Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!



52 Million Photos In FBI's Face Recognition Database By Next Year

Jane Q. Public Good Luck Trying To Hire Me (94 comments)

I'm not trying to get a security-related job anyway, but even so: I won't be applying to companies who want to take my fingerprints or my photograph.

I don't do piss tests or credit checks. Why should I do fingerprints of photographs?

Not very damned many people need a particular job that badly; there is usually other work to be had.


Netflix Gets What It Pays For: Comcast Streaming Speeds Skyrocket

Jane Q. Public Re:huh? (313 comments)

it seems like it's really good news for the people who stream Netflix on Comcast.


People tend to forget: they're already paying for that bandwidth. What Comcast has done is start charging Netflix to send you video over bandwidth you're already paying for. And now Netflix's costs are higher, which they will likely pass onto you, so you will end up paying twice for the same ISP service.

No, that's not good.


Private Keys Stolen Within Hours From Heartbleed OpenSSL Site

Jane Q. Public Re:Even root CA certificates may be at risk. (151 comments)

Also keep in mind that this involves a long, very serious, well-engineered attack.

The developer who first won the challenge made literally millions of requests to the server, in order to gather and piece together the chunks of memory slurped up.

2 days ago

Bill Would End US Govt's Sale of Already-Available Technical Papers To Itself

Jane Q. Public Re:Scrap librarians too? (32 comments)

You'd think that all they do is sell papers, when in fact they collect and organize them.

Anyone that does serious research will have used specialist librarians before. Just because the data is out there and available, doesn't mean you're going to find it. Even if you do find it, it doesn't mean your search was efficient.

I think you missed the whole point. The bill wouldn't stop them from doing the research. It would simply stop them from SELLING the results to other government agencies.

I mean come on, think about how ridiculous that is. The research was done with taxpayer dollars. Then they sell that research to other government agencies for more taxpayer dollars?

I do think it's a good idea to account for which government agencies use the service, and how much. But selling? Too far.

3 days ago

Judge (Tech) Advice By Results

Jane Q. Public Re:You can't help it, can you? (162 comments)

"You're just a mean, spiteful, jealous person, through and through."

Amazing. All I did was post a comment about OP that, to the best of my knowledge, is impersonal, factual, and true.

While all you've done is track me down in order to be personal, rude and insulting. But then you were before, too.

And somehow *I* am supposed to be the psychopath? How do you figure?

You're not merely content to be mean-spirited, though -- you have to be *better*. I'm hopeful you really are female; makes it statistically less likely your psychopathic behavior will turn to violence.

I've had to put up with lots of people before who couldn't stand being shown they were wrong. But this comment I think is the best yet.

Listen up, man. If you are the same Anonymous Coward I think you are, the very first comment you made to me was rude, personal, and insulting (saying a comment of mine you took out of context was "dumb", as I recall), and it only got worse from there.

I do my best to stay impersonal and simply discuss the subject at hand. But you weren't satisfied with that, and kept trying to make it personal. Well, too bad. This being the internet, your words don't have any weight to throw around. When someone is rude to me first, I'll be damned if I'm going to apologize for putting them in their place.

I haven't done anything wrong, so you can take your rudeness and bullying elsewhere. Maybe if you try to be polite and refrain from insulting others, they will respond in kind. But I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for it to happen. Evidence so far says I'd be waiting or a very long time.

about a week ago

The Problem With Congress's Scientific Illiterates

Jane Q. Public Re:Don't bother. (509 comments)

Since you clearly never took logic 101: an appeal to authority is only wrong when your appeal to authority does not involve an actual authority. Which the two people referred to, are. In which case an appeal to authority is actually the right course of action.

Since you apparently flunked logic 101: no, it isn't.

"Appeal to authority" is a logical fallacy when someones says an argument is true because an authority said it. That is a flawed argument. The whole point is that it doesn't matter what an authority says, they have to prove it just like everybody else.

Example: You say "Phil Plait (Bad Astronomer) says it is so; therefore it is so." That is an example of the Appeal to Authority fallacy. Plait is a noted authority on some subjects. But that does not automatically make him correct if evidence says otherwise.

Counterexample: "Phil Plait demonstrated it in an experiment, and the results were published in June 2012." That is not "appeal to authority", because it relies on the evidence of the experiment that was performed, not Phil Plait's word.

Third example: "Bob Jones performed an experiment that demonstrated X. But Phil Plait, Bad Astronomer, says it's not so, so I believe Phil Plait."

Again this is the "appeal to authority" fallacy, because the actual evidence indicates X, while the counterargument merely relies on the word of the supposed "authority".

about a week ago

CryptoPhone Sales Jump To 100,000+, Even at $3500

Jane Q. Public Re:That's dumb. (68 comments)

" Especially pertaining to Transmeta *and* FPGA"

Pardon me. In those particular instances,, I was wrong. Those are not firmware. BUT... and here is the main thing... that is completely irrelevant to the discussion that was taking place.

There are 2 points that are relevant here:

First, you took my comment out of context, and then called it dumb. Well, guess what? Lots of things are dumb when taken out of context. The context was: GP said "back doors" in cell phone conversations (that is the context) are in hardware (GP's comment). I said no, it isn't. If you want to argue about something else, you're going to have to argue with yourself.

The second point, related to the first, is: you didn't make any specific arguments against what I said, instead you just called it dumb. That's called an "ad-hominem", and in any kind of logical debate not only does it carry no weight, it can get you kicked out.

It might have been appropriate to ask me how I knew the back doors (if any) are not in hardware. But you didn't do that.

I have news for you: you aren't always the smartest person in the room. But more to the point: even if you are the smartest person in the room, there might be somebody there who knows something you don't.

So be careful about calling people stupid, lest you end up looking stupid.

I would have explained to you how I knew that back doors in cell phones aren't in hardware, if you had only asked politely. But since you didn't, I'm not going to bother.

about a week ago

Judge (Tech) Advice By Results

Jane Q. Public Re:How to judge tech advice: (162 comments)

Haselton is describing experiments with controls.

This is very far from a new or original idea. Even if he seems to think it is.

about a week ago

CryptoPhone Sales Jump To 100,000+, Even at $3500

Jane Q. Public Re:That's dumb. (68 comments)

"Setting aside the fact that "hardware" and "software" have a fine and wavering line between them, you have apparently never heard of (say) Transmeta, or FPGAs."

That's not "a fine and wavering line", at all. That's firmware, a third category.

"Or even software working around hardware issues -- e.g. the kernel patch for the Intel F00F bug."

That's moving the goalposts. It's a different subject from the one under discussion.

"Maybe you shouldn't try to sound so authoritative about stuff. Nobody knows everything, and, unless you do, acting as an Authority is dumb."

Since it is in the general field in which I make my living, I think I had the general qualifications to reply to GP.

The point here, which you seem to have missed, is: properly written software can make hardware (or even firmware) "back doors" irrelevant, unless your hardware has a complete second voice channel connected to the microphone that it's sending its data through. And I think it's pretty damned obvious that cell phone carriers aren't assigning 2 separate voice channels in realtime to U.S. cell phones.

Look up RedPhone. Go ahead, look it up.

about two weeks ago

CryptoPhone Sales Jump To 100,000+, Even at $3500

Jane Q. Public Re:"Secure service"? (68 comments)

"The hardware on cell phones provides the back door. Look up how SIM cards operate and get back to us (hint: it's how T-Mobile prevented Google Wallet from using NFC on my Samsung Galaxy S4, until the most recent update sent out by Samsung - an update which was sent out by mistake and never authorized by T-Mobile)."

Your own comment proves that it's software, not hardware. If it was correctable via a software update, then it isn't the hardware's fault.

about two weeks ago

CryptoPhone Sales Jump To 100,000+, Even at $3500

Jane Q. Public Re:"Secure service"? (68 comments)

"Unless it specifically says the company will never, under any circumstances comply with a government order to open up its communications, then the service should not be considered secure."

Most likely the "service" has very little if anything to do with the security, since in order to be secure, it HAS TO be encrypted on the phone prior to sending.

It is the software that needs to be evaluated, not the service. If the software on the phone doesn't allow a back door, then "the service" has no way to access the content, and it is secure. Otherwise it is not. There are few if any plausible alternative situations.

about two weeks ago

OKCupid Warns Off Mozilla Firefox Users Over Gay Rights

Jane Q. Public Re:April Fools stories are gay (1482 comments)

"That isn't even close to what I wrote. Trying to put words in other peoples' mouths is not logic."

"I never claimed it was what you wrote."

You tried to claim I was making that kind of comparison. Still having reading comprehension issues I see.

"And I saw Megyn Kelly once, on YouTube. I don't remember what it was about. What does she have to do with anything?"

"http://lmgtfy.com/?q=megyn+kel... [lmgtfy.com] If you need additional help understanding the reference, I'd be happy to oblige, but to summarize: you are presenting a false equivalence between two very different things in an attempt to make the moral difference ambiguous and subjective."

I'm not the one who needs education here. I knew what you meant by Megyn Kelly (or however her name is spelled). The fact that I've only seen her once or twice does not mean I do not know who she is. I asked what she had to do with this. You tried to pass it off as my ignorance, but in fact what you were trying to do was imply that I made this whole argument because I am a conservative. You are wrong.

"OkCupid has no force of law, they have attempted to use no force of law. ... An appeal for social action against someone who would harm an affected minority is not coercion."

That's just laughable. Of course it is. And you can see that it is, in the very sentence you wrote: "... social action against someone".

I repeat: coercion and bullying are not just violence. They are threats of negative consequences. "social action against someone" is a negative consequence. Therefore social action against someone -- over the way they vote -- is an attempt to coerce people (not necessarily him, but perhaps others) into not voting that way.

Come on, use that logic you claim you possess. "Social action against someone" because of how they voted is a threat against someone because of how they voted. And it is also an implied threat against others that they should not vote that way.

This isn't frigging rocket science, man. It's simple if-then.

"Bullying is the threat of violence (which I mentioned)."

No, bullying is intimidation and coercion, which are threats of negative consequences. Those negative consequences do not have to be violence.

If you said to an employee, "Give me sexual favors or I won't pay you", that is sexual harassment, which is one form of bullying. But there is no violence involved.

You can justify this kind of nonsense to yourself all you want, but at the end of the day what you are doing, in simple terms, is rationalizing the action of coercing people to vote a certain way. That is an un-American activity. Period. End of story.

Have a nice day.

about two weeks ago

The Problem With Congress's Scientific Illiterates

Jane Q. Public Re:Don't bother. (509 comments)

My post:

"The real question here is why a politician is actually asking perfectly legitimate questions, but is being labeled stupid on Slashdot for doing so."

was then modded down. What a hilarious proof of my point. These folks can pretend it's about the science all they want, but what it's really about for them is stifling dissent.

about two weeks ago

The Problem With Congress's Scientific Illiterates

Jane Q. Public Re:Don't bother. (509 comments)

Trying to move the goalposts won't work either.

about two weeks ago

The Problem With Congress's Scientific Illiterates

Jane Q. Public Re:Don't bother. (509 comments)

My post was not complete. Slip of the finger.

"What each upcoming season's weather will be we aren't sure."

Since we know what's happening to weather, we have a pretty good idea.

"But we are sure our changes to the atmosphere are warming the planet..."

Speak for yourself. I don't know any such thing, and I've seen A LOT of data that say it isn't so.

"All your denialist microquibbles, character assassinations, and FUD are red herrings."

My "denialist microquibble" was about why a politician who was asking perfectly legitimate questions about things that are in fact questionable, is being labeled stupid for doing so. Calling people stupid for asking questions is not the way science works.

"It's basically accepted by everyone except one political faction in one scientifically illiterate country."

That's the most hilarious comment you've made yet. And you call ME "denialist". Wow. I must remember to inquire about what brand of blinders you're using, because they seem to be good ones.

about two weeks ago

The Problem With Congress's Scientific Illiterates

Jane Q. Public Re:Don't bother. (509 comments)

"This is about science in general, not AGW in particular."

The video clip being discussed was about AGW, and it was the cause of people saying here that politicians are stupid. Claiming otherwise won't get you anywhere.

"But if you want to make it about AGW, the science is not based on surveys, nor is it based on computer models."

I didn't "make it" about anything. The videoclip was about AGW, and OP's post was (largely) about the video clip. And the video clip, in turn, was largely about the survey. You're trying to move the goalposts here.

But aside from that, you're still wrong. The computer models are supposed to be based on the science, not the other way around.

"It is based on old school physics that's been developing over centuries."

It is based on old-school physics that have been discredited. Fourier's conclusions about his friend's experiments turned out to be wrong... the experimental apparatus in fact formed a real greenhouse. But... greenhouse gas theory is not based based on a the kind of heating that occurs in real greenhouses, which is known to be the prevention of convective cooling. Greenhouse gas theory is completely different, having to do with trapping of radiation. Which has been thoroughly discredited. (Just one example of said discrediting.)

Don't try to debate me on the science, guy. I've got you beat. I can keep shooting you down all day.

about two weeks ago

OKCupid Warns Off Mozilla Firefox Users Over Gay Rights

Jane Q. Public Re:April Fools stories are gay (1482 comments)

"Who is using coercion to get this guy fired? I have yet to hear of a single person using violence or a threat of violence as a means to have him fired."

I didn't write violence, I wrote coercion. Violence can be used as a form of coercion, but there are other forms too. They are not quite the same things.

Bullying is a form of coercion, too, but not all bullying is violent. Just for example.

about two weeks ago

OKCupid Warns Off Mozilla Firefox Users Over Gay Rights

Jane Q. Public Re:April Fools stories are gay (1482 comments)

"Asking a man on the street for a dollar, and holding a gun to his head and asking him for a dollar are essentially the same thing. Can I get a Megyn Kelly meme?"

That isn't even close to what I wrote. Trying to put words in other peoples' mouths is not logic.

And I saw Megyn Kelly once, on YouTube. I don't remember what it was about. What does she have to do with anything?

about two weeks ago



Global Warming Researchers Trapped In Antarctic Ice

Jane Q. Public Jane Q. Public writes  |  about 4 months ago

Jane Q. Public (1010737) writes "Christ Turney, a climate researcher at University of New South Wales, and some other researchers chartered a ship to go to Antarctica to further their Anthropogenic Global Warming ("climate change") research.

The expedition, consisting of 74 researchers and crew, radioed for help on Christmas day, stating that they are trapped in the ice.

A chinese ice breaker called "Snow Dragon" came within a few miles of the stuck ship but had to turn back. The researchers and crew are now hoping that the ice breaker Aurora Australis, out of Australia, will be able to reach them."

Airport Announcement Threatens Arrest For TSA Jokes

Jane Q. Public Jane Q. Public writes  |  about 6 months ago

Jane Q. Public (1010737) writes "In this YouTube video posted just 2 days ago, the PA system in the Houston airport tells passengers that "... inappropriate remarks OR JOKES concerning security may result in your arrest".

Even under GWB, this would have been unthinkable. And the timing is — for lack of a better way to put it — very interesting."

Slashdot Drastically Throttles Submission Frequency

Jane Q. Public Jane Q. Public writes  |  about 7 months ago

Jane Q. Public (1010737) writes "Remember when you could submit a comment in one thread, then submit a comment in another thread after 1 minute?

Slashdot has now limited your submissions to once every 5 minutes.

I don't know about you, but there have been rare occasions in which I found even 1 minute to be stifling. 5 minutes is ridiculous. Sometimes it's possible to browse through 3 whole new topics in less than 5 minutes."

Obama Administration Asks Supreme Court To Not Hear Jammie Thomas Case

Jane Q. Public Jane Q. Public writes  |  about a year ago

Jane Q. Public (1010737) writes "The Jammie Thomas-Rasset case has been in the news for years now. As of the last court ruling, she has been ordered to pay $222,000 for sharing 24 songs. Her attorney argues that you can buy the same songs on iTunes for $24, and imposing a penalty of almost 10,000 times as much is "excessive and oppressive". The case has been appealed to the Supreme Court.

The Obama Administration has asked the Supreme Court to not review the case. Is this another example of this administration pandering to the copyright tro... I mean corporations, rather than The People they are supposed to represent?"

Link to Original Source

The Best Dennis Ritchie Quote

Jane Q. Public Jane Q. Public writes  |  more than 2 years ago

Jane Q. Public writes "

"Dennis Ritchie (1941-2011). His pointer has been cast to void *; his process has terminated with exit code 0."

Thus spake James Grimmelmann (@grimmelm), on Twitter"


MIT Prof. Says Power From Water is Near.

Jane Q. Public Jane Q. Public writes  |  about 5 years ago

Jane Q. Public writes "At the Aspen Environmental Forum yesterday, MIT Professor Daniel Nocera claimed that MIT research has found a more efficient way to hydrolyze water at room temperature with the use of cobalt and potassium phosphate, and that tomorrow's home will get its power from feul cells charged with hydrogen from plain water and a bank of inexpensive solar cells. If true, this is a major breakthrough in energy distribution and could solve many of our global energy needs."


Jane Q. Public Jane Q. Public writes  |  about 5 years ago

Jane Q. Public writes "I admit that I was a bit less than diplomatic; frankly I did not think I would get your attention, and it really was the kind of error that can cause bad feelings.

I will do better next time."

Hey, Editors!

Jane Q. Public Jane Q. Public writes  |  about 5 years ago

Jane Q. Public writes "Hey! Re: my article that you just posted, "FTC Warns Against Deceptive DRM"... webcasts are NOT available, and you should have checked before you changed the article to say that they were. Live streaming webcasts were available when the talks were going on, but they don't work now.

So now, you are going to get lots of readers trying to download webcasts, and blaming me when they can't. Thanks a shitload."

FTC says "We'll 'come calling' about deceptive

Jane Q. Public Jane Q. Public writes  |  about 5 years ago

Jane Q. Public writes "At the FTC's Seattle conference on DRM, FTC Director Engle started off by referencing the Sony rootkit debacle, and said that companies are going to have to get serious about disclosing DRM that may affect the usability of products. She also said that the fine print in a EULA is not good enough, and "If your advertising giveth and your EULA taketh away, don't be surprised if the FTC comes calling."
The conference was webcast live from the FTC website."

Scotty's Final Mission

Jane Q. Public Jane Q. Public writes  |  more than 5 years ago

Jane Q. Public writes "According to a recent article at Ars Technica, the ashes of James Doohan, who played "Scotty" in the original Star Trek series and several movies, were aboard the SpaceX III launch yesterday and were lost when the launch vehicle failed.

A fitting epitaph might be: "The engines are not meeting specification, Captain! She kinna hold out much longer!""


Jane Q. Public has no journal entries.

Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account