Beta
×

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!

Comments

top

Mozilla To Support Public Key Pinning In Firefox 32

diamondmagic Why a hardcoded list? (88 comments)

Why does the list have to be hardcoded? Why not pull the records from DNSSEC... there's a whole specification for this, RFC6698

2 days ago
top

Net Neutrality Is 'Marxist,' According To a Koch-Backed Astroturf Group

diamondmagic Re:Not Net Neutrality (525 comments)

Again, Net Neutrality is a routing rule. Your router is either neutral or it isn't (and when it isn't, maybe in various degrees). It has nothing to do with the law per se. If I build my own router in my intranet that routes to i.e. give priority to my computer, then all other nodes, my router is no longer neutral; but that does not mean that it is "fraudulent" (I own the thing! It's obviously impossible to defraud myself).

Now when I sign up with my ISP, I expect that, absent other agreements, they won't care about where my packets are address to or from, just if I'm exceeding their bandwidth limit I agreed to - the only terms they mention that would result in packet loss.

If they end up dropping packets on some other mean, I'd call that fraud. But fraud is not for the FCC to enforce, and it has little to do with one ideology vs. another.

5 days ago
top

Net Neutrality Is 'Marxist,' According To a Koch-Backed Astroturf Group

diamondmagic Re:Not Net Neutrality (525 comments)

I really wasn't trying to get into Marxism, but as an armchair university professor, I would guess that a computer network is necessarily built of capital (i.e. nodes of routers and computers), and the alternative to prevent suppression of the working class would be collective ownership of the routers; with some arbitrary "equitable" and/or "fair" routing scheme, which I guess would look like Net Neutrality (and it is, so far as I can tell, a good routing principle).

Aside, Adam Smith also casually used Labor Theory of Value (lacking a better alternative to explain the relationship of costs to prices), the settlement on Marginal Theory of Value didn't come about until Carl Menger.

There's examples of rent-seeking and legal barriers to entry too numerous to list, but municipal networks would be an example of the latter. If I wanted to install a high-capacity line to houses, I'd have to compete with the taxpayer-funded installed lines - an artificial increase in costs (cost being the value of the next-best alternative).

5 days ago
top

Net Neutrality Is 'Marxist,' According To a Koch-Backed Astroturf Group

diamondmagic Re:Not Net Neutrality (525 comments)

I'm not sure what you're getting at; I think you mean to qualify "considering only Wikipedia/Facebook traffic, each being used equally, each should account for about 50% of packet drops", but that's not necessarily correct either, Facebook has much more streaming media than Wikipedia and would likely show considerably more packet loss.

I'm also not sure we want to go all-out on the "treat all data equally" idea militantly; what does that mean? If I pay for a dedicated pipe at a data center, I'm paying per Mbps, i.e. the rate above which they'll start dropping packets. What if I also want to pay for low latency because my company does low-latency telecommunications (i.e. please don't ever drop my packets, so long as I don't send too many of them), and I don't want to lay down the capital necessary to dig my own fiber darknet? Obviously this is okay, but your literal rule suggests otherwise.

5 days ago
top

Net Neutrality Is 'Marxist,' According To a Koch-Backed Astroturf Group

diamondmagic Re:Not Net Neutrality (525 comments)

Forged RST packets, captive portals, and injecting into webpages are wrong, they are fraud (i.e. slap them with a class-action lawsuit), but it's not a violation of Net Neutrality. Net Neutrality involves routing rules, period. (Use the respective terms: Forged packets and captive portals.)

The FCC might be proposing regulations around Net Neutrality; but the point of the article doesn't concern that, it's that FCC shouldn't be the packet police.

5 days ago
top

Net Neutrality Is 'Marxist,' According To a Koch-Backed Astroturf Group

diamondmagic Re:Not Net Neutrality (525 comments)

Net Neutrality is a rule that can apply to any node that routes packets; meaning pretty much all of them.

I appreciate the energy you're putting into Marxism vs. other labels, but that's really not the important point I'm making.

5 days ago
top

Net Neutrality Is 'Marxist,' According To a Koch-Backed Astroturf Group

diamondmagic Re:Not Net Neutrality (525 comments)

I'm not critiquing Marxism. You're just begging for an argument, aren't you?

5 days ago
top

Net Neutrality Is 'Marxist,' According To a Koch-Backed Astroturf Group

diamondmagic Re:Not Net Neutrality (525 comments)

That's what I said; I gave the technical definition. Go and look up how TCP negotiates connection speeds: By dropping packets.

5 days ago
top

Net Neutrality Is 'Marxist,' According To a Koch-Backed Astroturf Group

diamondmagic Re:Not Net Neutrality (525 comments)

[Citation Needed]

5 days ago
top

Net Neutrality Is 'Marxist,' According To a Koch-Backed Astroturf Group

diamondmagic Not Net Neutrality (525 comments)

Wow, it sounds like someone woke up a little butthurt this morning. "Koch-backed astroturf group." So?

Let's examine this:

(1) Marxists do think Net Neutrality is a good idea. (This, of course, doesn't mean Net Neutrality is right or wrong by itself, it is a statement of fact. Marxists tend to agree with civil libertarians on quite a lot, if the intention is to portray the policy badly by negative association.)
(3) Net Neutrality means: Dropping packets (thereby manipulating congestion control and bandwidth negotiation) based on the source or destination of the packet. If you dropped a Wikipedia packet instead of a Facebook packet due to a policy configuration and nothing else (randomly due to too much load), that's a violation of Net Neutrality.
(2) The issue is not over Net Neutrality, but over classifying the Internet as a "public utility". I'm not sure what that's supposed to accomplish - by any standard, it's a common service that gets hooked up to houses, residences, similarly to electricity. But if the intention is to legislate how people are supposed to connect their computers to each other - I have a problem with that.

I'm all for fair routing and engineering solutions to problems, but do we really want the FCC being the packet police? This is the same entity that gave us the Broadcast Flag. Their only job is supposed to be to regulate and assign airwave space, not meddle in the affairs of private, voluntary connections between nodes in a computer network, Internet or otherwise.

5 days ago
top

Scientists Baffled By Unknown Source of Ozone-Depleting Chemical

diamondmagic Re:Easy, India or China (303 comments)

And there are other Republicans who do believe in the scientific method, and that global warming is at least in part manmade, but think the $100B price tag to delay the effects by just a decade or two could be better spent elsewhere.

Seriously, when's the last time a climatologist actually did a cost-benefit analysis to the proposed solutions?

about a week ago
top

Qt Upgrades From LGPLv2.1 to LGPLv3

diamondmagic Re:GPL is about User/Owner Freedoms (117 comments)

I can't speak for "freedom" because it's not well defined, but in the typical use meaning "liberty", GPLv3 is definitely less liberal than GPLv2.

Liberty is defined in terms of what one can legally (or violence, etc) compel someone else to do. It doesn't distinguish between audiences. If license A and B are identical except that licence A has some additional condition where I can file a lawsuit to get you to stop doing something, license A is necessarily less liberal, i.e. less free.

The FSF's notion of "free" is kind of backwards like this.

about two weeks ago
top

Two Years of Data On What Military Equipment the Pentagon Gave To Local Police

diamondmagic Re:No (264 comments)

Military surplus makes such tyranny especially cheap, cheaper than it would otherwise be. Also something about the law of demand.

about two weeks ago
top

Swedish Dad Takes Gamer Kids To Warzone

diamondmagic Re:Gettin All Up In Yo Biznis (419 comments)

billions of people the world over not only believe in them, but murder the holy living shit out of each other because of said belief.

I seriously doubt there's "billions" of murders on the planet, let alone potential murders, regardless of the reason. Many participants in wars have been religious, and will preach their beliefs in the course of doing so, but of course this is statistically to be expected, do not confuse correlation with causation. In contrast, communism is directly responsible for somewhere in the vicinity of 100 million deaths (by execution as an enemy of the state, starvation due to artificial shortage, etc; WW2 by contrast is likely 2/3rds this number, including disease, fatigue, and diversion of resources and labor away from home).

about two weeks ago
top

DARPA Wants To Kill the Password

diamondmagic Re:Passwords don't need to be killed (383 comments)

Minor problem: What if the master key is compromised? What if you want to change the identity you want to present to a website - just one website? You're screwed, and out of luck (respectively).

The proposal also assumes that the authority component of the URI (the hostname, usually) is the party you want to identify to - it doesn't.

It's not good enough for Web standards to work for 95% or 99% of people - they have to work for everyone, hence all of the back-and-forth of the standards development process.

I would point out WebID doesn't have these shortcomings.

about three weeks ago
top

NFL Fights To Save TV Blackout Rule Despite $9 Billion Revenue

diamondmagic Re:Punishes fans? (216 comments)

s/profit/revenue/

Two totally different things.

about three weeks ago
top

Algorithm Predicts US Supreme Court Decisions 70% of Time

diamondmagic Re:Simplified algorithm (177 comments)

You don't own a newspaper to deliver your opinion to the front steps of millions of people... Oh well?

That doesn't mean we can go around neutering newspapers. Now, I never said "money = speech", but that doesn't make the First Amendment implications any less relevant. You cannot enforce a law that has the effect of chilling speech. Period full stop.

Everything for Obamacare/PPACA, including the "penalty" tax and tax on medical devices, was introduced in the Senate. They could only pass the Senate version because it was the only version passed on either side of the Rotunda before Democrats lost their "super majority" in the Senate -- the House had to pass it second.

Again, you can't uphold a law that's unconstitutional. This means due process, and equal protection of the law. People have rights, and every time someone is allowed to exercise those rights in a way you don't like, you want to blame the Court. No thank you.

We also sent millions of Japanese Americans to detention centers, and continue to lock up people in Federal prison for completely consensual, non-violent "crimes", in the name of "the public good". When you have a completely subjective, flexible, term as "public good" you get the TSA, Homeland Security, USA PATRIOT Act, DEA, NSA, and you can protest it as much as you want but no court is going to agree with you on how their idea of public good is wrong, and your idea of public good is right. No thank you. We have rights that are above even every last person on Earth going to a poll station and checking the right box.

about three weeks ago
top

Algorithm Predicts US Supreme Court Decisions 70% of Time

diamondmagic Re:Simplified algorithm (177 comments)

The Court's first responsibility is to uphold the law -- not the law as they or anyone else wants it. This includes the Constitution, the "supreme law of the land" - they can't uphold a law that Congress has no authority to pass in the first place.

From this viewpoint, let's take a look at those decisions:

Bad decision: Calling the ACA a "tax". The ACA originated in the Senate, even though the Constitution requires that new taxes originate in the House. Furthermore, you can't compel people to buy something, and you can't compel a company to sell something - that's outright slavery, if it was ever recently legalized.

Good decision: Upholding the free speech of individuals, whether representing a corporation or themselves. The First Amendment says "Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech." No exemptions are listed. (And the Constitution, mind you, has numerous exemptions to various things - not in this amendment, though.) You might say "But money isn't speech!" which is technically, literally true, but doesn't make the First Amendment implications any less relevant. It costs money to publish speech, and this applies to newspapers, websites, and bloggers; in addition to advertisers. Additionally, the Federal government doesn't have the power to legislate intrastate exchange; it only has some power over interstate trade, the power to regulate (which does not include prohibition).

It sounds like all you want to do is force some people to behave the way you want them to behave, without considering that they might have a right to do so even when you disagree with them on the matter.

about three weeks ago
top

Verizon Throttles Data To "Provide Incentive To Limit Usage"

diamondmagic Re:And the FCC will do... (316 comments)

Um, remember the Broadcast Flag? The FCC claiming “ancillary” authority under the 1996 Tellecommunications Act to Regulate the Internet?

The FCC only exists to allocate RF spectrum and limit interference in it -- THE FCC IS NOT YOUR FRIEND (nor do you want them to be). They do not exist to make Internet providers do your bidding - if they're violating a contract (i.e. "unlimited" Internet), that's the proper role of the courts to enforce.

about a month ago
top

How Google Handles 'Right To Be Forgotten' Requests

diamondmagic Re:Try to make me forget. (135 comments)

It's not so much "right to be forgotten" as it is "obligation for you to shut up," is it?

about a month ago

Submissions

top

NSA Caused Syria's 2012 Internet Outage

diamondmagic diamondmagic writes  |  about two weeks ago

diamondmagic (877411) writes "Wired's new profile of Edward Snowden reveals that the 2012 outage of Syria's Internet, in an attempt to spy on communications in the midst of a civil war, was caused when the NSA tried to remotely install an exploit onto a core router. The article continues: "But something went wrong, and the router was bricked instead—rendered totally inoperable. The failure of this router caused Syria to suddenly lose all connection to the Internet—although the public didn’t know that the US government was responsible.""

Journals

diamondmagic has no journal entries.

Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>