Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×

Submission + - GCHQ destruction of Guardian computers raises questions 1

Submitted by GoddersUK
GoddersUK writes: Remember when, in an exercise in pointlessness, men in black from GCHQ oversaw destruction of computer equipment that the Guardian had been using to report the Snowden disclosures? Well Privacy International are reporting that the Guardian let them take a look at the destroyed computers and they were surprised by what they found. Under the direction of GCHQ technicians the Guardian staff seemingly intentionally and specifically targeted apparently mundane components of the computers in question, including chips on the keyboard and trackpad controllers and the LCD inverter. This raises two disturbing possibilities: Either GCHQ's technicians are incompetent or they know something about computer hardware that we don't. Especially given that GCHQ knew the distruction was all a charade so there was no reason to be paranoid in performing it.

Submission + - The US vs. Europe: Freedom of Expression vs. Privacy 1

Submitted by GoddersUK
GoddersUK writes: Rory Cellan-Jones writes about the recent European Court judgement on the right to be forgotten in terms of US/EU cultural differences (and perhaps a bit of bitterness on the EU side at US influence online):

He tells me... ..."In the past if you were in Germany you were never worried that some encyclopedia website based in the United States was going to name you as a murderer after you got out of jail because that was inconceivable. Today that can happen, so the cultural gap that was always there about the regulation of speech is becoming more visible."... ...Europeans who have been told that the internet is basically ungovernable — and if it does have guiding principles then they come from the land of the free — are expressing some satisfaction that court has refused to believe that.

(And, certainly, it seems, here in the UK, that even MEPs keen on the principle don't really know how this ruling will work in practice or what the wider consequences will be. Video here.

Comment Re:Censorship (Score 4, Informative) 199

by GoddersUK (#46988597) Attached to: EU Court of Justice Paves Way For "Right To Be Forgotten" Online
This isn't about defamatory material. This is about matters of historical/public record. This case was brought by someone who wanted records of bankruptcy proceedings against him removed. That's not libel nor slander. It's a public record. Similarly a German court blocked a guy who was trying to get records of a previous court judgement or prosecution (I don't recall which) against him removed from a newspaper website. http://www.theguardian.com/com...

Comment This last was for the disposal of waste paper... (Score 1) 199

by GoddersUK (#46988513) Attached to: EU Court of Justice Paves Way For "Right To Be Forgotten" Online
Similar slits existed in thousands or tens of thousands throughout the building, not only in every room but at short intervals in every corridor. For some reason they were nicknamed memory holes. When one knew that any document was due for destruction, or even when one saw a scrap of waste paper lying about, it was an automatic action to lift the flap of the nearest memory hole and drop it in, whereupon it would be whirled away on a current of warm air to the enormous furnaces which were hidden somewhere in the recesses of the building.

Comment Re:in b4 idiots (Score 1) 133

but even if I didn't know, there's a legal concept where ignorance of the law is no excuse, so if there were a law that could get me arrested for mental assault (for lack of a better term)...

You're confusing ignorance of the law (not applicable in your case, you know the hypothetical law) with mens rea (applicable in your case, you did not intend to engage in mental assault).

Submission + - French intelligence agency forces removal of Wikipedia entry

Submitted by saibot834
saibot834 writes: The French domnestic intelligence agency DCRI has forced a Wikipedia administrator to delete an article about a local military base. The administrator, who is also the president of Wikimédia France, has been threatened by the agency with immediate reprisals after his initial refusal to comply.

Following a discussion on the administrator's noticeboard, the article (which is said to violate a law on the secrecy of the national defense) has been reinstated by a foreign user. Prior to pressuring the admin, DCRI contacted the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF), which refused to remove the article. WMF claimed the article only contained publicly available information, in accordance with Wikipedia's verifiability policy.

While the consequences for Wikimedia's community remain unclear, one thing is certain: The military base article – now available in English – will get more public awareness than ever before.

Slashdot Top Deals

E = MC ** 2 +- 3db

Close