Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Good data first, then maybe big data later (Score 1) 99

by Jumperalex (#48946031) Attached to: Cutting Through Data Science Hype

Yes! Dear Tea Pot! YES YES YES!!!!!!

Then you find out the transactional data is jacked because it is 1) manually entered by a third party (not the user/customer) 2) entered without regard to policy 3) maybe not entered at all. [hangs head] and then they are the very ones asking for the analysis of that same data to drive their future planning and you want to beat them over the head with your rusting slide rule!!!!!!!

Comment: Re:Galaxy Alpha - We Hardly Knew Ye (Score 1) 47

by Jumperalex (#48693013) Attached to: Samsung To Discontinue Galaxy Alpha For Cheaper Galaxy A5

I was sadly limited to samsung only phones at my new employer (apparently they are the only phones to pass security mandates ... well other than iPown). Personally I have a 2013 Moto X and love it for its 99% stock android UI. all my previous phones were either nexus or immediately flashed to AOSP. Anyway chocked on the idea of Touchwiz and even the idea of a work phone bigger than my personal phone ... so I got the Alpha.

It was a great choice. For a work phone. The phone is amazing to behold, very slick, amazing battery life. But sadly it does suffer from the fatal flaw: Touchwiz. It is stupidly laggy; opening the recent apps list literally is a press, wait wait wait, wait wait wait, affair; the stupid physical button can't decide if it wants to take me back to the home screen or GoogleNow. It looks like a giant cartoon for children. Honestly it is a bit insulting.

If I had made the mistake of getting it as a personal phone I would have tried to reflash AOSP and failing that returned it.

But again this is all the fault of TouchWiz and not the physical phone. It is truly amazing. When the UI isn't getting in the way it is very snappy. The screen looks great. Battery life is amazing (3 days no charge and still 30% left). And it is sweet to look at. Catch a clue Samsung; touchwiz sucks. You aren't special, just like everyone else. Make great hardware and leave the software to others.

Comment: Re:Fire all the officers? (Score 2) 515

by Jumperalex (#48593639) Attached to: Once Again, Baltimore Police Arrest a Person For Recording Them

Yes if the law you are breaking it directly related to the accomplishment of your job:

Cashier; steal cash, lose your job, and any chance of being a cashier ever again
Doctor; fraudulent prescriptions or insurance fraud, lose your job, and any chance of being a doctor again
CPA; embezzle, launder, etc, lose your job, and any chance of being a CPA ever again

Need I go on? This isn't a difficult concept.

As to the pension, there aren't many defined benefit plans left anymore, but for the ones that do still exist (mostly public employees) there is 100% a requirement that you depart the organization on good terms. For the military you don't even have to break a law to lose your chance at a pension, you just have to be separated before 20 years.

Of course anything like a 401k is different, that money is yours EXCEPT for matching contributions, those are up for grabs though I understand once they are vested that likely means it is legally yours without risk of forfeit. But that isn't the point. The idea of losing a pension after termination for cause is 100% valid and common.

The only question left: what crime / infraction justifies such a termination.

Comment: Re: Time for hope (Score 1) 424

by Jumperalex (#48236743) Attached to: Law Lets IRS Seize Accounts On Suspicion, No Crime Required

Yes, lets bet [hypothetically]. You have made an assertion. Would you be willing to bet $1000 that you are right? Or do you just like spouting off. If you think government overreach and seizure is a Dem only feature you're really living inside your own echo chamber. In the end this is a problem larger than any single party and is just a feature of power corrupting at all levels.

Comment: Re:Wrong Title (Score 1) 499

Baloney. As someone who deals with the military industrial complex on a daily basis, I know for a fact that the forms you submit to the OPM ask you in plain English "have you ever belonged to an organization dedicated to the violent overthrow of the US government" and these forms are retained by the OPM for something like 7 or 10 years, after which you are required to resubmit them. If she said "no" to the question in question, but knew that her acquaintances went to jail, something objectively doesn't add up. The best possible excuse is that she's just pathologically oblivious, not that the OPM has trumped up charges out of nowhere.

I don't have mod points to upvote so I'll brave the repost of this. This person is not a troll, they are stating facts. Omission on an SF86 is the same as a lie. Not only do they specifically ask you about groups advocating the overthrow of the government they also ask you about ANY political group affiliations.

Anyone filling out an SF86 should two simple facts: 1) the lie is always worse than the fact and 2) when in doubt WRITE IT DOWN!!! The worst that happens is you've wasted some time writing it down and wasted some time of the investigator/adjudicator.

Let's be clear: I (and thus we) do not have enough facts even from TFA to really make an informed assessment. But parent is not wrong, not a troll, and for what we do know from TFA is on-topic.

Comment: Socialism? ... riiiiiiight (Score 1) 171

by Jumperalex (#47588243) Attached to: Critics To FTC: Why Do You Hate In-App Purchasing Freedom?

If a 15 minute open refund period produced "obvious and intuitive consumer benefits" just think about what an hour could do. You know, like enough to actually test out the app for REAL. Especially apps that are more complicated than flappy bird and, oh yeah, more expensive.

Mea Culpa: though I will acknowledge that a "free" app with in-app purchase, that works well enough to test it out before spending money, is indeed one way to get around the limited 15 minutes to test the app.

But of course those apps are not the problem. The problem the government (you know, the supposedly by the people FOR the people) is trying to prevent predatory sharks from bilking people of money through shady practices like kids games that make it very easy to just click click spend a shed load of money.

Comment: Re:Except, of course, they have to prove you can (Score 1) 560

I don't see why not.

First you are resumed innocent at least by US Law. So to claim that you setup the dead-man switch specifically to destroy evidence is to assume a priori that you are guilty.

Second, there are completely legitimate reasons for the scheme presented. Such as preventing absolutely anyone else in the world, other than the police, from accessing the data without your knowledge or consent. The fact that it is so elaborate and/or effective (I can't comment on that last bit) is evidence of skill not guilt.

Assuming a defendant didn't do something stupid like admit their real fear was prosecution using evidence of a crimes stored on those very same drives, I'd have a hard time as a juror finding the defendant guilty of evidence tampering. I am under no obligation to admit anything about those drives, to include my knowledge that the clock is ticking. That is the heart of the self-incrimination argument against having to decrypt a hard drive.

Mind you my assertions above are not backed up by a law degree and in some ways are still tenuous given the current state of jurisprudence in the various US courts. Though iirc, the SCOTUS has weighed in with a narrow decision along those lines. But I might only be thinking of a circuit court decision.

Comment: Re:State constitution, not Federal (Score 1) 519

by Jumperalex (#47214309) Attached to: Teacher Tenure Laws Ruled Unconstitutional In California

haha thanks, you mostly saved me from saying the same thing. So I'm just piling on for effect.

While it might be a worthy discussion to have concerning just how much work gives you how much "paid-retirement" the fact that the concept itself is looked at with derision is truly sad. Instead of lionizing the few left who still have the option, it might be better to start demanding answers for why more people don't.

*Disclaimer - I'm one of the lucky few

Comment: Re:So in other words, it will be just like Firewir (Score 1) 355

by Jumperalex (#46997869) Attached to: Can Thunderbolt Survive USB SuperSpeed+?

The problem lay with the peripheral manufacturers who didn't want to put in more expensive controllers and dual-ports on their enclosures. ... They buy on price and availability, plain and simple.

And they were right. Overall what is cheaper? Six devices and a computer with expensive controllers in them? Or one computer with one less expensive controller in it and six devices with really inexpensive controllers in them?

Daisy chaining - I'm sure it was nice, and I can even think of one or two cases where I might have used it if it were available, but in the end the fast majority of my devices were all within reach of me, which meant they needed to be ~the same distance from the computer, which meant they could both use the same length cables (give or take). Daisy chaining doesn't change the # of cables I need. At best is lets me use one shorter cable and slightly declutters the back of my computer. But that is what a USB hub is for, and combined it was cheaper than FW controllers, enclosures, and cables.

It was a very expensive solution to a problem very few people had: the need to move massive amounts of data in/out of a peripheral at a time when the user is unwilling to wait. That is to say, not even external-backups really needed it because those tend to be fire and forget.

At least that was my experience and I actually did buy an external FW HDD for backups because I really was just that impatient :)

Comment: Re:Makes no sense (Score 2) 178

by Jumperalex (#46853205) Attached to: DOJ Complains About Getting a Warrant To Search Mobile Phones

And if the officer is not in possession of the phone, then having or not a warrant has exactly zero impact on the suspect's ability to wipe the phone. The only thing that prevents that is physical possession of the phone by the officer. Not having a warrant does not prevent the officer from taking the phone into evidence, it just stops them from searching it until a warrant is granted. So no, it most certainly does not.

Wherever you go...There you are. - Buckaroo Banzai

Working...