Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

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:I just must be drunk. (Score 1) 90

by N1AK (#49146103) Attached to: Fighting Scams Targeting the Elderly With Old-School Tech
I still find it hard to comprehend why more isn't done to protect people from scammers and pursue those who run these scams. A government can easily put eye-bleedingly large fines on any company who provides a phone number that is used for scamming. This would make the companies who provide the UK/US/etc numbers on the end of overseas scams far more cautious about who they provide them to.

Then you're only left with foreign calls which a) cost scammers vastly more, b) already look very suspect, and c) can be dealt with by penalising countries that provide a safe-harbour to scammers.

Comment: Re:How do we know this is not parallel constructio (Score 1) 129

by N1AK (#49028327) Attached to: The Technologies That Betrayed Silk Road's Anonymity

I think it is safe to assume that from that moment on the name Ross Ulbricht led the suspect list and all effort was put in to linking DPR to Ross Ulbricht.

I also think it is likely that they caught him exactly as they said he did. That doesn't mean that they shouldn't be expected to keep records to show that is what in fact happened, and have their records audited to ensure they tell the truth. We're seeing far too many cases of things like the FBI protecting the police from having to reveal information about certain methods of surveillance to trust their word.

There are enough examples of very serious crimes, that don't get solved for decades and when they are that the quantity and obviousness of evidence is overwhelming; yet somehow it was missed at the time.

Comment: Re:How do we know this is not parallel constructio (Score 1) 129

by N1AK (#49023945) Attached to: The Technologies That Betrayed Silk Road's Anonymity

Sure, I suppose the NSA could have used magical spying technology to know everything about Dread Pirate Roberts, but whether they did or not, they didn't need to. He had left enough clues about DPR's identity scattered around in public to put him on a small list of suspects.

I don't intend to suggest something underhand happened, but I want to highlight what I feel is a flaw to this logic. Once you know someone has committed a crime it will be comparatively simple to find masses of evidence. Yes he might of left information around that could help narrow down suspects, or even incriminate himself, but that doesn't mean that it would have been found, noticed, and acted on.

Comment: Re:Consider the denominator (Score 0) 136

by N1AK (#49020891) Attached to: DEA Hands MuckRock a $1.4 Million Estimate For Responsive Documents

Those documents belong to us, they should be redacted when filed so that we can see them.

Pretty stupid logic. You're suggesting that the government spend $1.4 million redacting these documents, and hundreds of millions annually redacting all documents that could possibly be requested, in case they are requested, rather than spending the money when someone actually asks for it. You could make a case for arguing the government should be expected to pay the cost of redacting documents that the public are entitled to request, but that's a different issue.

Comment: Re:Backpedalled? (Score 1) 740

by N1AK (#48967235) Attached to: New Jersey Gov. Christie: Parents Should Have Choice In Vaccinations

The consensus view on Slashdot seems to be that vaccines are good and that taxes are bad. But, to me, at least, such views seem inconsistent.

Then that's your shortcoming, and you should think things through a few steps further. I shouldn't really be shocked though, the correlation between half-arsed incorrect arguments and opposition to vaccination is staggeringly high.

The cost of treating a serious outbreak, disruption to the economy etc are considerable. The costs of supporting those left disabled by disease are considerable. The cost of treating people in hospital with severe cases is considerable. The money spent developing vaccines by government is negligible compared to the costs to government of their being no vaccination.

Comment: Re: Backpedalled? (Score 3, Interesting) 740

by N1AK (#48967165) Attached to: New Jersey Gov. Christie: Parents Should Have Choice In Vaccinations
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that something very strange happening with allergies. I've just hit 30 and when I was a kid nut allergies were virtually unheard of, nothing was done by society to control the risks, nut free food plants didn't exist (or were at best vanishingly rare). Now ~20 years later nut warning information is everywhere, nut free plants are common, schools and other institutes have policies and processes in place, airlines have nut allergy policies etc.

Either nut allergies are a lot more common, or its become a lot more common to think you have an allergy.

Comment: Re:Backpedalled? (Score 3, Interesting) 740

by N1AK (#48967137) Attached to: New Jersey Gov. Christie: Parents Should Have Choice In Vaccinations
So are you suggesting there is no line?

Should the state stay uninvolved if a parent sexually interferes with their child, or does that interference not count as drawing a line? How about allowing the beating of children badly enough to break bones when they misbehave, or does saying they can't do that not count as drawing a line? Refusing to feed their children must be ok by your logic, otherwise it'd be the state telling parents what to feed their children which you explicitly use as an example of bad state interference.

The issue with vaccinations and freedom is that it isn't about what is best for that individual child, it is about what is best for society and children as a whole. I'm fine with parents having the choice not to vaccinate their children, as long as schools/scout groups/theme parks/sports stadiums etc can all require proof of vaccination or a medical exemption, and that public venues that allow un-vaccinated children in and don't warn people about that can be sued for the damage caused.

Comment: Re:Double Irish (Score 1) 825

by N1AK (#48954289) Attached to: Obama Proposes One-Time Tax On $2 Trillion US Companies Hold Overseas
Do companies pay enough gas tax to pay for the proportion of road use they generate?

Do they pay enough for the enforcement of patent laws, trademark laws, for the military that protects their assets, etc etc.

Even if you take the naive position that only things directly consumed by a company matter (thus not healthcare, education etc) it's a pointless pedants argument. If that all had to be funded by taxes on workers then wages/sales taxes and various of other things would increase instead. They'll end up spending whatever they save in tax on costs instead.

Comment: Re:Double Irish (Score 1, Interesting) 825

by N1AK (#48954235) Attached to: Obama Proposes One-Time Tax On $2 Trillion US Companies Hold Overseas

if the profits were made in tax free countries, so be it.

A viewpoint that requires a special kind of stupidity in those who don't appreciate it is purely theoretical. Companies aren't making billions in tax free countries, they are making billions in countries with taxes and using loopholes to legally avoid paying the vast majority with the help of a select group of countries. Getting every country to stop supporting this kind of action is impossible, so America is changing the laws to make it pointless instead.

If you can find one example of an American company that is currently paying less than 19% tax on it's average foreign profits without using a convoluted trick like double Irish I'd be amazed, so feel free to share.

Comment: Re:So drive a few miles in the other direction (Score 1) 165

by N1AK (#48931247) Attached to: Drone Maker Enforces No-Fly Zone Over DC, Hijacking Malware Demonstrated

Fact is while there are plenty of innocent reasons to want to fly a drone, there are virtually no innocent reasons to *need* to fly a drone

There's no 'need' to consume alcohol, play team sport, have foods with added sugar, own a car, or have the internet either. It's idiotic to look at laws restricting things on the basis that there is no 'need' for the thing they restrict.

Comment: Re:kinda illegal already, by a rule referring to a (Score 2) 165

by N1AK (#48931201) Attached to: Drone Maker Enforces No-Fly Zone Over DC, Hijacking Malware Demonstrated
It's pretty common for GPS drones to include no fly areas like airports and military bases. Obviously that's primarily in place to stop someone accidently causing a plane crash, as anyone intentionally trying to do so would find it trivial to get round the restriction. I don't think there's anything wrong with that. I don't want to fly my drone into those areas, and if I did for some very niche reason then I could intentionally subvert it. Blocking out hundreds of square KMs of land because a drone was found near an important persons house is utterly retarded.

You knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Fred. -- Superchicken

Working...