Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:What benefit to announcing it? (Score 1) 176 176

Because if one person can find an exploit so can someone else. At some point you have to go public because other ways Hacking Team like business can just keep selling it as a zero day to all manor of bad actors and end users are left exposed.

At lease if you let the cat out of the bag individuals can decide to stop using their phone if they believe the liberty or safety may be threatened as result. At that point you may be exchanging some activist keeping his head attached to his neck for price of script kiddies embarrassing some celebrities by publishing their nudes. It might just be the best of bad options.

Comment Re:Two birds with one stone (Score 1) 520 520

Here are the things about the Hillary E-mail scandal that should given everyone pause.

1) Basic technical understanding. Hillary keeps talking about the future and continuing to lead America into the 21st century but does not herself see that conducting business with sensitive materials from an outside e-mail domain is problem. Not only does she not understand this she hasn't got anyone around her to tell her or won't listen to them. yet we are supposed to accept that she makes informed intelligent decisions.

2) Hillary as per her history "no controlling legal authority" type pattern is being evasive rather than turning that server over to the government immediately like any of us little people would have done once congress started asking about it ( to save our own skin ) she redacted and turned over copies of the documents. Okay minimally compliant, in the mean time though the chain of custody has been ruined. So whatever does surface in terms of classified docs etc will be harder to prove. She is working to construct a legal defense of herself based on various technicalities.

2a) While we might forgive 2 as simply being prudent, if we accept her vast right wing conspiracy assertions she is basically making her case in the court of public opinion on technicality as well. "Oh those things were classified after the fact", well fine but they were still sensitive and the Secretary of state of all people should have been able to recognize that. Maybe no crime was committed but its still was comically bad judgement and given you want our vote for president why can't you answer for that?

3) How does her negligent handling of sensitive materials square with her harsh condemnations of Snowden and Manning's deliberate leaks? Given those events were taking place partially under her watch did that trigger any introspection about her only procedures around operation security? If not why not? Do the rules not apply to Hillary?

Comment Re:She is better then jeb bush (Score 2) 520 520

My check from the government is my earned entitlement. Your check from the government is an amoral welfare. Paul Ryan hates Social Security, but when he drew Social Security to get to college, it was somehow fine. Even Ayn Rand drew government checks.

Because as an individual its not a moral act. You leave nothing on the frigging table. Rand and Ryan I am sure never voted to support those programs, they also never voted for the taxes and regulations they labored under before or after utilizing them.

If there were an option to opt out of society and only opt back in when the time to collect comes that would be wrong. The way I figure it even though I totally support dismantling most of what the federal government does until someone tells me I don't have to file a 1040 form and sends me a check re-reimbursing me with interest for all the various activities my tax dollars have paid for along the way that I did not support you better believe I feel entitled to collect from and utilize programs I qualify for. I did not vote for them, I did not get my way. My fellow citizens did however.

Its a democratic republic. We take the consequences of elections good or bad. There is nothing wrong with voting to end programs, distributions, etc and still taking advantage of them if you loose. That is inherit in the rules of our society.

Comment Re:Or let us keep our hard-earned money (Score 4, Insightful) 520 520

Better idea: Use environmental and workplace safety laws to enforce and minimize those health costs, instead of using the concept as a cudgel to push cronyism.

Except in 240 years of American government both under the Constitution and the Articles before it that has NEVER been successful. Cronyism has basically been the character of our government from the outset.

The only thing that has ever worked is to tie the hands of government and the framers knew it. Power corrupts!

A far better idea would be to eliminate liability protections, weaken the corporate veil, and stop government backed lending. Make industry responsible for the harm it can do. The tail pound from your mine leaked and now my farm land is useless. I should be able to sue the coal company for the economic value of my land and income it could have generated for my family for the next 10 generations and if the coal company goes bankrupt I should be able to collect from the share holders in proportion to the remaining liability and stock they own.

Oil spill same deal. Heavy metal toxicity from the shit your solar panel plant releases ditto. You want people and industry to behave responsibly the solution is unlimited liability.

Comment Re:Drones (Score 5, Interesting) 267 267

Admittedly have never been an infantry man, pilot or any other sort of military man myself I still suspect its much easy for a guy sitting safely in chair to make a moral decision about a target, than it is for a guy in a life threatening situation to do so.

A drone operator can loiter around a target for a long time until he or she is confident said target is properly identified. A jock in a fighter-bomber does not have that luxury and also exists in constant fear someone is going to pop up with an anti air craft device, that will end his life. The drone operator has to worry an anti air craft device will ruin his afternoon with extra paper work. I known which one I'd rather imagine hovering over me deciding if I an enemy combatant or just a guy going out to milk the goats.

The separate question is does done warfare lower the barrier to entry such that conduct operations in theaters that would forgo if it meant having the infrastructure and associated costs of supporting large numbers of manned air craft in the area. This is over great concern. If we make warfare to easy we might find ourselves doing more of it. I am not buying the argument though that drones are equivalent to mindless kill bots or worse than the existing maned alternatives in any given situation all else being equal.


Comment Re:Free speech isn't the only right in play here (Score 1, Interesting) 275 275

If I were sitting on the SCOUTS I would have to question even those restrictions. The first amendment provides for the right of peaceful assembly, not the right of peaceful assembly when adequate sanitation as defined by a government agency happens to be in place.

I find it hard to accept the government can make a credible claim that an anti-violence fundraiser isn't a peaceful assembly, until there is probably cause to expect its anything else the government should have NO RIGHT to interfere irrespective of the number of porta-cans present.

Comment Re: Under what authority? (Score 2) 275 275

So let me understand this argument of yours? If you are standing gutter along a public street you can shout whatever you like and the government can't stop you because of the first amendment. On the other hand if you rent a venue and charge administration suddenly the government is allowed to censor you content? That makes no sense.

Comment Re:Under what authority? (Score 0) 275 275

In this case, you need a permit to use the park. Their permit said that they would not have this wanted fugitive perform. They violated the terms of their permit, so were shut down.

But that doesn't answer the question: what right does the city, which manages public spaces such as parks on behalf of the public, has to put arbitrary conditions on their use by said public?

Comment Re:RMS Says I Told You So (Score 1) 308 308

This is yet another an example of the industry trend to make all personal computing devices, from desktop workstations to wrist-band gadgets, merely "dumb terminals" that are completely beholden to a distant server. Software will inevitably become a service that will be metered out by a distant authority like water or electricity.

It's not limited to software but is the whole idea of an economy built on disposable products: since nothing lasts, you are effectively renting everything and since you're renting everything, you can't build up wealth except in the form of "financial instruments" who's demand - and thus value - is thus artificially inflated.

Comment Re:Pure undulterated bullshit (Score 1) 193 193

Or you could run the software in a VM and have the host OS capture the screenshot, if they manage to implement invasive DRM.

Or you could simply not run the software at all and only lose messages even the sender's drunk ass knew they would be ashamed of in the morning. And possibly the occasional extortion scheme.

Comment Re:The important details: Slower and over 540$ (Score 2, Informative) 75 75

So get a cheaper 4th Gen Core i whatever. Or go with an AMD APU or CPU and get a discrete GPU in the mean time.

I think you missed the point. GP expressed a wish for a 5-gen chip with more cores, and no graphics.

There's a lot to be said for that.

Comment Re:How much is an AG these days? (Score 2) 243 243

Apparently these hoes are for sale, so what's left to be determined is the price.

They aren't for sale to you. Their (real) job is to maintain the system; they get paid a commission from their current corporate patron. They aren't interested in your money, you're a mere mortal.

Weekend, where are you?