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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:If only PJ was still running groklaw! (Score 1) 173

by Col. Klink (retired) (#48621095) Attached to: The GPLv2 Goes To Court

I was a regular user on groklaw as well. She quit because she was a private person and email was no longer private. You may be able to protect the contents of your email by encrypting it (assuming that the encryption hasn't been intentionally compromised, which is NOT a safe assumption), but that doesn't encrypt the "From/To" fields. PJ quit the internet (not just groklaw) because she's a private person who didn't want to be watched.

You have your view, I have mine. Everyone else can read what she wrote and decide for themselves.

Comment: Re:If only PJ was still running groklaw! (Score 1) 173

by Col. Klink (retired) (#48610693) Attached to: The GPLv2 Goes To Court

You claim you can "just encrypt" your email, but it was the creator of lavabit, the "secure" email system that Snowden used, who stated essentially that email can NOT be made secure. It's not just a technology problem. When Secret Courts tell citizens they can't talk about Secret Orders, "encryption" isn't the solution. It's not just what you're saying, but with whom your talking to (e.g. metadata).

You may not agree with that, but you can't declare that no one else can believe it. You can read PJ's statement for yourself. You may not believe her, but you can't look into her heart and know that the reason she gave wasn't sincere:

My personal decision is to get off of the Internet to the degree it's possible. I'm just an ordinary person. But I really know, after all my research and some serious thinking things through, that I can't stay online personally without losing my humanness, now that I know that ensuring privacy online is impossible. I find myself unable to write. I've always been a private person. That's why I never wanted to be a celebrity and why I fought hard to maintain both my privacy and yours.

Comment: Re:If only PJ was still running groklaw! (Score 1) 173

by Col. Klink (retired) (#48609789) Attached to: The GPLv2 Goes To Court
She didn't quit because it was time consuming or because her collaborator wasn't precise enough. She quit because she can't communicate securely:

The owner of Lavabit tells us that he's stopped using email and if we knew what he knew, we'd stop too.

There is no way to do Groklaw without email. Therein lies the conundrum.

Comment: Re:From Jack Brennan's response (Score 4, Informative) 769

by Col. Klink (retired) (#48558397) Attached to: CIA Lied Over Brutal Interrogations

The Committee's Study outlined 20 specific cases that the CIA claimed either solely based on EIT (torture) or thwarted attacks. In ALL cases, there was either other corroborating intelligence (so they didn't need to torture anyone) or that the "attacks" were either fantasies or non-operational.

Brennan's statement doesn't actually refute this. Providing intelligence that "helped" is not the same as intelligence that was critical.

Comment: Re:fight it out in court (Score 1) 481

So some of his co-workers are psychotic murderers, but the rest of the cops are "great guys" who won't kill you themselves, but they will definitely help cover up your murder. I'm sorry, but if you know your co-worker is a murderer, you're not a "great guy" if you aren't trying to stop him.

Comment: Re:Wrong Title (Score 2) 499

From TFA: "Barr answered 'no' when asked if she had ever been a member of an organization 'dedicated to the use of violence' to overthrow the U.S. government or to prevent others from exercising their constitutional rights."

They didn't ask her if she "belonged to a group that may have been in some way affiliated with another group, some of whose members may have advocated the violent overthrow of the US." If you ask it that way, anyway that has ever joined the NRA might want to consider how they should answer.

It's also pretty weird that a country that includes a right to bear arms to forbid membership of groups that might advocate using that right. The right to bear arms isn't about hunting or even fighting off foreign invaders, it's about overthrowing tyrannical governments. If the founding fathers thought elections were all that were ever needed to defend against tyranny, then the 2nd amendment would make no sense.

Comment: Re:Agree 100% (Score 1) 253

by Col. Klink (retired) (#47818929) Attached to: Why Phone Stores Should Stockpile Replacements

It's a water heater, not a laundry machine. If the pilot won't stay lit, there's basically two parts that could have failed: the thermopile and the gas valve. Each can be carried in one hand.

Either way, I told them the diagnostic code when I called, so they already knew exactly which part had failed. They were servicing a warranty for a unit just over a year old. It's a current model and they knew the exact serial number of the unit before they dispatched anyone.

I've actually been shopping for other appliances recently and been asking more closely about their service standards. It seems to be common knowledge amongst their competitors that Sears generally doesn't carry parts on their while most others actually do.

Comment: Re:Agree 100% (Score 2) 253

by Col. Klink (retired) (#47816917) Attached to: Why Phone Stores Should Stockpile Replacements

The thermopile on my 16 month old hot water heater broke down on a Friday morning. The parts are still under warranty, but not labor.

I called Sears service (the warranter), told them the diagnostic code indicated the exact problem, and scheduled service (earliest available was Saturday). The tech arrived, looked at the same double-blink light pattern that I saw, and agreed that the thermopile needed to be replaced. He didn't, however, carry that part on his truck, so he had to "overnight" order it.

An "overnight" order on Saturday actually means it gets ordered on Monday and delivered on Tuesday. They ship it directly to the customer's home, which means they won't schedule the next appointment until after I call to confirm that the part has arrived. They won't come on the same day, so essentially "overnight" on Saturday means we'll see you in some 5-hour window on Wednesday.

I know I'll never order from Sears again (other service companies carry parts on their trucks), but I hadn't thought of just making it illegal to provide bad service...

Comment: Re:ugh (Score 1) 552

Every time it snows, deniers claim "see, there's no global warming" and believers say "weather is not climate!" The summary of this article then uses the past three months and declares it proof of climate change.

I realize that the actual article is more subtle, but I believe the point OP is making was that if you don't want "Polar Vortex" to be used as an argument against climate change, you probably shouldn't use "heat wave" as an argument in favor.

Taken as a whole, the trend is clear. Leading with a headline "last three months hottest ever" is only going to remind people in DC that they just experienced the coldest winter in 20 years and the most snow ever recorded.

Comment: Re: Blame Google. (Score 1) 239

But meat inspection includes objective measures (as I already said). There's also no penalty for overblocking, but significant costs if they miss even one block. Meat inspection is well regulated with documented procedures handed down by regulatory bodies, but you insist that Google write all their own rules and procedures and have no forgiveness if they get anything wrong (apparently in either direction).

Comment: Re:Blame Google. (Score 2) 239

Isn't "meat inspector" a job of the government, paid for by taxes? The EU didn't provide Google with a "forgotten person" inspector. When it comes to meat, there are clearly objective measurements to determine when it has gone bad. There are no objective criteria handed down to determine when this right applies and when it doesn't. You're asking a for-profit company to personally be responsible for the cost of evaluating every case before them. In fact, you don't even know whether or not they did evaluate this? Given their precedent setting loss, it's not unreasonable to assume that they've set the threshold higher than maybe you would have.

If you were to ask me, the only objective criteria should be as simple as "Was the event newsworthy?" (Yes, because it appeared in the news.) But that's clearly not enough. The information is still allowed to exist, so it's not libelous and the information itself is not illegal, only linking to it is. There is no "registered famous/public person" database (or even a definition of a "public" person). The problem is that you can't just smell this meat and decide if it's gone bad. Now, Google could decide, on its own, to declare that this particular case doesn't pass the undefined threshold, but they have to take on all the expense and risk.

You've come along and demanded that Google toss out all the bad meat (without defining it), and NOW you're complaining when they find it easier to also throw out some good meat. Everyone told you that's what they'd do. It's the ONLY sensible course of action.

It was kinda like stuffing the wrong card in a computer, when you're stickin' those artificial stimulants in your arm. -- Dion, noted computer scientist

Working...