Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



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

Comment Re:They want no cash (Score 4, Informative) 558

Guilty as accused, at least up to a point.

However, it is certainly not conjecture that most large retail outfits are actually multi-nationals. Which, by and large, centralise their IT, purchase and logistics operations across countries to some degree. It is also pretty much both logical and normal that said multi-nationals routinely store and analyse data about customer behaviour.

Do you really think that the likes of Rewe and Tesco would bother to exempt Belgium from these analyses?

Considering that Belgium happens to be in Europe, and the considerable penalty for breaching European privacy laws, I would say yes, they would bother to exempt Belgium, since the cost of not doing so can potentially be HUGE, if caught.

Submission + - Paul Vixie Throws In The Towel On DNSSEC (google.com)

kindbud writes: Commenting on Google+ about the mitigations for CVE-2015-7547, a glibc getaddrinfo() stack-based buffer overflow that can be triggered by large EDNS0 packets, Paul Vixie said it's "time to move on."

so much for the small chance of ever reaching ubiquity that dnssec had until this week. time to move on, i suppose.

— Mitigating factors for UDP include:
— A firewall that drops UDP DNS packets > 512 bytes.
— A local resolver (that drops non-compliant responses).
— Avoid dual A and AAAA queries (avoids buffer management error) e.g. Do not use AF_UNSPEC.
— No use of `options edns0` in /etc/resolv.conf since EDNS0 allows responses larger than 512 bytes and can lead to valid DNS responses that overflow.
— No use of `RES_USE_EDNS0` or `RES_USE_DNSSEC` since they can both lead to valid large EDNS0-based DNS responses that can overflow.


Comment Re:Too much hype about driverless cars (Score 3, Informative) 211

Looks like you are arguing from a bias. First, your demand that there should be zero accidents is an idiotic one. Statistics and tests have already proven that there are less number of accidents with automated cars.

Secondly, your pulled-out-of-your-ass argument about dropping safety standards seems to never happened to say flights, or industrial machinery. You put people's lives at risk, your product doesn't sells and you get sued too. Hell of a dis-incentive.

All the argument about being unable to stop a lump of metal travelling at 100kph in 0 time is the most moronic thing I have heard. Do you have some special telekinetic powers to be able to do this, if you had manual control?

The key thing you are missing is that the software is not getting distracted while texting, is not going to be drunken driving and is not going to get into a drag race with others on the road. Its 100% focus is on avoiding collisions while getting you where you want to go.

Comment Re:It reminds me (Score 0) 390

So just like you argue that civilian innocents casualties are unavoidable in war, consider abortions, unavoidable civilian innocent casualties of life. Happy to put things in perspective for you.

If unborn are sacred due to innocence and not committing any sins, same applies for chicken, turkeys and buffaloes. So what did you have for thanksgiving?

The only basic logic you have is an arbitrary once that makes sense to you alone. It is called hypocrisy.

Comment Is My Religious Liberty Being Threatened? (Score 5, Insightful) 1168

How to Determine if Your Religious Liberty Is Being Threatened in Just 10 Quick Questions.
  Just pick "A" or "B" for each question.

  My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am not allowed to go to a religious service of my own choosing.
B) Others are allowed to go to religious services of their own choosing.

2. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am not allowed to marry the person I love legally, even though my religious community blesses my marriage.
B) Some states refuse to enforce my own particular religious beliefs on marriage on those two guys in line down at the courthouse.

3. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am being forced to use birth control.
B) I am unable to force others to not use birth control.

4. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am not allowed to pray privately.
B) I am not allowed to force others to pray the prayers of my faith publicly.

5. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) Being a member of my faith means that I can be bullied without legal recourse.
B) I am no longer allowed to use my faith to bully gay kids with impunity.

6. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am not allowed to purchase, read or possess religious books or material.
B) Others are allowed to have access books, movies and websites that I do not like.

7. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) My religious group is not allowed equal protection under the establishment clause.
B) My religious group is not allowed to use public funds, buildings and resources as we would like, for whatever purposes we might like.

8. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) Another religious group has been declared the official faith of my country.
B) My own religious group is not given status as the official faith of my country.

9. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) My religious community is not allowed to build a house of worship in my community.
B) A religious community I do not like wants to build a house of worship in my community.

10. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am not allowed to teach my children the creation stories of our faith at home.
B) Public school science classes are teaching science.

If you answered "A" to any question, then perhaps your religious liberty is indeed at stake. You and your faith group have every right to now advocate for equal protection under the law.

If you answered "B" to any question, then not only is your religious liberty not at stake, but there is a strong chance that you are oppressing the religious liberties of others.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Don't tell me I'm burning the candle at both ends -- tell me where to get more wax!!"

Working...