Forgot your password?

Comment: Touch/button interaction? (Score 1) 37

by swb (#47732437) Attached to: Apple CarPlay Rollout Delayed By Some Carmakers

Will VNC intelligently handle touchscreen integration? I'd like my device on the car display, but I'd like my device on my car display, along with touch screen access (and integration with other physical buttons).

But of course all of this is a solved problem as of years ago, but vendor lock-in attempts and technology "innovation" has kept this from happening.

Comment: Re:What BS (Score 1) 159

by swb (#47721481) Attached to: Calif. Court Rules Businesses Must Reimburse Cell Phone Bills


Companies are merely looking to gain a set of benefits -- mobile communication and availability -- without paying for any of it.

The benefit from their perspective is two fold -- not only are you underwriting a significant cost for them, a device, a phone plan, you're doing it on a personal device, which presumes that you're also providing them with a communications availability that they get without any additional wage compensation.

The problem with it being "industry wide" means that they are no longer competing with each other in terms of a defined workplace compensation, so you really can't shop around in terms of finding a job as to who pays for what, they all just assume you're going to provide it for them and it stops being even something you can negotiate.

Given the chance, employers will always want to provide for employees like they're contractors (ie, nothing) but control them like they were slaves (ie, everywhere).

FWIW, it's easy enough to add an additional email account but I draw the line at importing a security profile on my personal device. If they want/demand that they need to provide a complete device. I will no more allow them to put security controls on my personal device than I will allow them to install security controls on my house.

Comment: Now just force society to accept transit limits (Score 1) 274

by swb (#47714759) Attached to: Helsinki Aims To Obviate Private Cars

Right now society (jobs, business interactions, legal obligations, etc) are generally structured around the common denominator of automobile transit. Your boss expects you to get to work around the basic parameters of what you can do in a car.

It's great to eliminate the car at some municipal level, now make "the bus didn't show up" or "there were no Uber/Zipcar/Car2Gos available" as some kind of universally accepted, legally unchangeable excuse for missing work, a court appearance, daycare pickup, etc.

One of the problems with the "yay, no cars!" world is that the rest of the world goes on making assumptions about people moving about that are based on the ability to get from point A to point B in a car.

Sure, in some places like NYC, a subway glitch will usually be accepted (in fact, I think they have a process for issuing excuse notes) and when I worked in a downtown office where there were a lot of bus riders, weather problems with the bus were generally not questioned or a cause for action.

But generally speaking society as a whole just assumes you're at fault.

Comment: Magic government security tools (Score 1) 143

by swb (#47714655) Attached to: Researchers Find Security Flaws In Backscatter X-ray Scanners

What's worse about this is that the government buys into these security technologies as if they were magic, both financially and from a security perspective, treating them as if they were prima facie proof of guilt/innocence.

Yet at the same time they classify the technologies, prohibiting anyone from gaining any information about them or validating whether they work. The cynic of course knows this is just to hide their failings for political and commercial reasons "to prevent terrorists" from exploiting them.

Comment: Re:Logged in to email? (Score 2) 115

by Frobnicator (#47713977) Attached to: 51% of Computer Users Share Passwords

It would really surprise me if your Android phone *doesn't* have this feature, because it *is* required by law. Mine certainly has it.

This is one of those funny cases were people accidentally out themselves as not securing their phone.

The phones legally must display it in most countries, but only if the phone is locked or password protected. If there is no password required to get in, just a "swipe to unlock" rather than a security system, the button does not appear.

Lack of emergency call button == unsecured smart phone.

(Or a fairly old phone, or a hacked phone that breaks the law in many nations.)

Comment: Re:Disagree != Flamebait (Score 1) 715

by Pseudonym (#47709509) Attached to: News Aggregator Fark Adds Misogyny Ban

In the interested of balance...

OWS was just a bunch of bums, they were not demanding accountability for criminal acts by executives.

Similarly, the Tea Party was originally a protest against increasing the national debt by an insane amount, to bail out financial institutions because they were "too big to fail". It was only later that it was taken over by the crazy end of the Republican Party.

Comment: Re:Sigh (Score 1) 715

by Pseudonym (#47709483) Attached to: News Aggregator Fark Adds Misogyny Ban

Sorry, being forced to "tolerate" someone is, for me, functionally indistinct from being forced to approve of them.

This is a common misconception.

It's true that for a bigot, approval and tolerance might be equally difficult, but they are not functionally identical. The very notion of "tolerance" presupposes the existence of something that you find detestable. Being asked to tolerate is a tacit admission that it's okay that you don't approve.

Comment: Re:Vitamin D deficiency; he needs to supplement (Score 1) 297

by Pseudonym (#47709193) Attached to: WikiLeaks' Assange Hopes To Exit London Embassy "Soon"

F*ing a sleeping girl to work around her explicit and repeated refusal to consent to your preferred form of sex (what Assange is charged with, #4 on the EAW) IS RAPE [...]

No. Julian Assange has not been charged.

Let me repeat that in bold-face for added emphasis, because this is a crucial point without which none of this fiasco makes any sense.

Julian Assange has not been charged.

I'll wait for you to catch up with that before I go on. Got it? Good, now I'll continue.

Extraditing people without charge is a highly controversial practice, and widely considered to be an abuse of human rights. This year, the UK passed an amendment to the Extradition Act which bans it. Unfortunately for him, his case is grandfathered, since it's already been through the highest level of court.

Assange is wanted for questioning, no more and no less. This warrant was issued because he refused to travel to Sweden for questioning at his own expense (which is what the prosecutors wanted). Said prosecutors have known exactly where he has been for the last four years and has consistently refused to question him in any of those places despite his legal team making the offer many times.

If he is ever convicted of what he's been accused of, then he absolutely deserves his day in court and whatever punishment the court sees fit. Right now, it's hard to see how the Swedish prosecutors could be said to be acting in anything resembling good faith.

What he's accused of is serious, make no mistake. But right now, Julian Assange has not even been charged.

Comment: Re:precedent (Score 5, Informative) 228

by Frobnicator (#47708653) Attached to: $125,000 Settlement Given To Man Arrested for Photographing NYPD

Right, because trial can set precedent and the city *really* doesn't want that.

Precedent is only part of the story.

A settlement comes with the clause that they do not admit to any guilt. If the courts get involved, and a guilty verdict comes down, it also comes down with the "under color of law" modifier. That comes with a year in prison at the lowest tier. If there was bodily injury if weapons were used or threat of weapons was used, it jumps to a ten year prison term. The third tier, which triggers if the acts result in death, threat of death, or if they include kidnapping (which false arrests can qualify under), attempt to kidnap, sexual abuse or its attempt, the punishment can grow to life in prison.

It doesn't matter what their original violation was, those are additional bonus punishments of up to a year, a decade, or life in jail.

They will fight in the courts right up until the court decides they are no longer immune. The moment the immunity is broken they will do anything to take a non-guilt settlement.

LEOs (both as individuals and as departments) will do all they can to avoid an actual guilty verdict when their own acts are done under color of law. They will try to get any other deal or settlement they can rather then spend time in the prisons they helped create.

Comment: Re:No surprise here (Score 1) 170

Yes, countries spy on other countries. All of their hands are dirty to some extent.

The difference is the method and extent of targeting. As a wartime example, it is the difference between a sniper rifle vs Agent Orange.

There are various 'socially acceptable' levels of international espionage. Military groups are going to spy on other military groups, sure. Installing listening devices inside embassies, I understand that. Under international law it is well regarded that those INDIVIDUALS who engage in an activity against another party can be subject to similar activities by other nations. That is, government spying on government is okay. Government spying on citizenry is NOT okay.

The Geneva Convention implemented and now all nations are bound to treat non-combatant civilians as 'protected persons'. While they might be affected by actions, they are unlawful targets and violators are considered international war criminals. Those same protections should apply even during times of peace and apply to espionage, but unfortunately they don't.

"Ethical espionage" is not a contradiction in terms. Just as in traditional warfare the common citizenry are protected and are illegal targets, so to should they be off limits to espionage. The "Just War" doctrine, which currently includes details like only attacking war-related targets, ethical treatment of prisoners, post-war reconstruction and recovery for the citizens, should apply just as well to espionage.

Comment: Re:Turkey, ha! (Score 4, Interesting) 170

Your explanation is extreme, but Turkey is very much a wild card in the current scheme of things.

Erdogan's Islamist politics alone make Western powers nervous after years of dependable pro-Western/anti-Islamist governments, enforced as needed by the Turkish military.

Throw in Turkey's desire to play a leadership role in the Middle East coupled with the fact that what we call "the Middle East" was basically territory of the Ottoman Empire through about the end of the 19th century and it's not hard to see the guys who move around chess pieces on maps get a little curious as to what's happening there.

There are worse things in life than death. Have you ever spent an evening with an insurance salesman? -- Woody Allen