Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:What? (Score 1) 46

by Jane Q. Public (#49549667) Attached to: Microsoft Opens Vulnerability Bounty Program For Spartan Browser

The "information highway"? WTF is this, 1995?

No... more like 480 BC. It seems reasonable to think that "Spartan" refers to "Sparta" which in turn implies (with deference to Slashdot's notably horrible character handling): "Molon labe"... which would mean in this context: "Come and get it." The reply to Xerces when he demanded they lay down their weapons was "come and get them".

The historical reference hit me right away, and if Microsoft didn't really intend it, they screwed up bigtime. Because the name of their browser is historically a challenge to "try to go through me". So...

Let's go try it. I kind of doubt if seriously attacked it would stand as they did.

Comment: Re:privacy? (Score 1) 271

The cost would seem proportional to the users.

Of course. Did you not see in my sample calculation "$3.5M given 1M users"?

However, the economies do not scale linearly. You make an investment in infrastructure, and it's good up to X users. Then you make another investment, it's good up to X times 10 users. Etc. In practice it's mostly a step function, not a straight line.

Comment: Re:Question still remains (Score 1) 124

by Jane Q. Public (#49534387) Attached to: Google Adds Handwriting Input To Android

Then why did she dispute the fact that women are a minority in positions of power like government, CEO's, etc.?

Because your original statement

No, you're just part of the gender which is a minority in positions of power like government, CEO's, etc.

Can be interpreted at least two ways:

"part of the gender which is a minority in positions of power like government, CEO's, etc."


"part of the gender which is a minority in positions of power like government, CEO's, etc."

I admit, I read it pretty fast, but it struck me the second way. I could have thought about it more. I did wonder why you were saying I was in a position of power. :)

But just FYI, I didn't claim to be any particular gender, or belong to a minority, or be in a position of power.

Comment: Re:Question still remains (Score 1) 124

by Jane Q. Public (#49534367) Attached to: Google Adds Handwriting Input To Android

Yeah, you know why? Because they didn't have the horsepower to drive the resolution that users expected from a display at larger sizes. It's only recently that the hardware has become efficient enough to actually provide a larger display with the features users expect.

I repeat: my Tungsten at 320x480 was very nice, pretty fast, and the graphics were pretty impressive for their day. As I mentioned before, Bejeweled (for one example) played and looked great.

My point -- which you still seem to be not getting -- is that if they'd simply stuck a phone in it, we'd have CLOSE TO what we have today, years before it actually happened. No, the screen was not AS big. No, it did not have AS HIGH a pixel size. But neither did anything else. It would have been a phone that decently ran apps, AND had pretty good (again for its day) handwriting recognition.

Comment: Re:privacy? (Score 1) 271

by Jane Q. Public (#49534325) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: What Features Would You Like In a Search Engine?
Well, my comment was really meant in the context of ISPs.

Sure, there are small innovative companies. Like Instagram and even Netflix (it didn't start out big). BUT... what about companies that bring those services to the consumer? The ISPs? That's where Net Neutrality really comes in, and they have erected huge barriers to entry for anybody small (or innovative).

Comment: Re:Not just about terrorism (Score 1) 201

by Jane Q. Public (#49531231) Attached to: McConnell Introduces Bill To Extend NSA Surveillance

Oh no, they understand it just fine.. they just don't care or feel it should apply to them.

No, I don't believe that's true. While they might know the words, they haven't really studied it, or its history, enough to UNDERSTAND the intent of the words when they were written.

Further, many of them think they don't have to... that it's a "living document" that changes meaning over time.

I call bullshit.

"The first and governing maxim in the interpretation of a statute is to discover the meaning of those who made it." -- James Wilson, founding father

Comment: Re:Wonderful. (Score 4, Interesting) 252

by Jane Q. Public (#49522679) Attached to: Twitter Rolls Out New Anti-Abuse Tools

Twitter's hypocrisy was eyeroll worthy before, but it's just outright silly now.

I could be wrong, but I took your "SJW" comment to be a reference to those who abuse the "report for abuse" button.

This is a real phenomenon. Twitter has a history of suspending people for reported abuse, when in fact the "offending" party hadn't abused anyone or anything at all. For some people, like modding "troll" rather than "disagree", it has become synonymous for "I don't like this person, so I'm going to do something nasty".

To compound the problem further, Twitter doesn't tell the "offending" party what they did wrong. Occasionally -- not always by any means -- they will let people know what the "offending" Tweet was, but not specifically what was wrong with it or why anyone objected.

Twitter could easily do that without revealing the name or names of the complainants. But insisting that people stop "abuse" when they don't even know WHAT people complained about, is completely unreasonable in an atmosphere of "report abuse because I don't agree".

Comment: Re:Ask the former residents of East Germany (Score 1) 254

by Jane Q. Public (#49505975) Attached to: The Upsides of a Surveillance Society
Yes, the out-of-context issue is a very real danger, what with comments people make in one conversation taken out and presented in the context of something else, making it seem as if that person meant one thing when they really meant another.

I know this one well; it has been pulled on me many times.

Comment: Re: Ask the former residents of East Germany (Score 1) 254

by Jane Q. Public (#49505951) Attached to: The Upsides of a Surveillance Society

Look, it's really simple: we live in the Surveillance Age now, there's absolutely nothing we can do about it, might as well find a few upsides. You know the old saying "when rape is inevitable, relax and try to enjoy it"?

Another "downside" to pervasive surveillance: a disturbing degree of fatalism.

Comment: Re:rule of law (Score 2) 299

by kraut (#49502685) Attached to: Joseph Goebbels' Estate Sues Publisher Over Diary Excerpt Royalties

Longerich maintains this case has important censorship implications. “If you accept that a private person controls the rights to Goebbels’ diaries, then – theoretically – you give this person the right to control research,” he said.

A private person controls the rights to Goebbels' diaries until a court of law declares otherwise or they fall into the public domain for some other reason. Courts should have done this in the aftermath of WWII, but Germans wanted these copyrights to remain valid in order to control such writings.

The drive for essentially infinite copyrights comes mainly from the Walt Disney Corporations and the rest of the US Media. Germany has perfectly effective legal sanctions in place to prohibit the distribution of Nazi propaganda - personally I think they're misguided, but they certainly doesn't rely on copyright law.

Arguing as if "research" should be exempted from the usual rule of law is particularly embarrassing for a German professor studying the Holocaust, since many atrocities were committed in the Third Reich because German academics considered themselves above the law and got away with it.

a) research isn't affected by copyright in the same way as publication
b) The Third Reich was, on the whole, scrupulously legal. Once you have absolute power, passing laws to make your atrocities legal is trivial. Which is why the Nuremberg trials didn't apply German laws then, and why we need strong international enforcement of human rights laws today, regardless of national laws.

Unix is the worst operating system; except for all others. -- Berry Kercheval