Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


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

Comment Re:Another obvious defense against this (Score 4, Interesting) 427

I want a "panic" finger such that it displays a "could not read fingerprint - try again" message and then immediate sets "allow_unlocking_with_fingerprint=False" internally so that a password is required. Make it indistinguishable from the usual unlock failure message so that it's impossible to tell that it was triggered (even by examining the on-device logs, if that's possible).

Comment Re:One small problem... (Score 1) 111

"That's a wiretap"

No, it's not. It's deep packet inspection for purpose of network management.

"blocking a service without a DMCA notice is criminal."

No, it's not. First, the world is bigger than the US, and second, we do it as sysadmins all the time. We blacklist spammers, and people involved DDoS attacks.

None of this matters, however, to a system like this, which involves watermarking the content, and blocking it on the upstream side. The provider watermarks all the streams of their videos, and when it shows up on the internet somewhere, that subscriber is shut off. Perfectly, completely legal.

Comment Re:Doesn't sound plausible (Score 2) 111

"So every single stream is going to have a unique watermark embedded in the audio or visual data? The original will be decompressed, the mark added, then recompressed and streamed to each specific subscriber to allow identification? Tens or hundreds of thousands, simultaneously?"

No. The watermarking technology is put in the decoder - the set top box, the Widevine DRM module (in browsers), in iTunes. The stream is watermarked so capturing it and re-encoding it will have the watermark present.

Comment Re:easily made up in peripherals. (Score 1) 515

Your suggestion, in a thread about relative costs of systems, is to buy a custom piece of hardware, from a vendor who's website doesn't actually list a price.

Y'all got Amazon where you live? Or access to any of the vendors they list on their website?

But it's not like Windows can backup to thin air. You have to have something on the other end of that CAT-5, so it's probably a wash hardware-wise.

Do you know what I think when I see a website selling a product but not listing a unit price.

"Huh, I wonder if Amazon has them?" would have been my first thought, but apparently it wasn't yours.

Comment Re:easily made up in peripherals. (Score 3, Informative) 515

if things ever get too hairy for a dell, your restore process is entirely automated in windows or linux. restoring a mac is nothing short of corporate witchcraft.

To backup: buy a Synology NAS. Enable the Time Machine service. Configure your Macs to back up to it. Voila, done.

To restore from scratch: hold down Command-R when booting a Mac. Tell it to restore from Time Machine. Wait an hour. Voila, done.

Comment Re:There is something to that... (Score 1) 515

because Mac is like 10 percent of the worlds PC sales, and the viruses usually dont survive that far when the percentage of ownership is that low

That has zero to do with the relative dearth of malware on Macs. (Pausing for a moment for a pedant to point out the one or two Mac bugs they've read about. Yes, we know. It's still proportionally much less than Mac's market share so move along.) Macs are initially more expensive, but that also means there owners tend to have more money and therefore the machines are more valuable targets. There are also still tens of millions of Macs out there in the wild. Even if there are more PCs, there are still a hell of a lot of Macs to be owned for anyone interested and capable. The fact that they're not is an indicator that building a nice interface on top of a solid Unix platform is a good way to end up with a stable, secure desktop.

Comment Re:blackouts, lack of channel choice, forced hardw (Score 1) 199

sports blackouts

OMG yes. I bought my wife an season pass because she loves watching baseball. What do you get for $109.99? Every game on TV except the ones in your home market. You can watch the Twins suck any time you want, so long as you don't live in Minnesota. Oh, and no postseason: that's a separate subscription.

Who the fuck came up with those ideas? I'll be damned if MLB ever gets another penny from us.

Comment Re:Why is this here? (Score 1) 380

I don't trust Snopes to debunk anything, but it's not for any political reason whatsoever. They have an article about Marilyn Monroe having six toes. To be clear, I think the whole idea is silly and I don't think (or particularly care whether) she did. However, they quote as evidence:

There is no record of Marilyn's having had an operation at that point in her life, and no contemporary references to anyone's noticing her walking with a bandaged foot or a limp for a period of time. (One doesn't simply get up and start trotting around after having a toe removed — the missing digit affects one's balance, and it takes some time to adjust to the change and "relearn" how to walk.)

My wife is a podiatrist. I asked her about this reasoning and she said it's BS. She amputates toes from time to time as part of her practice and says that patients usually bounce back and are walking perfectly fine in no time, even when she has to remove the big toe. Lopping off an extra little vestigial toe wouldn't have any noticeable effect once the wound healed, and the patient certainly wouldn't have to '"relearn" how to walk'. I wrote to Snopes with that information and got back a response basically blowing me off and arguing that the sixth toe story is a fake and my facts are wrong because "there should be no reason why a person with a painfully infected toe would walk with a limp. But they do.". Yeah, I get that. I never said otherwise. But I do claim that this one piece of evidence is completely wrong, does not accurately contribute to their conclusion (which I agree with), and I have a subject matter expert's testimony to that effect.

Since then, I've been a bit loathe to trust Snopes about anything. I mean, they're probably right about most things, but I have firsthand experience with them completely ignoring evidence that doesn't fit their narrative. I haven't paid enough attention to their articles to know what their political slant is, but the point is moot for me already anyway.

Comment Re:SpaceX should be grounded (Score 1) 79

"As an aerospace engineer, I can assure you that this is something that shouldn't have happened."

Pheww! Lucky you are an aerospace engineer, or we wouldn't have known that! We were all thinking that exploding rockets were just part of the normal routine! Thanks for clarifying, Mr. Obv... I mean, Aerospace Engineer!

Comment Re:the answer: (Score 1) 70

I know the term. But I happen to disagree with it.

That's why I said, Gods as in: the Greek Gods. Contrary to our contemporary idea about god, the Greek gods were full of flaws, and knew things like envy, revenge, pettiness, and all other 'human' emotions, good and bad. Including hubris. ;-)

They didn't differ from humans on a psychological and emotional level, thus... only they had vast powers exceeding anything a human had back than, and immortal life.

We currently already have vast powers. With things we consider 'normal' today, one would easily have gotten God-status in ancient Greek times. Something like a nuclear bomb that could destroy a city in the blink of an eye would only have been considered a god's power back then. All our scientific advancement has brought tremendous power, be it good (medicines) or bad (weapons).

No, we already succeeded on the powerlevel, and this will only continue. There is, at least in principle, no limit to scientific knowledge and technological progression.This leaves only immortality, but with stemcell-research and parabiosis, etc., it's only a matter of time we'll get lifespans of hundreds, and maybe thousands of years as well.

So, as I said, we're pretty close to 'Gods' as the ancient Greek envisioned them.

Comment Re:Wacky? Maybe, but at least he's got vision. (Score 1) 289

But true to some extend. As a whole, there is a lot more flamebait, trolling, and "Look at what I dare to say!" (but anonymously) -posts coming from Anonymous Cowards than from people under a regular nickname.

I know, I know. In principle, it's the arguments that count, and not who says it. And it's a fine principle. Only, there is no real reason not to say it under your regular nick, if you're convinced enough to say it in the first place. The fact one doesn't, can have several reasons, but all of them don't seem that praiseworthy to me. One reason could be one is a lazy ass who can't be bothered registering for a one-time comment. But that's a false reason in most instances, since many AC actually come back and comment again and again, and there is no reason why one wouldn't register a nick once, if it's for continuous use on a site you're posting on regularly anyway.

Another reason, is reputation. And more precisely, the fear of losing it. That points to a defect in character, though, since it means you're afraid of saying your own opinion because of the (bad) rap you would get from it. I guess this is where the 'coward' comes into the AC.

A third reason is just liking to be a troll, or finding pleasure in flamebaiting, without giving the opportunity to others to 'get back' on 'your' nick. It hangs together with 'shadenfreude'; either towards other posters, or towards - as is in this case - the person of the topic in question. Which in this case is Elon Musk. And indeed, as one can see, the majority of AC's are often negative and derisive against Elon Musk or his projects. But one lacks the guts to do the same under ones' own name/nick. It's the flair and taste of impunity that makes it extra sweet, it's like kicking someone without any chance of the person knowing who did it. Those kind of things appeal to the lowest in human nature, but yet it's often used, even in more serious r/l situations, as is shown by the Taharrush in Cologne.

While it starkly differs in level, it's the same principles: indulgement of base desires because of little fear of any consequences.

Comment Re:Market failure (Score 1) 428

While there is always *some* restrictions on businesses even in a free market (child labor in the West is not allowed for instance), those restrictions normally do not involve price-settings on a private company running a for profit businesses in the free market.

In this instance, it's just a matter of demand and supply. As other have pointed out, it does not make sense to complain about this. People not wanting to pay "3 times more" could just as well ordered a regular taxi-service.

And if that regular one still asked more money: what are they complaining about?

Imagine, then, that Uber didn't exist. Then all people wanting to leave with a taxi would need to pay that regular taxi-service, who asks even more than Uber.

So... why is this a topic? why are they complaining? there is NO logical grounds for it. Whether they have to pay higher prices to uber due to higher demand, the fact is and remains that without Uber, they would need to pay *even more*. So shut the fuck up, I'd say to those whiners.

Slashdot Top Deals

Dead? No excuse for laying off work.