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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Submission + - Peakl Oil Threat Gone - Era of Cheap Biofuels finaly here?

Bodhammer writes: Pacific Northwest Nation Labs has developed a new technology that turns algae to crude in an hour. This press release http://www.pnnl.gov/news/release.aspx?id=1029 describes process and the partner they have selected for the pilot plant. The process is efficient and produces crude oil which can be traditionally refined, clean water, gas which can be burned or cleaned to make LNG, and nutrients that can go back into the process. Is this the end of the Peak Oil threat?

Submission + - No security ever built into Obamacare site: TrustedSec CEO (cnbc.com)

schwit1 writes: Dissecting the critical security problems with the website Healthcare.gov, with TrustedSec CEO David Kennedy. "When you develop a website, you develop it with security in mind. And it doesn't appear to have happened this time. It's really hard to go back and fix the security around it because security wasn't built into it. We're talking multiple months to over a year to at least address some of the critical-to-high exposures on the website itself."

Another online security expert—who spoke at last week's House hearing and then on CNBC—said the federal Obamacare website needs to be shut down and rebuilt from scratch. Morgan Wright, CEO of Crowd Sourced Investigations said: "There's not a plan to fix this that meets the sniff test of being reasonable."

When it comes to securing personal information online, Kennedy cited Amazon, Facebook, and Twitter as models for the industry. He even said the IRS website does regular testing to help "ensure that when the websites come out they're protected."

Submission + - On duty or off duty, on-call, and waiting to engage or engaged to wait 2

An anonymous reader writes: I have a question on labor law for the Slashdot crowd. My circumstances should be similar enough to others that I'd like to hear how others handle it. I work for a small, privately held company. My employment contract states that I am a full-time employee, non-exempt, hourly. My company leases equipment to smaller companies where it does not make financial sense for them to outright buy their own. My division provides field service on this equipment, as well as on equipment owned by other companies. My division is small, with a couple dozen of us spread geographically across the U.S. Essentially, the job is to await a service call that the equipment is broken, get to the site as fast as possible (some close enough for driving, some require flying to, even by the same primary) and fix it. We each have our own geographical area of responsibility (the secondary is not called unless the primary is otherwise engaged). We have "normal" business hours, M-F, 8am-4:30pm. We work after hours and on weekends as required.

I have worked in this industry for almost 20 years, though not long at this company. In every other instance, I've been paid for 8 hours per day, plus overtime is paid if I go over 40 hours for the week (or over 8 in the day for companies that adhere to CA policies). This company does not. We have been instructed to leave our time sheets blank until a service event occurs, then fill it out. At the end of the week, we are to then go back and fill "non-service hours" so that we reach 40 hours for the week, which is what they now claim is all that they guarantee. If I do not receive a single service call for the week (unfortunately, this happens), I am paid the 40 hours.

The issue is what then happens when I do have a service event. My closest site is a 3-hour drive each direction. Coupled with 5 hours of labor (very common), the day ends up being 11 hours (not counting breaks or meals). So a week with just one service event would, elsewhere, show 43 hours (40 regular + 3 OT). This company counts it as 40 regular hours. The 3 extra hours are deducted from the "non-service hours" that they have us record to get up to 40. It's even more of an issue when I work 15-hr days W-F and they go back and deduct the 16hrs from M & T.

Effectively, they're making the determination on whether or not to pay after the fact. When I talked with the VP of HR about it, they claimed that I'm an "on-call employee" (contrary to what my employment contract states, and contrary to any written policy) and they don't have to pay me unless I'm actually at a job site. I asked if I called the home office at 8am, would they tell me that I was on duty that day. They said yes. I asked if I called back at 4:30pm and asked if I was on duty that day. They said yes. So you have to pay me for those hours worked. Depends on whether or not I did "productive" work (which they define as being on-site or traveling to/from). Can I drink? No. Can I go to the lake? No. Can I go see a movie? No. Can I work a second job? No. Do I have to keep a Go Bag so I can jump on a plane at a moment's notice? Yes.

Has anyone else run into this situation? This is the first time in 20 years that I've been in this situation, and all the other jobs were just like this one (right down to immediate supervisor being over 1000 miles away), but there's never been a dispute over pay. Am I just completely misunderstanding Federal labor law?

And, yes, I am seeing an attorney who specializes in this field. I'm just curious if anyone else here has ever run into this.

Comment Re: Make it easy? (Score 5, Insightful) 150

But, how does it do that. The article and even the Safeplug website do not explain the mechanism it uses to redirect your traffic to Tor. There aren't even any pictures of the back off the device that I can find.

Does it sit between your gateway and your router, and transparently redirect all packets to the tor network?

Do you just plug it into a router port and point your devices at it as a proxy?

Where is the source code? If we're going to be paranoid enough to use Tor for everything, shouldn't we demand to audit the code for security holes and possible backdoors?

It just seems like a product without a niche. Most users have no desire to use Tor, and those that do are typically savvy enough to set it up themselves.

Comment Re: Ridiculous stunt (Score 1) 565

That pole is on the public right-of-way, not your property. And your municipality is paid for the wires on it. It's called a franchise fee.

The transmitters aren't owned by the cable companies, and transmit power has nothing to do with how the cable networks operate. The rebroadcasters simply don't see a return on upping the transmit power.

Comment Re: Seriously... (Score 2) 415

There is a reason mini-USB has been depreciated for micro-USB, and it directly relates to you never having a mini-USB cable fail. The retaining clips on mini-USB are on the connector, when they fail you must repair the device. With micro-USB you just replace the cable. Also, a properly designed micro-USB cable fails before the connector does.

My three year old has picked up and walked off with one of my five current micro-USB devices at least once (probably a dozen times with the tablet) while they were still plugged in. I do have a healthy supply of partially functioning cables, but I've never had to repair a port.

Comment Re: Oh for crying out loud (Score 1) 325

I knew that was coming. :-)

This is not a copyright case, and copyright wouldn't prevent me from handing my mail to my assistant and saying, "Open these, read them, throw away the ones I don't want, stack them in order of importance, and if you can think of anything I might want based on these letters let me know."

Comment Re: Oh for crying out loud (Score 1) 325

My apologies, I used consent instead of two-party consent.

And, I'll retract my comment that must jurisdictions (US) require it. Turns out only 12 states do (honestly, a little shocked by that fact).

California's law prohibits "intercepting and recording" without all-party consent. Now, clearly no intercepting is going on. A Google mailbox is the desired endpoint.

Recording is a little less clear cut. E-mails must be recorded by definition. I argue that, since Google is using the "original" copy stored in my mailbox, no additional recording is going on either.

However, none of this addresses my point that once an e-mail is in my mailbox (just like a physical letter) it is mine, and I am free to do as I please with it.

Comment Re: Oh for crying out loud (Score 1) 325

That's a terrible analogy. First, it's not common practice to record and retain phone calls for future reference (creating a reasonable expectation that the recording doesn't exist in the first place). Second, it is explicitly illegal to record phone calls without consent in most (all?) jurisdictions. Third, just who does an email belong to once it has been delivered? (I feel this may be the most important question posed by this case) I'll certainly argue that once it hits my mailbox, it's mine. So, I would clearly be within my rights to allow Google to read it.

Comment Re: Contest (Score 1) 266

Have you read the proposed law? It only requires removal (which the law defines as no longer transmitting, not deletion) of content posted by the minor making the request. So, if your "friend" posts a picture of you doing something questionable and tags you, it stays up. I admit, I've never tried to remove a post from five years ago, but that doesn't seem like a major technical hurdle to overcome.

Slashdot Top Deals

It is easier to write an incorrect program than understand a correct one.

Working...