Well I don't. There's no substitute, in privacy terms, for talking directly to people. That's why when I want to talk to someone and they're not around, I climb on something very high and shout the confidential information directly to them, as loudly as possible so they can hear it.
If for some reason you are suggesting that we give up, that we might as well give all control to one party, all I can do is completely disagree
I agree with you that 3 is better than 2, and I definitely don't want to see 1. But I believe the whole system of giving anybody control is broken and wrong. Most of the powers the government has need to be eliminated - they were wrong when kings exercised them, it became slightly better (by some measures) when we started voting on people taking turns exercising them, and it might be slightly better if we had more choices on who to vote in for tyrant each term. But the ultimately solution is to not give those powers out at all.
I am totally, completely in favor of building up a third party to rival these two.
Then there can be three sets of clowns pretending to have substantively different views while all favoring the expansion of government power.
... not letting me delete my account.
Slashdot is like the Mafia, CIA, and the Los Angeles Science Fiction Society: Once a member, ALWAYS a member.
As LASFS says: "Death Will Not Release You."
No, I'm in agreement with you here. As much as I don't buy from ThinkGeek anymore (unless they have a really, really wantable T-shirt on sale*...because I'm cheap as hell), having something akin to an Amazon Locker is a boon and a win for them.
It's a heck of a smart business strategy and it's going to be interesting (to me at least) to see how successful it is.
*I have a "Fhloston Paradise" t-shirt, and alas, no one ever recognizes the reference. That causes me to be bummed in almost unreasonable amounts.
If you weren't too fucking lazy to read the article, you might know that it's a combination of $37 million and $20/share. You don't deserve your low ID.
While you were busy 'reading articles', he was busy getting a low ID. BTW, UID 1 never read an article.
How would an ISP block them, however? The only mechanism I know about would be DNS blocking, whenthe DNS server is supplied by the ISP.. Is there some new British trick where pages of certain sites could be selectively blocked? If so, how long before "politically sensitive" human rights pages would be blocked, or whistle blower pages?
CleanFeed, built by British Telecom to block access to child abuse imagery, sold to other ISPs, then inevitably abused as a blunt instrument to enforce copyrights. It's a two-stage filtering system: a list of IP addresses gets loaded into the ISP core routers, which diverts all access to those addresses through a proxy server; that server checks against a (secret!) list of prohibited URLs and lets the rest through. It has already blocked part of Wikipedia by mistake or misjudgement, and the government has already announced plans to filter "extremist" websites too.
TalkTalk, another of the named ISPs, bought a more elaborate setup from the People's Republic of China for millions of pounds, and push their "adult" content censorship system on all customers who don't specifically opt out. It's been a big political issue lately, with the current government wanting to force all ISPs down that route so you'd have to ask your ISP specifically to stop filtering your connection.
Facebook lets you control your public keys as if it were any other information: public, friends only, etc.
What is the problem you are eluding to?
There are GPG plugins for the web client but I have not used them.
b) It's worth encrypting everything. This protects your data not only from the spooks, but from gmail/live/your ISP/whatever free client you may use.
>In fact I may enable a bunch more useless notifications and set up a rule to delete them at my end as they arrive.
For the record, I met her on the job. Bitter? Me? Never.