is effectively Windows 7 SP2 is called the Convenience Rollup instead, probably because it avoids complications about extending support dates if a new Service Pack is released, and it's found as KB3125574. See my first post to this discussion for more about how to use it, including installing it without waiting an eternity for Windows Update to get its act together.

Comment Microsoft Update Catalog is my new hero (Score 5, Informative) 221

For general information, if you're installing a fresh Windows 7 now (starting from SP1, presumably) then it seems by far the fastest way to get a system reasonably well patched is to install the Convenience Rollup (KB3125574) and if necessary its prerequisite (KB3020369) from the Microsoft Update Catalog. That immediately brings you up to somewhere around April 2016 in terms of patch level, and you can download the required files quickly from the Catalog site and then install them locally using WUSA without waiting around for hours while Windows Update does whatever its current broken mess needs to do now. The most recent time I did this was just a few days ago, and after doing that it was then another couple of hours for Windows Update to find the rest and install the remaining security updates, but at least it could be done in an afternoon instead of leaving the new PC overnight and hoping it might have found something by the morning. Spybot Anti-Beacon or some similar tool can still turn off the various telemetry junk that you can't now individually because it's all bundled into the CR update.

Incidentally, for those who would prefer to keep security patching their existing Windows 7 systems but not get anything else, there are reportedly (direct from a Microsoft source) going to be monthly security-only bundles as well, but you'll have to get those from Microsoft Update Catalog manually as well, they won't be advertised or pushed out through Windows Update. So it looks like the new SOP is to turn off Windows Update entirely (as a bonus, you get back that CPU core that's been sitting at 100% running the svchost.exe process containing the Windows Update service for the last few months) and instead just go along and manually download the security bundle each month to install locally.

Of course, Microsoft Update Catalog requires Internet Explorer 6.0 or later and won't run with any of the other modern browsers, but I'll live with using IE to access it if it means I get security-patched but otherwise minimally screwed up Windows 7 machines for another 3 years.

Also, it's been confirmed that this policy will apply to all editions of Windows 7. It's not an Enterprise-only feature and doesn't require the use of WSUS etc. Let's hope they stick to their word on this one.

Comment Re:Already compensated (Score 1) 178

Microsoft have been fined roughly $2B in Europe for various antitrust-related violations, as well as ultimately being forced to change their software. As far as I'm aware, they are still the recipient of the largest fine of that nature in history.

In the US, at one stage a court even ruled that Microsoft should be broken up because of the nature of their software bundling arrangements, though that was subsequently overturned on appeal.

Numerous sources can be yours for the price of entering "Microsoft antitrust" into the search engine of your choice.

Comment s/Have/Have Not/g (Score 3, Insightful) 173

Please, for the love of the children, can we STOP innovating on curly braces already.

And here I was all pumped up about the Erlang to Elixir upgrade path, repeated for Go, which suffers from the same weird Erlang-like conservatism that isn't suitable for all needs (such as most projects by corporations employing fewer than 20,000 technologists).

Conservatism has its uses, but it's no silver bullet, nor can removing braces make it so.

Comment Re:The beatings will continue until morale improve (Score 1) 134

Yes, in some places that is true, but I am talking here about "minor" copyright infringement. If stealing a $1 chocolate bar is criminal theft, I'm suggesting (as a basis for discussion) that perhaps downloading a movie instead of buying a $10 DVD should be criminal copyright infringement, and therefore something that public authorities are responsible for policing in the same way that they would prosecute someone caught stealing a chocolate bar from a store.

Comment Re:Already compensated (Score 1) 178

You can't force a company to meet your standards unless you can get a court verdict against them, and that's already been tried with Microsoft and it failed.

Erm... Say what? For one thing, Microsoft has lost some of the biggest lawsuits and been subject to some of the most severe penalties in the modern corporate tech sector. For another thing, the issues around their direction with Windows 10 haven't been litigated yet, and the kind of consumer advocacy we're discussing in this very thread is often how that process starts.

Comment Re:Sounds good (Score 1) 134

OK, I'll take you at your word and ask you this, then: why is insider trading considered a bad thing? It's only acting rationally based on true facts. Regardless of the outcome for the inside trader, no other investor was ever guaranteed any particular value for the shares they hold. The business itself is still there and has still issued the same number of shares. So why has anyone lost out in insider trading, and why does the law prohibit it, in your view?

Comment Re:Already compensated (Score 1) 178

So if you want to sit around and whine about how bad MS is, go ahead, but it isn't productive and it's annoying.

Strange that you're still posting in this discussion if you find it so annoying. Also strange that you seem to equate everyone's comments here with mere whining, when at least the people I've been reading and debating with seem to be more interested in talking about actions that might usefully be taken in the real world.

The only rational solution, if you don't like the way they're treating you, is to vote with your feet.

Well, no, we could also raise awareness of the issues to put pressure on them to change their behaviour, and if that doesn't work, we could take legal action on various grounds, which is customarily how one enforces one's rights against a business that is misbehaving and refuses to do better.

or 2) you can find a better vendor.

The trouble is, if all anyone ever does it post online about how they'll take their business elsewhere, that doesn't magically create any better vendors to move to. It takes competition in the market place to do that, and part of that competition comes from holding vendors to the standards we require of them in terms of treating their customers fairly and punishing those that do not meet those standards.

Slashdot Top Deals

Machines that have broken down will work perfectly when the repairman arrives.

Working...