Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×

Submission + - Google Removes Confederate Flag from Shopping Search Results (recode.net)

Submitted by davek
davek writes: "The company is planning to pull paraphernalia with images of the flag from Google Shopping, its online marketplace, as well as its product listing ads.

“We have decided to remove content containing the Confederate flag from Google Shopping and Ads,” a Google spokeswoman wrote in an email. “We have determined that the Confederate flag violates our Ads policies, which don’t allow content that’s generally perceived as expressing hate toward a particular group.”"

Try it yourself: https://www.google.com/search?...

Submission + - Apple removes Civil War games featuring the Confederate flag (dailydot.com)

Submitted by Patrick O'Neill
Patrick O'Neill writes: Following in the footsteps on major retailers like Walmart, eBay, and Amazon, now Apple seems to be taking steps to ban the Confederate battle flag by removing historical Civil War games from the App Store. "Ultimate General: Gettysburg," which is used in classrooms to teach students Civil War history, is the most high-profile game banned yet. The ban comes in the wake of last week's mass killing of nine black churchgoers in South Carolina, governments and companies around the United States have been taking down the Confederate flag, a symbol flaunted by alleged killer Dylann Roof on a website explaining his motivations.

Submission + - Editor of "Reason" talks about Federal subpoena (thedailybeast.com)

Submitted by mi
mi writes: Is there anything more likely to make you shit your pants out of a mix of fear and anger than getting a federal subpoena out of the blue?

Well, yes, there is: getting a gag order that prohibits you from speaking publicly about that subpoena and even the gag order itself. Talk about feeling isolated and cast adrift in the home of the free. You can’t even respond honestly when someone asks, “Are you under a court order not to speak?”

Comment Re:Why would anybody do this? (Score 4, Insightful) 229

by the_skywise (#49930657) Attached to: After Uproar, Disney Cancels Tech Worker Layoffs

Because they offer you severance pay and other benefits which you forfeit if you don't.

Disney is also a special case in Florida because it's THE major employer in the Orlando area. If you burn your bridges there, it's unlikely you'll work in that town again. (Not that it mattered because they were blocking people from coming back as contractors anyway but I think that's a legal issue issue, not a personal one - EG Contractors who worked at a company long term were found to be defacto employees by a court ruling against Microsoft several years ago - To get around that ruling contractors have to have a "rest" period of more than a year or else they might get to sue the company. I suspect Disney's actions for not hiring back the employees as contractors right away is probably to get around that.)

Comment Great but - (Score 1) 193

by the_skywise (#49916689) Attached to: Microsoft Announces Xbox One Backward Compatibility

Many of my save games are locked to my 360 and not portable.

Although I will say this has moved my thoughts on purchasing an XBone from not likely to possible.

Games are still the deciding factor for me and I'm still working through my backlog of 360 titles although none of them are on the initial list.

Submission + - Obama lawyers asked secret court to ignore public court's decision on spying (theguardian.com)

Submitted by Errorcod3
Errorcod3 writes: The Obama administration has asked a secret surveillance court to ignore a federal court that found bulk surveillance illegal and to once again grant the National Security Agency the power to collect the phone records of millions of Americans for six months.

The legal request, filed nearly four hours after Barack Obama vowed to sign a new law banning precisely the bulk collection he asks the secret court to approve, also suggests that the administration may not necessarily comply with any potential court order demanding that the collection stop.
US officials confirmed last week that they would ask the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance court – better known as the Fisa court, a panel that meets in secret as a step in the surveillance process and thus far has only ever had the government argue before it – to turn the domestic bulk collection spigot back on.

Justice Department national security chief John A Carlin cited a six-month transition period provided in the USA Freedom Act – passed by the Senate last week to ban the bulk collection – as a reason to permit an “orderly transition” of the NSA’s domestic dragnet. Carlin did not address whether the transition clause of the Freedom Act still applies now that a congressional deadlock meant the program shut down on 31 May.

But Carlin asked the Fisa court to set aside a landmark declaration by the second circuit court of appeals. Decided on 7 May, the appeals court ruled that the government had erroneously interpreted the Patriot Act’s authorization of data collection as “relevant” to an ongoing investigation to permit bulk collection.

Carlin, in his filing, wrote that the Patriot Act provision remained “in effect” during the transition period.

“This court may certainly consider ACLU v Clapper as part of its evaluation of the government’s application, but second circuit rulings do not constitute controlling precedent for this court,” Carlin wrote in the 2 June application. Instead, the government asked the court to rely on its own body of once-secret precedent stretching back to 2006, which Carlin called “the better interpretation of the statute”.

Submission + - Obama lawyers ask FISA court to ignore 2nd circuit's decision on spying (theguardian.com)

Submitted by schwit1
schwit1 writes: The Obama administration has asked a secret surveillance court to ignore a federal court that found bulk surveillance illegal and to once again grant the National Security Agency the power to collect the phone records of millions of Americans for six months.

But Justice Department national security chief John A Carlin asked the Fisa court to set aside a landmark declaration by the second circuit court of appeals. Decided on 7 May, the appeals court ruled that the government had erroneously interpreted the Patriot Act's authorization of data collection as "relevant" to an ongoing investigation to permit bulk collection.

On Friday, FreedomWorks filed a rare motion before the Fisa court, asking it to reject the government's surveillance request as a violation of the fourth amendment's prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures. Fisa court judge Michael Moseman gave the justice department until this coming Friday to respond — and explicitly barred the government from arguing that FreedomWorks lacks the standing to petition the secret court.

Submission + - Free Speech Under Attack - By The DOJ (popehat.com)

Submitted by Lawrence_Bird
Lawrence_Bird writes: The past couple of months saw many claims of free speech being under attack in relation to cartoons of the prophet of a certain religion. Yet, once again, we see that the most significant attacks on free speech are not from islamic fanatics but from the US government. Popehat.com has obtained a subpoena against Reason.com seeking to obtain identifiying information about commenters in a thread about the Silk Road verdict. The comments are all clearly over the top and are protected political speech.

Submission + - Obama has an offer that AT&T can't refuse. (washingtonexaminer.com) 1

Submitted by the_skywise
the_skywise writes: AT&T wants to make a deal. America's second-largest mobile telephone provider and its largest landline provider wants to purchase DirecTV, the satellite television provider, for $49 billion.

Regulators routinely have to sign off on such mega-deals. At least in theory, they do so in the interest of protecting the freedom of the marketplace from monopolistic practices.

But in this case, the regulators are not protecting consumers — instead, the Washington Post reported last week, the Federal Communications Commission appears to be using this deal as a bargaining chip to buy off one of the larger and better-funded sources of opposition to its Democratic commissioners' net neutrality agenda.

Essentially, it appears that AT&T will get its deal as long as it agrees to stop resisting and accept the FCC's restrictions on its Internet service. It's a quid pro quo in which the regulators make trades to increase their own power instead of protecting consumers.

Submission + - Apples switch from Android to iOS app .. (9to5mac.com)

Submitted by nickweller
nickweller writes: As part of iOS 9, Apple today has announced a new app called Move to iOS that makes the transition from Android to iPhone more seamless for the user. While the app went unannounced during the WWDC keynote, it is listed on the iOS 9 feature page on Apple’s website.

Slashdot Top Deals

Understanding is always the understanding of a smaller problem in relation to a bigger problem. -- P.D. Ouspensky

Close