Doesn't the kill switch also wipe the phone? The existing Android Device Manager and whatever Apple's version is called wipe the phone remotely, to protect personal information from the thief.

The beat cop doesn't need a "kill switch", he just has to call the station and they can do it or contact whoever does it, quick enough.

Frankly, I'm more concerned with hackers or script kiddies bricking thousands of phones for lol's, than I am about hypothetical law enforcement abuse of it, but it remains a possibility.

Your Streisand effect theory works for widespeard bricking, or say a large protestors at a large protest. But it doesn't work on the small scale. Imagine if some poor schumck recorded video on his smartphone of that cop in Ferguson shooting that kid. They'd brick the phone immediately, eliminating the video, and only leaving the schumck's word that he had the video.

Extortion laws ought to apply here as well.

As the article states, it's very rarely only $20... they're charging $20 per song. And yes, they expect you to admit guilt along with the payment.

I think he's saying use Tor to avoid being caught in the first place. Of course there's nothing stopping Rightscorp from just accusing people at random, since there's absolutely no recourse for the falsely accused but to pay up or lose your Internet connection.

I don't really care which way they go. My point was they haven't decided anything, but in typical /. fashion, the summary makes it sound like it's happening.

As for politians making decisions on technology, that's usually a bad idea.

One politician said it failed... all other reports of the project (even very recently) have said it's been a success. The actual article says they are convening a panel of experts to consider whether to go back to Microsoft, so despite the misleading summary here, nothing has been decided.

The actual source article says they are *considering* going back to Microsoft, while the title and summary here imply its a foregone conclusion.

Yep... if they had been forthright about what they were buying and why in the first place, there likely wouldn't be any controversy here. The controversy is that they lied about it.

Tell that to Samsung... they're doing just fine. And LG, and Motorola, and Lenovo, etc... Only HTC is hurting, and even they just turned a profit for the first time in awhile.

I agree... we don't really know what his demeanor was. If he was loud, abusive, or threatening, he should have been kicked off the flight for that, not for a tweet about rude service. If he stayed calm and complied with the airline employees' instructions, then only the gate agent was in the wrong.

Nowhere in TFA did it say he had a "temper tantrum" nor did it say he yelled at the agent. True it only tells one side of the story, but you're applying your own imagination as to how things really went down.

And the slashdot summary states the children were age 6 and 9.

Southwest allows families with children aged 4 or under to board between the 'A' and 'B' groups, or during the 'A' group if the parent is in the 'A' group.

http://www.southwest.com/html/...

They're aren't rude and irrational people in the 3rd world?

Calling someone "rude" is neither intimidating nor harassment.