Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


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

Comment This brain science with psychology is dumb (Score 1) 140

So they are going off blood flow and activity? That doesn't mean little lies make big lies easier in a emotional or stress sense, just that you are faster at them or more reflexive. I'm so tired of people acting like consciousness is a sum of it's parts.

also, it was A STUDY in a research hospital. here is the problem, lying in a study is NEVER going to be the same as lying in a organic situation where no one knows but you.

That is another thing I am tired of, studies in a research office where after you go through a sorting questionnaire someone with a clip board asks "I give you 100 dollars but that means he gets $20 less... etc etc but you have to go lie to him about it etc etc but I take away this $1 bag of tasty corn chips" ---reseacer: ""Ah see! this proves people will sell cornchips for $100 and lie about it!"". ', They think this some how reflects what someone would do in the real world.

protip: people don't act how they say they will, so ASKING them about something is worthless, and having them do it in a study group is only slightly less worthless.

Comment What about the drone war? (Score 1) 107

Will the US play along with this and not expand the extrajudicial assassination by drone program to Sweden? There's a high likelihood the next US administration will continue the drone war (which the US would call "state-sponsored terrorism" if any other country were doing has been doing). Terror Tuesday is coming up fast but we all know murder-by-drone is lighthearted humor except for its victims and anyone who thinks killing is wrong. Like Obama said, "Turns out I'm really good at killing people. Didn't know that was gonna be a strong suit of mine". Paving the way for the next war criminal, Hillary Clinton, to take over the role.

Comment Re:Illusion of secure encryption on an insecure OS (Score 4, Insightful) 71

Indeed; there are many reasons not to do business with Apple and many reasons to never use proprietary, user-subjugating software. Contrary to one of the follow-ups to the parent post, this has everything to do with TrueCrypt, VeraCrypt, and any other free software to which one entrusts their sensitive information. There's nothing these programs can do to fix the real problem. The user has to switch operating systems to a fully free software, user-respecting OS and install only free software on top of that to do the best we can do to avoid the aforementioned problems. So while nobody can blame these free software programs for leaked keys, passphrases, and other leaked information there's no reason to trust the underlying proprietary software these free programs rely on to do everything they do when running on non-free OSes.

Comment Proprietary control is the trouble with Windows (Score 1) 285

The problem isn't the trouble of having to read and modify so much, it's that even if you do all that you can't trust what you have; you can't be sure those "41 pages of switches, GPOs, and reg hacks" will grant you the privacy you seek even on the Enterprise variant of Windows. Anyone who tells you otherwise is speculating from ignorance. You can't stop any variant of Windows from tricking users into "upgrading" to some more recently-released variant (like the trouble Windows users had with Windows 10 "upgrades" recently). That's the thing about proprietary software; you're never in charge of what it does. Even if you think you've set the switches the right way, programmers can make a UI that looks like it is doing what the user wants but actually does something the user does not want and does this without the user's permission or control. No configuration of switches can fix this. Users need software freedom to fix this.

Satya Nadella and Bill Gates before him focused on what's important for modern proprietors—spying on the user because that's profitable and secures powerful friends. Consider that Microsoft tells the NSA about bugs before fixing them. This doesn't help most Windows users, but it helps the NSA know to devalue those bugs. And it tells you to devalue proprietary software. With proprietors, you're the product: all the data you generate including what you run, when you're using the computer, and where you take the computer (for computers with cell phone capability or GPS units) can and is spied upon. You don't get out of that trap without software freedom either.

Comment Re:huh? (Score 1) 146

A decade or two ago (I'm not really sure when he wrote it)) Brad Templeton suggested something like this as a fix for various problems, especially trademark. My take is that the basic idea is that TLDs are already meaningless, so diversifying them into increased meaninglessness does no damage while offering some benefits. (e.g. makes monopolizing certain words harder, makes it easier to try out new registration policies, etc)

Comment Re:Whatever it is, it's out and not "Linux" (Score 1) 163

Thanks for the clarification. Are people meant to run other OSes but GNU atop Windows Subsystem for Linux? I've not heard of anyone doing this nor have I seen any announcement this was intended.

So GNU doesn't come with this, but one runs ELF binaries (Ubuntu's 14.05 release, for instance) on Microsoft's Windows Subsystem for Linux to effectively get GNU. Since this ostensibly doesn't include the Linux kernel this wouldn't qualify as GNU/Linux either.

Functionally, however, I don't see a great deal of difference between this and Cygwin as in both cases one ends up with a lot of the same programs running atop Microsoft Windows.

Comment Re:Does anybody ... (Score 1) 474

how do you cut off *his* internet connection without cutting off the entire Ecuadorian Embassy's internet connection?

Go to the rack and unplug the ethernet cable whose other end is in Assange's room. Change the wifi password and only tell people the new one along with the instructions "don't share your password, especially with that Assange guy."

The "state actor" was Ecuador, or else it didn't happen. That's the only government capable of doing it.

Comment Re:Logical (Score 1) 365

Who is responsable in the case your AI-autonomous car decides to kill some pedestrians ?

I don't know. Tell me more about what happened right before that.

Was the pedestrian running out into traffic for laughs, to see all the cars crash into each other as some other threads here suggest? Was the occupant aiming it toward crowds to impress his friend with how it suddenly swerves away from the crowd when he takes his hands off the wheel? Did it just suddenly "randomly" turn off the street into a crowd as a result of a bug?

By the time someone or something decides "hit this or hit that" you already have a huge failure. That is way more important and common than the hit-this-or-that question itself.

Comment Whatever it is, it's out and not "Linux" (Score 2) 163

MS has stated that this is very new and very buggy but that they are working on it. It is not yet for public consumption.

Apparently Microsoft released it to the public.

MS has been embracing Open source minus the extinguish part for some time now.

Time will tell.

Linux (okay so not the kernel but still) on Windows outside of a virtual machine is everything a lot of people have wanted but never thought would happen.

This tends to confirm the view that the GNU/Linux misnaming as "Linux" is really about denying credit where credit is due (particularly noteworthy amongst people who are sticklers for technical accuracy and in need of a clearer distinction for what one has). This project includes some parts of a system but without the Linux kernel and yet you're still giving that project credit. What Microsoft has released might be a GNU/kWindows (akin in naming to Debian GNU/kFreeBSD, meaning GNU running atop the kernel of some other system—Microsoft Windows or FreeBSD, respectively) but whatever it is, it is certainly not "Linux" and it contains no Linux kernel code. Also, Cygwin has delivered some variant of comparable functionality for years.

Comment Corruption? How about killing people? (Score 1) 394

If Hillary Clinton wins the presidency, she'll be entering office as a war criminal having achieved that status well prior. She has backed possibly every war the US is engaged in and shows no signs of pulling the US out of its many occupations. Her belligerent stance on Syria, for instance, is to push for a "no-fly zone" which she acknowledges (to her bankster friends who also bankrolled Pres. Obama's candidacy) will "kill a lot of Syrians". Patrick Cockburn disagrees any US president would actually do this, but that doesn't stop her from making it known she is fine with the bombastic talk. She'll continue all of Obama's wars just as Obama continued and expanded G.W. Bush's wars. We don't know precisely where she'll expand US wars to, but it's likely to be some other poor country just as Obama expanded wars into Yemen. She'll continue the extrajudicial assassinations of Obama's drone wars (which Obama engaged in far more than Bush, making the drone wars a hallmark of Obama's presidency).

The drone strikes deserve some special attention because so few people seem to know about them. If any other country did this the US would have no problem identifying them as "state-sponsors of global terror" or calling them "terrorists". Each of these wars kill a lot of women and children (putting into perspective how much Clinton cares about women), including Americans (as we've seen with the Al-awlakis, such as killing a father and son 2 weeks apart in separate drone attacks) without due process. And the drones kill completely unsuspected innocent passers-by (such as one infamous wedding party attack. The US kills so many civilians they can't keep track of them all but are clearly ashamed by the deaths so they released (on a Friday before a holiday weekend when mainstream corporate media are least likely to carry the story) an internal assessment of civilian killings in U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, and Libya (including those killed including during Clinton's stint as Secretary of State). In that assessment we find an undercount due to the US reclassification of any military-age male as an "enemy combatant" in a desperate attempt to reduce the civilian death toll. There's every reason to expect more of the same from Hillary Clinton should she become president.

Domestically, Clinton's anti-poor/anti-working-person policies are bound to worsen the plight of women. Taking so much money from global banks ensures a continuation of no prosecutions for global banksters, no matter what fellow Democrat Sen. Elizabeth Warren says. Global trade pacts will help the US more efficiently exploit the poor. The TPP is a fine example of this: the TPP was known to, and does, receive massive international disapproval hence the TPP negotiations and early drafts were done in secret even keeping US congresspeople in the dark. Regardless of what Clinton says or hints to the US public, Clinton picked a pro-TPP vice presidential candidate in Tim Kaine and Clinton picked TPP boosters in her cabinet setup committee. It's hardly surprising that in April 2015 reported that "TPP Proponents Close to Clinton Remain Optimistic About Her Support". "The Gold Standard" remark from Clinton is no suprise given her history with Wal-Mart, an organization famous for their anti-unionization stance in the US (but tolerance of unionization in Germany where Wal-Mart couldn't avoid dealing with labor unions). Her stance against universalizing the US single-payer healthcare system Medicare (no doubt due to her taking so much money from HMOs who don't stand to benefit from a proper universal single-payer system) add to the misery acutely affecting the poor, including women who are often left to raise children. Where poverty continues to be allowed to go you can expect more needless suffering and death.

As I've pointed out before, she may be more gentle-toned than Trump but she's the more lethal choice than Trump too. Donald Trump's wide ignorance and many bigotries, as ugly and reprehensible as they are, are being pitched loudly to distract one from considering Sec. Clinton's lethal record of injustice. Fortunately, as I'm sure the Democrats will be happy to attest to should Clinton lose again, there's more than 2 choices for US president.

Comment Re:Logical (Score 1) 365

If you're worried to the point of stupidity/paralysis ("be prepared to be sued out of existence") then you've already chosen to never drive even a manually-operated car, because you were overwhelmed by your fears. Most people don't have that attitude going on, so they already drive cars anyway, where they face constant daily risk of injuring or even killing pedestrians.

And some of them end up occasionally doing it, to many peoples' grief. For whatever reason, society didn't give up and decide the existence of cars was just too dangerous to allow. It's over a hundred years too late for to advocate against cars. By the time your grandparents were born, this argument (that we're having today) had already been settled.

How the vehicle got to be out of control is what everyone trying to establish liability will be asking. That it killed a pedestrian or driver is merely the motivation for asking.

Comment More honestly, it's a "tracker". (Score 1) 21

You're thinking correctly in that, it's right in line with why we commonly call liberating a device to run software the owner wants to run without the approval of the device's proprietor(s) "jailbreaking"—a clear acknowledgement that the device shackles the user. The real harm comes from the inequity making the owner of the computer (typically the user) subservient to whatever proprietors are involved in making and selling the device. But the device's true purpose is spying on the user's movements and discussions, tracking and recording what the user does in real-time.

Slashdot Top Deals

"God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh." - Voltaire