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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Misunderstanding Facebook (Score 4, Insightful) 260

Facebook is not a place that everyone goes to. It is merely a hosting platform where people create zillions (of partially overlapping) "places" that they go to. Those millions of people are not on your Friends list. Facebook is millions of "places", not one. (However, George Takei's page is indeed the one single place in the world where everyone goes. But just for his stuff; nobody reads the comments.) As for Facebook "bombarding your news feed with useless information 24x7", ummm, that doesn't happen to me. Get a life?

Comment Re:Why single out Whole Foods? (Score 1) 794

skids:

the sellers are con artists and shouldn't be allowed to prey on them

There are con-artist products in every grocery store. Singling out Whole Foods for that is really just an excercise in hippie-punching. If we really want to crack down on false advertising claims, then 1) we should first actually verify them false with research rather than kneejerk skepticism and 2) concentrate on claims most detrimental to public health first, and then after that, those most detrimental to the economy.

Insightful.

Comment Re:People will always feel threatened (Score 1) 921

...what will it take for general acceptance to finally take hold?

I doubt it will ever be truly widespread. Isn't it still illegal in most places to record people without prior permission, and threatening to record can also be seen as a threat?

No, it is not. In a public place you have no legal expectation of privacy. People can record you all they want. And they do.

What's going on here is that people don't like that fact. They don't like the government and corporate and even the individuals that are recording them everywhere all the time. They don't like being recorded with cell phones, either. But until now, it has been difficult to object to this "invasion of privacy". Along comes Google Glass, which just brings the reality to the forefront where you can't even pretend it isn't happening. Google Glass is both a symbol of "lost" privacy, and the first on-your-face-in-your-face implementation of the coming privacy-invading cyborg culture. While some embrace this future, others loathe and fear it.

In the case of the girl who was assaulted, battered, and robbed at the bar, there is an additional social factor. The people in that neighborhood bar HATE Google and have been assaulting Google employees on the street on their way to work. Hence the comment from the bar patron, "You people are ruining our city!" This incident was as much about hating Google and yuppie-techies in the city, as it was about privacy.

The (actual) privacy-in-public culture we've been living in was a brief and anomalous period in our history. In earlier days, you did not have much privacy in public places like streets and bars. The town was small, and "everyone knew everyone" (to some approximation). The whole town knew who was out and about, on what business, and talking to whom. And of course you could be overheard in bars. If you wanted privacy, you had to be a lot more discreet. When cities got big, it was possible to "get lost in the crowd" and hide in plain sight. Now things are turning around, and your activity outside your house is potentially exposed to everyone. With our new technology will come a return to the old no-privacy culture.

Society will adapt to provide some kinds of "public privacy" by opening bars that have a no-recording-devices policy. And there will be technological aspects to this. One example might be jamming of mobile devices on the premises. (This is currently illegal, and there are several social and legal issues to address there.) Another example: having to walk through the Device Detector (like a metal detector) gate at the bar entrance.

I have, on my head, a device with which I can access all the worlds knowledge, communicate with everyone on the planet, and record and share my life's experiences. I use it for looking at pictures of cats and picking fights with strangers in bars!

Comment Re:There won't BE any "general acceptance" (Score 1) 921

does anybody actually know the laws around recording in public? Obv you can record celebrities because they do it on TMZ. and obv you can record with a security camera. but sometimes a tv show is recording at an airport or whatever and I walk by and there are signs "by passing by this sign you consent to being recorded." so obviously the right to record someone else is not absolute.

Can anybody add any actual information to this vacuum?

You are taking those signs at face value and drawing a conclusion from them. But that's not how the world works. There is no need for the airport or a mall to inform you that you might be recorded in public. You do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy when out in public. The reason for the sign is to intimidate the less-intelligent potential criminals who are going to the airport to steal people's luggage and such. The sign might more accurately read, "Attention Dumbshit: Don't Come In Here For Opportunistic Crime; Of Course You Are Being Recorded By Police Who Are Watching You On The Cameras, Hidden And Visible All Over The Place Here." But that wouldn't be as polite. Sometimes the signs do say things like, "Warning: Police Recording", though.

Comment "By Your Command" (Score 1) 104

"The virtual version of Zoe was created by Zoe Graystone herself using hacked rudimentary emulation software capable of duplicating her own V-World avatar. Graystone programmed the copy - a perfect copy - with roughly 100 terabytes of personal information from other databases. This allowed the avatar to access and translate information from medical scans, DNA profiles, psychological evaluations, school records, emails, video and audio recordings, CAT scans, genetic typing, synaptic records, security cameras, test results, shopping records, talent shows, ballgames, traffic tickets, restaurant bills, phone records, music lists, movie tickets, TV shows and "even prescriptions for birth control" - essentially turning raw data into personality and memory." -- http://en.battlestarwiki.org/wiki/Zoe_Graystone

Comment Second Life (Score 2) 293

I remember this recycled story from around 2008. The Linden Lab executive (who was also one of their main system creators originally) hasn't been with the company now for many years. This was all eons ago, but it's being brought back up in the wake of Snowden. The part about Linden Dollars and the Second Life economy is a little ridiculous, since the money is only useful for buying in-game virtual items. For example, terrorists getting some better high heels for their avatars. You can cash out Linden Dollars, but there are lots of limits and monitors on it, and you cash out through either your verified PayPal account or a bank check mailed to you. Neither of those are in any way anonymous, and they are tightly monitored by the feds at multiple levels. (You could get some IP addresses and in-game transaction information from Linden Lab if you were tracing back some accumulated cash-out; that might be useful intelligence, I guess.) Like any glorified chat system. The idea that terrorists are using Second Life for virtual training is a bad joke. No realistic scenario or actions could be created. You could use the primitive in-game 3D modeling to create a rough representation of the buildings and alleys or whatever. But very little could be communicated beyond that. Avatars can't actually do anything subtle - mainly they can just walk. Arms and hands don't do anything except point-and-click on scripted objects in the world. The scripting can make objects change texture/color and move around. Communication is a very primitive text chat system plus an in-game Voice system that doesn't work very well or reliably. So you could make a really crappy diagramatic 3D model of your bomb scenario, and walk your avatars around it. But you could do infinitely better by just looking at a street map, or Google Earth, and tracing your fingers and talking about it or whatever. Linden Lab advertises that it keeps Chat logs (etc.) for some period, six months was what they said at one point. However, I asked someone there once and they said, "Well, we've' never actually deleted any logs to date." Second Life is an interesting experiment along a number of axis, but it's capabilities are really quite primitive. They tried at one point to sell it to businesses as an online meeting system, and it was such a bad joke they gave up that marketing effort. IBM has an open-source version of the system that is integrated with some other IBM meeting software. There are other service providers running "grids" with the open-source version of SL. You can download the server and client onto your laptop if you want to play with it stand-along (or hook together with some other users and make your own network). But it doesn't have any specially great utility for terrorists. Any more than any other MUD/MOO/Mush type system. That was all just hype, years ago, from when Second Life was exciting and hyped and not understood. NSA monitors AOL chat rooms and whatever, too; it's just exactly the same thing. They didn't understand that a half decade ago when this "news" article first came out.

Slashdot Top Deals

UNIX is hot. It's more than hot. It's steaming. It's quicksilver lightning with a laserbeam kicker. -- Michael Jay Tucker

Working...