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


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Re:Question still remains (Score 1) 100

by DarkOx (#49500911) Attached to: Google Adds Handwriting Input To Android

Although, put out by HandSpring (with palm OS) and than later required by Palm, the Treo phones were some of the earliest of what we might consider to be modern 'smart' phones and they really were the best of their generation. Yes Blackberry might have had some more feature richness but needed a lot of propriety costly infrastructure behind it to deliver that functionality. A Treo could do IMAP etc so was actually useful to 'regular' people and businesses that were to small to justify a BES server.

I don't think HandSpring/Palm were wrong to move into the mobile phone market. I don't think they positioned themselves well. Had they gone after the consumer market and branded themselves as the Blackberry for anyone not a shyster^H^H^H^H^H^H sales professional they might have succeeded. If anything they were perhaps to early to market.

Comment: Re:Wishing I was canadian... (Score 1) 72

by DarkOx (#49500191) Attached to: For the most recent tax year ...

Unless you live in Massachusetts and you are actually dealing with Romneycare and not just the ACA I don't see how you can blame Republicans who did literally everything in their power to stop it save for a handful of traitors to the party; and no the fact the Heritage foundation floated a similar idea in 1989 that went nowhere does not somehow make it GOP party plank in 2010.

As to propping up the insurance industry, you are nutz there too. Seriously if you think the Democratic party votes to pass healthcare reform that obliterated the private insurance industry would have been there, I have a bridge to sell you! Remember every state as a byzantine set of rules to more or less force every insurer to have some local presence and probably tax exposure there.

After that you have an entire chain middle men like brokers, resellers, re-insurers, who all have an intrest in private health insurance remaining the norm. If that isn't enough you also have a chain of hedge funds, mutual funds, bond funds and their respective ownerhsip that invests in these large mostly public private health insurers that also don't want to see change.

There are enough monied constituencies, that actually implementing single payer would be political suicide. I am serious we could have the president, senate, and house in DNC control and still no progress toward single payer would occur. Its one of those issues very much like abortion(at the national level). The pols are happy to talk about it but they don't want to actually deal with it legislatively, its better to use as a political football to stir up the base. If you are a Democrat and you need the optics of lots of people marching for social justice say some stuff about single payer. If you are republic and you need to ensure your base will show up on election day, tell them your opponent wants single payer.

Comment: Re:Does it work in reverse? (Score 5, Insightful) 294

You gotta love the cognitive dissonance. We are perfectly 'okay' (societally) with same gender patdowns because you know that can't be 'sexual' or exploitative, yet we no longer consider homosexuality to be deviant behavior to the point we largely support marriage equality.

My take on its government should not be allowed to have it both ways. You either don't believe in homosexuality as a normal state, or you can't support TSA patdowns. Sexual assault is sexual assault no matter what gender or sex the other persona happens to be unless its invited. And the TSA procedure meets every definition for assault. Do you feel free to turn around and leave if you are selected for an enhanced search? I don't I'd be considerably afraid that if I they suggested they needed to do a patdown and I responded "no thanks I'll just head back to my car" that I would find myself detained shortly their after.

Comment: Re:Obama Hurts Another US Company... (Score 1) 99

by DarkOx (#49452105) Attached to: Microsoft: Feds Are 'Rewriting' the Law To Obtain Emails Overseas


I feel you but I am really afraid that Rand simply isn't his father. I am not sure who Rand or Ted Cruz really are. They don't seem very consistent to me, and in Rands case I don't see much evidence that once faced with 'the realities of the office' he would utterly bend over and just pick up with Bush and Obama left off.

Who we need is someone like this:
who has announced he is going to run in 2016.


Comment: Re:This should be no different to physical documen (Score 1) 99

by DarkOx (#49452099) Attached to: Microsoft: Feds Are 'Rewriting' the Law To Obtain Emails Overseas

The feds cant use a warrant obtained in the USA to require a US based company to hand over physical documents stored in a foreign company, why should they be able to do it for electronic documents?

What are you smoking. Sure the feds can't use a warrant obtained in the US to go kick in a door on foreign soil, they have to ask the local government their nicely to do it for them (unless its in the Middle East than we just do it anyway); but they certainly can subpena records.

You think for example during the Enron trials if they had just said "gee SEC we don't have to comply with these subpenas for records because we do all out accounting out of our Mexico City office", the feds would have responded "Oh well than I guess there is nothing we can do". No they would have been held in contempt and punished that way.

Comment: Re:The inversion is complete. (Score 2) 99

by DarkOx (#49452077) Attached to: Microsoft: Feds Are 'Rewriting' the Law To Obtain Emails Overseas

Two sides of the same coin, isn't it?

No its not. A records request in accordance with some kind of due process that is public information and established before the event, is decidedly not spying.

You are welcome to consider such a process bad law, and objectionable for any number of reasons but its a very different animal. At least someone is accountable for it, whether its a judge who signed a warrant and legislator who signed the law authorizing record sharing with $AGENCY. There is a (theoretically) functional political process by which you can attack the problem.

On the other hand spying is done in secret, so nobody is effectively accountable. You never learn that it happened in many cases so you can never seek redress. The politician and legal process for dealing with it when revelations do come out are entirely broken, look at the legal standing issues around the phone metadata law suits ,etc.

Domestic spying is IMHO way way worse, in that it represents and entirely extra-legal undemocratic application of government power, without due process and frequently in violation of other civil rights. Government fundamentally can't be by the people and for the people when its secret from the people. All those who support these programs are immediately wrong for doing so, be they are contrary to the fundamental mission of our government set fourth in the Constitution and its Bill of Rights. There can be no justification.

Comment: Re:The inversion is complete. (Score 4, Insightful) 99

by DarkOx (#49449279) Attached to: Microsoft: Feds Are 'Rewriting' the Law To Obtain Emails Overseas

This isn't about spying its about compliance with records requests and privacy laws. EU has all kinds of (frankly downright crazy) privacy laws around email. That make it difficult to hand records to anything third party (that isn't an EU or member nation organ) and still be in compliance with the letter of the law; the US government is arguing that our courts etc have the power to subpena records on overseas servers.

This puts companies like Microsoft between a rock an hard place, they essentially can't follow both sets of rules if US jurisdictional rules are not limited in scope to well, the US.

I am not sure what the right answer is here, but it is a problem.

Comment: Re:Abusive authority breeds abusers, not obedience (Score 2) 626

If someone defecated on my dinner table I would never eat off that table again.

Really why? I mean you know we have things like disinfectants and such that would make it entirely safe right? A little soap water, and some elbow grease to clean it, then follow it with a little Lysol (which probably from a health stand point isn't even needed) and it should be cleaner and more germ free than before there was a turd on it.

Have you ever been around small children or had sick pet? If your standard is must dispose of anything that has even been in contact with fecal matter must be disposed of you had better avoid both pets and children or be prepared to replace all your furniture several times over.

That said I would much my ordering of things would be:
Pie theft
Turd leaving
iPad theft

I mean Pie's are cheap and easy to make. If the wife does not feel like making another we can just go get ice-cream or something. Occasionally turds have to be cleaned up, that comes with life and I can handle it, but I'd rather bake a pie. The iPad is pretty pricy.

Comment: Re:Seems fair (Score 1) 107

by DarkOx (#49447739) Attached to: ICANN Asks FTC To Rule On<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.sucks gTLD Rollout

Well I would add to that list a little bit, the national tlds are perfectly reasonable for serious business, and perfectly well intentioned individuals to use as well, I don't have a problem with .us, .uk, .ca, ...

The anything goes as a TLD situation though is what sucks. We have enough problems with 'identity' when we care about it online as it is without adding ambiguities like, does example mean example.example.com because I have example.com. in my search suffix list or is it a tld, well okay if it was a tld it should have been written example. but did the moron who wrote the app I am using that uses that as a string component to create some more complex URI to send somewhere else know that?

I hate this mess.

Comment: Re: And it's not even an election year (Score 1) 407

the real story is: what applied back in the turn of the century does not apply any longer.

Yet there are no good reasons that it could not apply again.

they were INVESTED here, they eventually learned the language and merged in. that was then.

what we have now is a 'grab, take, return home' situation.

Its much easier to invest in something when you have a fairly concrete promise. H1Bs (and various other forms of visa holders) can't really expect to become full citizens with any degree of certainty at anytime. We ought to fix that problem.

stop playing star spangled banner and smell the real coffee. what worked 100 years ago is not applicable now. the workforce is too crowded, the unemployment is sky high and we are borderline on depression, again and again.

This is just false. The unemployment rate is probably lower now than it was at the turn of dawn of the 20th century. The difference now is people feel entitled to stay where they are, back then you moved where the work was. The other thing is the economy is much more stable than it was then, even with the trauma of the 2007-10 years. I actually think THAT IS A PROBLEM, its the reason we have such a big wealth gap, its the reason we have "long term unemployment", its the reason we have problems like 'systemic risk' we don't let the big fail we don't stir the pot so folk shift in an out of the workforce; we prevent industry for adapting to the needs of the day.

and yes, I do think that being born in a country and raised there DOES give you more rights over those who just moved in. try moving to germany or france or austria or switzerland or probably most other european countries and trying to be 'a citizen'.

The failures of others is not a justification for not attempting to do/be better. It may offer proof the problem was hard and excuse failure but it isn't in and of it self a good reason not to try if the ends are noble.

Honestly the best way to 'fix' the problem IMHO is do away with all the quota and specialty visa programs. Let anyone who wants to come do so. Tell them they have 24 months during which they must any felony convictions and pass a 4th grade level English exam (for anyone over the age of 10), and provide the government with current contact information at all times. If they do that they get a green card. Commit a felony automatic deportation NO reentry ever. No unaccompanied minors unless they can prove they have relatives willing to house them. Fail to pass the English exam they must go home and can try to immigrate again after one year. Failure to provide contact info or sit for the exam is felony illicit immigration.

That way its nice an simple and open to every, which means anyone who does immigrate illegally is almost certain to be an undesirable or other sort of bad actor we should have little sympathy for; which means we CAN secure boarder (utilizing force as required) and work aggressively to discover and deport anyone who is not supposed to be here.

Comment: Re:Follow the money (Score 1) 100

by DarkOx (#49440257) Attached to: Apple Leaves Chinese CNNIC Root In OS X and iOS Trusted Stores

Pretty much what I said a week ago and got modded into oblivion for it. Google already has/had an somewhat antagonistic relationship with parts of the Chinese government and they don't get the revenue from there they get elsewhere and are unlikely to do so in the near future.

Which is the problems with the CA system, To Big to Fail CAs now exist. What if this was Verisign/GeoTrust/Thawte etc caught doing something like this. Think any of the major browser or OS vendors would even consider revocation of there roots? I don't.

So there is no real remedy for misbehavior now.

Comment: Re:use it or lose it (Score 2) 153

by DarkOx (#49438953) Attached to: ESA Rebukes EFF's Request To Exempt Abandoned Games From Some DMCA Rules

holder ceases to publish, market, support and profit from a product

Its a nice idea but kinda hard to enforce. Suppose Microsoft wants to make sure XP's copyright does not expire early. They gather up 20 retail copies of "new old stock" they have somewhere an set an Outlook reminder to put one on Ebay once a year. Does that count? What if its a small ISV with a shareware product that they maybe only sell a handful of license for per year. Its not a product they pay much attention to but hey once in a while someone decides to toss them $50 to make the nag screen go away, it costs them nothing to leave the license generator and sales page up on their site, so what not? Should they not be allowed to do that as long as they care to?

We you make to many rules it just creates to many questions and to many competing interpretations. It leaves everyone wonder what really is allowed and what isn't and the real beneficiaries end up being the attorneys.

I think we need to keep it simple like, authors lifetime + 15 or just strait 75 years where author is a nonhuman legal entity. No ifs, ands, or buts, no renewals, sorry Disney you can't own Micky for ever.. type system.

Comment: Re:Do they not grasp the concept here? (Score 1) 153

by DarkOx (#49438837) Attached to: ESA Rebukes EFF's Request To Exempt Abandoned Games From Some DMCA Rules

They would be indignant, I am sure.

They are like the ISP/Telco/Wireless provider crowd though they want to have it both ways. "I am a common carrier" when it affords me legal protection or entitles me to some government handouts, rights of way etc, "I am pure commercial entity that should be except from regulation" when I want invent new revenue streams and leverage my monopoly by double dipping.

Same for the games industry, suggest they should be regulated and the cry is "We are artists, free speech!", unless that pesky first sale doctrine implies you could resell it like a novel or a painting, than "we are service providers!". Same deal on copyrights if someone uses their stuff for anything "OMG Pirates!, save the intellectual properties", they want to use something, "its just sampling".

These are not rational and consistent arguments they are making. You can't therefore try and reason with them or make assumptions about what their position will be for a given set of facts, you have to understand there thinking just boils down to "Whatever is most favorable to us right now!", that is really all there is if you try and analyze beyond you will reach incorrect conclusions 99% of the time.

Comment: Re:Or a simple solution. (Score 3, Insightful) 95

by DarkOx (#49437161) Attached to: Microsoft Creates a Docker-Like Container For Windows

No we don't. The hands on votec schools don't teach industry history and if you look at that stack overflow poll from a few days ago it looks like the majority of people only spend about 15 years in software development. So once every 10 years or so the majority of developers are two young to know better when 'hard learned lesson' is called into question by one of the rockstars.

In case of injury notify your superior immediately. He'll kiss it and make it better.