Slashdot Mirror


User: Rick+Schumann

Rick+Schumann's activity in the archive.

Stories
0
Comments
4,991
First seen
Last seen
Profile
(view on slashdot.org)

Comments · 4,991

  1. Re:Hate to sound like this but.... on Chinese Scientist Says He's First To Create Genetically Modified Babies Using CRISPR (npr.org) · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Regardless of whether or not this is real or bullshit, it's EVIL, plain and simple. Two words: Josef Mengele.

  2. Why not expand UL testing? on Germany Proposes Router Security Guidelines (zdnet.com) · · Score: 1

    Just a thought: At least here in the U.S., Underwriters Laboratory does electrical testing on products to ensure they're safe. Why not expand their role in the case of computing equipment like this (and perhaps also so-called 'IoT' devices) to test for vulnerabilities? Basically, throw a bunch of attacks at Internet-facing devices and see if you can crack them. As new exploits are discovered, expand the suite of testing to include those attacks. Would never be 100% because exploits and attack methods seem to evolve faster than they can code around them, but it would likely be better than these manufacturers have been doing on their own.

  3. TiVo+30-second-skip = WIN on NBCUniversal Taps Machine Learning To Tie Ads To Relevant Moments on TV (adweek.com) · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Commercials? What are these 'commercials' of which you speak? xD

    But Rick, what will you do when they outlaw skipping or fast-forwarding through commercials?

    (Assuming they can get away with that) Same thing I did before TiVo: mute them and ignore them.

    It's almost 2019; do intelligent people actually sit and pay attention to commercials anymore (assuming they don't have a DVR)?

  4. Re:How about AI for content on NBCUniversal Taps Machine Learning To Tie Ads To Relevant Moments on TV (adweek.com) · · Score: 1

    That's just crazy-talk, DR2; positively un-American. How can you possibly suggest not monetizing everything possible to maximize profits?
    You must be a foreign national trying to influence our society. Please go back to your masters and tell them you failed. </sarcasm>

  5. Re:Wow, you're all just starting to think about th on Can The Police Remotely Drive Your Stolen Car Into Custody? (thenextweb.com) · · Score: 1

    So if you stop in the middle of nowhere and there's no cell service, your car won't start and you can't call anyone to 'authenticate' it?
    Are you trying to bait me? Because that's the only reason I can think of you'd post something so stupid.

  6. Re:The 'next big thing in tech' should be the Eart on What's the Next Big Thing in Tech? It's Up To Us (wsj.com) · · Score: 1

    Oh look everyone, the Anarchist is chiming in!
    You're likewise an idiot. Chaos isn't going to solve anything, it'll just make everything worse.
    You should have outgrown teenage rebelllion against authority a long time ago, GROW UP.

  7. Re:The 'next big thing in tech' should be the Eart on What's the Next Big Thing in Tech? It's Up To Us (wsj.com) · · Score: 1

    Hear, hear!

  8. Wow, you're all just starting to think about this? on Can The Police Remotely Drive Your Stolen Car Into Custody? (thenextweb.com) · · Score: 2

    If your vehicle is entirely 'fly by wire' (i.e. steering, accelerator, and braking are all just 'video game controls' and the on-board systems actually control everything based on their input), and you have cellular wireless connectivity built in to the vehicle, then it's highly likely that the vehicle can be controlled remotely without permission of the owner. With the advent of so-called 'driver assist', 'self-driving', and advanced 'cruise control' systems that rely on cameras and other sensors installed on the vehicle, suddenly not being in control of the vehicle at all while driving and having the vehicle directed somewhere other than where you want to go becomes a reality. The only way to prevent this from happening is to disable any and all transceivers within the vehicle's systems by disconnecting their antennas and terminating the antenna cable(s) with dummy loads. Of course by doing this there will be a loss of some of the vehicles' accessory features, but since there's no other way I'm aware of to disable outside tampering with your vehicles' systems, that's the price you'll have to pay.

    What's really needed is a hardware switch that disables transceivers that can be used for remote access to the vehicle, but I'm sure that governments, and law enforcement in particular, would fight tooth and nail against such a thing. They'd rather have the ability to control any vehicle at any time without any need to get 'permission' from the owner or occupants, regardless of what their reason for it is, and regardless of your rights as a citizen. The fact that criminals can (and WILL) be able to also hack into vehicles for purposes of theft, kidnapping, or terrorism, is irrelevant to them, so long as they have this power over your vehicle and, ultimately, you.

  9. Re:friendly howto for new car owners on Can The Police Remotely Drive Your Stolen Car Into Custody? (thenextweb.com) · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A less complicated way to accomplish this (especially if they change the way the system is designed) would be to identify the antenna cable, disconnect it, and install a 50-ohm dummy load onto the transceiver end of the cable. This will prevent any wireless communication between the vehicle and the outside world, without causing any collateral dysfunction of the vehicle or damage to the transceiver; reception will be impossible, and any transmissions the transceiver attempts will just be dumped harmlessly into the dummy load without causing any standing-wave damage to the RF power amplifier in the transceiver. The system would just interpret the loss of wireless connectivity as not being in range of any towers it could connect to.

    Disabling GPS is similar, although since GPS is receive-only, disconnecting the GPS patch antenna should be sufficient.

  10. The 'next big thing in tech' should be the Earth on What's the Next Big Thing in Tech? It's Up To Us (wsj.com) · · Score: 2

    How about we stop spending so much time and energy on toys that we don't necessarily need and allocate that energy and resources to fixing and maybe reversing the damage we've done to the environment of the Earth, being the only planet we can currently live on?
    Don't even say we should move to another planet. Ain't happening and you all damned well know it and there's nowhere to go in any case.

  11. No, you still don't understand, and you clearly don't understand that article either. Go learn some basic electronics then get back to me, stop trying to get your electronics 'education' from shitty articles written by people who don't understand electronics either.

  12. Re:Nothing stays the same on Climate Change Will Have Dire Consequences For US, Federal Report Concludes (cnn.com) · · Score: 1

    Won't happen fast enough because there's no profit to be made from it. We need to fix our shit here, first anyway.

  13. Uh, no, you clearly don't have any idea how electronics works.
    The amplifer between the chipset that generates the audio and the speaker(s) is not bi-directional; it can only amplify an input signal and feed that to the speaker(s), not the other way around. Or are you being sarcastic?

  14. Re:Nothing stays the same on Climate Change Will Have Dire Consequences For US, Federal Report Concludes (cnn.com) · · Score: 0

    Let me tell you what my 'tone' is all about, friend: I'm fucking sick and tired of my entire SPECIES being so fucking stupid that they're more-or-less ensuring that we, as a species, won't survive. There's literally no point in my bothering to be 'polite' to anyone about this anymore if they're one of the ones who are being stupid; I reserve my well-earned politesse for people who deserve it. I won't be around for The End, thankfully, but I'm not going to make life any easier for these jackasses in the meantime, regardless.

  15. Re:Nothing stays the same on Climate Change Will Have Dire Consequences For US, Federal Report Concludes (cnn.com) · · Score: 0

    Critcizing something as arbitrary and variable as socio-political issues is not even CLOSE to 'criticizing' a science-based issue, and if you're too stupid to understand the difference then you also have no right to be making pronouncements on the validity of decades of climate science study.

  16. Re:Survival of the fittest baby! on Climate Change Will Have Dire Consequences For US, Federal Report Concludes (cnn.com) · · Score: 1

    Eat shit and die. Human-caused climate change deniers are on the same list of idiots as anti-vaxxers. They're cancerously stupid, cancerous because it seems to be spreading like a disease. Our civilization and likely our species as well are likely doomed because morons keep ignoring the facts, or worse, calling it some 'liberal conspiracy'. Meanwhile the nutjob religious ultra-right-wing types keep encouraging the morons because they want the Apocalypse to happen, regardless of how fucktarded that entire notion is. So how about you, that other guy, and the rest of your climate-change-denying jackasses go throw yourselves into a wood chipper and get mulched? Preferably head first.

  17. Unless it's a hardware switch that's literally wired between the microphone and the rest of the phone, you can't count on it doing what it says it does.

  18. Bill, word has it that you don't even have to download any apps, it's either baked right into the firmware of the phone, or you get surveillance software push-installed silently, with it running silently in the background. Your phone could be listening to you right now and you'd never know it, no way to tell. Don't tell me I'm paranoid, either, it's all been documented, and don't tell me you're not worth surveilling, because that's not the point. The only way to be sure you win this game is to not play.

  19. So get rid of your smartphone. You've been indoctrinated to believe that you cannot live without one, but that's complete and utter bullshit. I do not have a smartphone, never have, never will, and I live life just as fully as anyone else. Cheap clamshell phone for the win!

    Think about it: do you really need to play games, surf the web, watch movies, or any of the other crap you do with your smartphone other than make and receive calls and text messages? No, you do not, you WANT to do those things, but you do not NEED to do those things. It'll just take an adjustment.

    Furthermore: What's the price difference every month between basic cell service with text messaging, and that plus the overpriced, underserving data-plan you have now? How much money would you save every year if you didn't have a smartphone?

    Then there's the phone itself. Your smartphone is a ticking timebomb, waiting to go haywire on you, and you cannot get it repaired when it does. There goes, what, at least $500? I have a $50 cheap-ass plastic clamshell phone. Works great as a phone, that's all it needs to do. It dies? I say "oh well shit" toss it in the bin and get another one. No big deal

    B-b-b-but Rick, what about Facebook, Twitter, and other social media? All my friends will miss me! I'll DIE without social media!

    No, you won't, you'll actually have a better life overall not being distracted by the cancer that is so-called 'social media'. Be more ACTUALLY social with ACTUAL friends, in person, instead. You'll benefit far more from the social contact than you will from shitty Facebook and garbage like it. So will your kids, especially; get riid of their smartphones, too, and save all sorts of money!

    So you see you should just make the leap and get rid of your smartphone. You'll thank me later for this advice.

  20. You are such a fucking moron that every time you open your mouth I want to find the nearest object I can stuff into your pie-hole to shut you the fuck up.
    See this comment, it also applies to you: https://science.slashdot.org/c...

  21. Re:Nothing stays the same on Climate Change Will Have Dire Consequences For US, Federal Report Concludes (cnn.com) · · Score: -1, Troll

    Unless you can show us your credentials to be making authoritative statements about climate science (a PhD in it from an accredited University will do), you need to shut the fuck up about things you know NOTHING about. Meanwhile the best scientific minds on the planet have been studying this for literally DECADES and they've consistently said we humans are fucking up the planet. You should shut the fuck up and LISTEN TO THEM instead of running your mouth like an idiot.

  22. Re:Survival of the fittest baby! on Climate Change Will Have Dire Consequences For US, Federal Report Concludes (cnn.com) · · Score: 0, Troll

    Yes, AC, we can all see that you're a completely natural being on this planet, literally just like all the other animals -- and like those animals, you haven't got a fucking clue about anything beyond putting food in your belly, eliminating your wastes, and reproductive activity. And just just like so many species that came before you, you can naturally go extinct. I'd recommend, for your own comfort, that you arrange to go personally extinct as soon as possible. It's better for the planet if you do.

  23. What a bunch of motherfucking assholes! on Beijing To Judge Every Resident Based on Behavior by End of 2020 (bloomberg.com) · · Score: 1

    Guess they don't care that fucking bullshit like this will drive some people to suicide, they've got over a billion people so I guess they don't give a shit if they lose a few hundred million of them when they lose their minds from stress and anxiety and commit suicide in any way they can manage, because who the fuck would want to live like that?

    Yet another prime example of why, if there are indeed advanced, starfaring alien civilizations out there, that they don't bother talking to us or even letting on they exist: the fact that the government of a country that has about 18% of the total population of humans treats them like this is flat-out disgraceful and disgusting.

  24. Re: What is WIndows? on 'Windows Isn't a Service, It's an Operating System' (howtogeek.com) · · Score: 1

    No thanks. There's no reason for the 3 or 4 devices on my internal network to use IPv6, and I don't think all of them support it anyway. I won't change the WAN side until I'm forced to, then a router will handle the NAT.