Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Red Hat Software

Submission + - Is Ubuntu Development Becoming Less Open? (muktware.com)

Submitted by sfcrazy
sfcrazy writes: While the larger Ubuntu community was busy downloading, installing and enjoying the latest edition of Ubuntu yesterday, a post by Ubuntu founder Mark Shuttleworth rustled some feathers. He gave indications that from now onwards only selected members of the community will be involved in some development and it will be announced publicly only after completion. Unlike other open source projects where all development happens in open manner. There as some criticism of this move and Shuttleworth ate his words and responded that they are actually opening up those projects where were being developed internally by Canonical employees instead of closing currently open projects. He also attacked Red Hat, as usual. This attitude or Shuttleworth is causing much discomfort for the entire Linux community. Is Canonical doing something wrong?
Security

Submission + - TSA Moving X-ray Body Scanners To Smaller Airports (propublica.org)

Submitted by OverTheGeicoE
OverTheGeicoE writes: If you're concerned about possible health effects from TSA's X-ray body scanners, you might be pleased to learn that TSA is making changes. TSA is removing X-ray body scanners from major airports including Los Angeles International, Boston's Logan, Chicago's O'Hare, and New York City's JFK. Then again, these changes might not please you at all, because they are not mothballing the offending devices. No, they are instead moving them to smaller airports like the one in Mesa, AZ. Is this progress, or is TSA just moving potentially dangerous scanners from 'Blue' areas to 'Red' ones right before a presidential election?
Math

Submission + - Randomly generated math article accepted by ``open-access'' journal (thatsmathematics.com)

Submitted by call -151
call -151 writes: Many years ago, a human-generated intentionally nonsense paper was accepted by the (prominent) literary culture journal Social Text. In August, a randomly-generated nonsense mathematics paper was accepted by one of the many low-tier ``open-access'' research mathematics journals. The software Mathgen which generated the accepted submission takes as inputs author names (or those can be randomly selected also) and generates nicely TeX'd and impressive-sounding sentences which are grammatically correct but mathematically disconnected nonsense. This was reviewed by a human, (quickly, for math, in 12 days) and the reviewers' comments mention superficial problems with the submission. The references are also randomly-generated and rather hilarious. For those with concerns about submitting to lower-tier journals in an effort to promote open access, this is not a good sign!
Security

Submission + - Boston Airport Replacing X-ray Body Scanners (bostonherald.com)

Submitted by OverTheGeicoE
OverTheGeicoE writes: Boston's Logan International Airport is in the process of replacing its X-ray body scanners with millimeter-wave ones. According to TFA, nine of the new scanners have been installed already, and ultimately 27 of these scanners will replace the 17 X-ray backscatter scanners that were installed in March of 2010. Perhaps this will help TSA workers avoid being part of a cancer cluster. Some speculate that TSA will ultimately eliminate all of its X-ray body scanners.
Microsoft

Submission + - Does M$ Office hack Open Office? 1

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes: On my new Mac Air, I installed Open Office and created a slide deck. Yesterday, I installed Microsoft Office 2011 for Mac. Afterwards, when I open my Open Office slide, I noticed it was all messed up and would take a long time to fix. Suspecting that Office hacked Open Office, I downloaded and re-installed Open Office. Re-installling Open Office fixed the problem.
Does anyone else has similar experience? Is Microsoft hacking open source software now?
Science

Submission + - Pilot Crashes Jetliner Deliberately...For TV Documentary (usatoday.com)

Submitted by OverTheGeicoE
OverTheGeicoE writes: The producers of the Discovery Channel's Curiosity documentary series are about to start their new season in an interesting way: they decided to purchase and deliberately crash a Boeing 727. Why? To find out more about airline passenger crash survival. The plane is, of course, unmanned at the time of the crash into the Mexican desert, and it appears to have little to no fuel on board, judging by the lack of a fireball (video). In other airliner crashes, including both tests and genuine disasters, fireballs (video) were (video) common (video of 9/11). Will this documentary give people a false sense of security about their chances of surviving an airline crash? Does the low-speed, low-fuel crash test trivialize the largest danger, fuel fires, both for passengers and bystanders on the ground?

Submission + - Intelligence effort named citizens, not terrorists (nctimes.com)

Submitted by PolygamousRanchKid
PolygamousRanchKid writes: A multibillion-dollar information-sharing program created in the aftermath of 9/11 has improperly collected information about innocent Americans and produced little valuable intelligence on terrorism, a Senate report concludes.

The lengthy, bipartisan report is a scathing evaluation of what the Department of Homeland Security has held up as a crown jewel of its security efforts. The report underscores a reality of post-9/11 Washington: National security programs tend to grow, never shrink, even when their money and manpower far surpass the actual subject of terrorism.

Because of a convoluted grants process set up by Congress, Homeland Security officials don't know how much they have spent in their decade-long effort to set up so-called fusion centers in every state. Government estimates range from less than $300 million to $1.4 billion in federal money, plus much more invested by state and local governments. Federal funding is pegged at about 20 percent to 30 percent. Despite that, Congress is unlikely to pull the plug. That's because, whether or not it stops terrorists, the program means politically important money for state and local governments.
Apple

Submission + - Samsung Seeks New Trial, Accuses Foreman Hogan Of Implied Bias (muktware.com)

Submitted by sfcrazy
sfcrazy writes: Samsung is demanding new trial accusing foreman Hogan of not being truthful to the court. Hogan did not disclose about his court battle with Seagate, a company Samsung helped last year by purchasing its hard drive unit. Hogan was once sued by Seagate for not paying the sum he owed to the company. Hogan chose to file for personal bankruptcy instead of paying back to Seagate. Hogan seems to have genuine reasons to hate Samsung in addition to all the 'things' he did to mislead the jury. Samsung says in its filing that "Hogan’s failure to disclose the Seagate suit raises issues of bias that Samsung should have been allowed to explore in questioning and that would have triggered a motion to strike for cause or a peremptory strike."

Comment Re:One thing is missing: (Score 5, Informative) 170

by OverTheGeicoE (#41515789) Attached to: Supreme Court Won't Hear Body-Scanner Appeal

The plaintiff was hoping to get a jury trial in the district court. All suits regarding TSA in the DC circuit court go straight to appeals, meaning no jury trial is possible there. This is the same court that has been so deferential to DHS in the EPIC suit on the same topic. The plaintiff seemed to think a jury would be more receptive to his arguments.

Is another suit in the DC court worth the trouble? If not, then Mr. Corbett has been about as effective as Jesse Ventura was in his suit.
Security

Submission + - Appeals Court Caves to TSA Over Nude Body Scanners (wired.com)

Submitted by OverTheGeicoE
OverTheGeicoE writes: The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) recently filed a petition to force the Department of Homeland Security to start its public comment period on body scanners within 60 days or stop using them entirely. The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia has issued its ruling (PDF), and has refused EPIC's petition. DHS told the court earlier that it expected to have a formal rule proposal on body scanners by the end of February, so the court denied EPIC's motion on the expectation that public comment period would start by late March. TFA and this submission have a pessimistic headline on this ruling, but other sources seem to think the glass is half-full, and that EPIC in effect got what it wanted. Is this a victory or a defeat? Will the rulemaking process start on time, or will a TSA dog eat the proposed rule in late March and force further delay?
Security

Submission + - DHS Gets Public Comment Whether It Wants It Or Not (techdirt.com) 2

Submitted by OverTheGeicoE
OverTheGeicoE writes: The motion to force DHS to start its public comment period is still working its way through the court (DHS: 'we're not stonewalling!', EPIC: 'yes you are!'). While we wait for the decision, Cato Institute's Jim Harper points out another way for the public to comment on body scanners, tsacomment.com. Even before this site existed, of course, the government was receiving public comment anyway in the form of passenger complaint letters, which they buried in their files. Even so, the public can get a chance to view those comments as the result of Freedom of Information Act requests. An FOIA request about pat-downs by governmentattic.org yielded hundreds of pages of letters to the government from 2010, including frequent reports of pat-down induced PTSD and sexual abuse trauma.
Security

Submission + - Poll Finds Americans Think TSA Is 'Doing a Good Job' (forbes.com)

Submitted by OverTheGeicoE
OverTheGeicoE writes: Why is it that airport security never seems to change in the United States? Perhaps it's because most Americans think TSA is doing a 'good job,' according to a surprise Gallup poll, allegedly commissioned by no one but the kind editors at Gallup. The poll found that 54% of Americans believe TSA is doing a good or excellent job, and that 57% have a good or excellent opinion of the agency. So why all the criticism? According to TFA, criticism of the TSA comes primarily from 'Internet sites, where reporting standards are generally not at the same level as newspapers, where reporters are taught to consider what is told to them with skepticism and to seek responses to charges.' Furthermore, 'the TSA is put into a difficult situation when such charges are posted with little or no fact checking by reporters.' Other sources, of course, have different interpretations of Gallup's results, including questions about whether the poll was biased. If Americans secretly do love TSA, that could explain why the recent whitehouse.gov petition failed to gather enough signatures for a 'response.' In fact, you'll find so little information about the petition remains on whitehouse.gov that you'll wonder if my link is correct. And these are not the droids you're looking for. Move along.
Security

Submission + - EPIC Files Motion About Ignored Body Scanner Ruling (epic.org)

Submitted by OverTheGeicoE
OverTheGeicoE writes: The Electronic Privacy Information Center filed a motion in court yesterday regarding the court's ignored year-old ruling on EPIC vs. DHS. EPIC is asking the court to require DHS to start taking public comment within 60 days or, as an alternative, forbid DHS from using body scanners in primary airport screening altogether. If the court orders the latter, that would give EPIC what it originally sought in its lawsuit. Meanwhile, for what it's worth, the related petition on whitehouse.gov has a little more than half the signatures it needs to get an official 'response.' The signing period ends on August 9.
Security

Submission + - DHS Still Stonewalling on Body Scanning Ruling One Year Later (arstechnica.com)

Submitted by OverTheGeicoE
OverTheGeicoE writes: About a year ago, the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on EPIC v. DHS, a lawsuit that sought to end TSA's use of body scanners. The Court found that DHS violated federal law by not seeking public comment before using body scanners as a primary search method. They ordered TSA to take public comment on its body scanning policy but did not require TSA to suspend its use of the scanners during the comment period. Several months later nothing had been done yet. One year later TSA has still done nothing, and even EPIC, the original plaintiff, seems to have given up. Others have apparently picked up the torch, however. Jim Harper, director of information policy studies at the libertarian think tank the Cato Institute, has posted a piece on Ars Technica about TSA's violation of the court order. He also started a petition on Whitehouse.gov asking TSA to comply with the order. An earlier petition ended with a non-response from TSA Administrator John Pistole. Will the latest petition fare any better, even in an election year?

Slashdot Top Deals

I have hardly ever known a mathematician who was capable of reasoning. -- Plato

Close