Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:I'll take it (Score 1) 294

I would agree, EXCEPT that its the ones I'm least attracted to.. so it feels a little more like rape, than a frisk, which is certainly not fun. Upside, given how much they seem to be interested in my "package", I should just give them a washcloth so I can get some useful benefit out of the deal.

Comment: Indiana and say Saudi Arabia are not the same (Score 1) 653

by Sassinak (#49415263) Attached to: Carly Fiorina Calls Apple's Tim Cook a 'Hypocrite' On Gay Rights

I think Carly is confusing the battles (perhaps intentionally). Indiana (as part of the US) actually has a law that talks about freedoms for all men (lets assume it means all people) and specifically calls for a separation of church and state so religious influence can not be forced upon the local population.. Countries like China and Saudi Arabia do not have those notions in their foundation. So its more of the hypocrisy of the US and the states that is at fault.. (all men are created equal.. ok.. well, they are not "men" so it doesn't apply.. Marriage shall be applied equally.. well, lets narrowly define what a marriage is instead of the general understanding that its an institutional/legal contract between two consenting adults, so we can exclude them).

Tim cook, as a CEO, has quite limited powers of influence outside of his "country".. So Apple doesn't sell in China.. (boo hoo.. the people there will buy their phones elsewhere, or import, like what they did before). But in the US, he shuts down plants, well, that has actual measurable impact because it impacts everyone there, and people no matter what they feel will vote with their wallets. (ie: No job (or a lower paying job, property values go down because of lower income/less jobs, education suffers (less money available to educational sector because its re-allocated to more "important" services (debatable but whatever), etc.. Those won't happen there, so its matter of picking your battle where you can actually have an impact. (and don't forget, CEO is not absolute ruler.. he runs a publicly traded company with shareholders, so he still has to turn a profit (or make sure all the majority shareholders are ok with lower profits for "a cause" otherwise, just what.. he gets kicked out, and any impact he was attempting to make would get pushed out with him. Its a delicate line and one that is not easily walked.

And don't forget, the bigger you are, your own local government (US) will often times encourage you to not rock the boat too much if they want to take to task another action. We don't live in a bubble that we can do absolutely ANYTHING we want.

Comment: Re:Decoy (Score 1) 200

by Sassinak (#49307215) Attached to: NZ Customs Wants Power To Require Passwords

The problem with your idea is many fold:

1: You need to insure the communication channel in the host country is sufficient (not always the case)
2: The cost/time to pull all the relevant information back in a usable manner (so you spend at least a day to get all the pieces of what you need to do your work back, potentially more if the network speed sucks)
3: Drives up the cost to do business. (see reasons 1 and 2)
4: You need to insure the connection back to home base is not compromised/tracked (one reason why physical media for some very sensitive information is still used)
5: The biggest reason, almost EVERYONE has some blending of personal and business elements on the same device (some more than others).. even doing things like "synching/backup your personal phone to your laptop while traveling" means your private life is present.
6: In most cases, they take the machines "in the back" so you don't know what is actually being done to it.. (I've had two of these searches done, and in both cases since I'm a security forensics person, I can check the "Footprints" and in most cases, they have duped the entire HD's (I can see last physical access) and left snoopware on the laptops.. which means you would be bringing a compromised / Trojan horse back to home base with snoopware.. (can someone say lawsuit?)

So yes, I am not a fan.. because none of these laws take HUMANS into account (devious, easily compromised, greedy bas**rds they are)

Comment: Re:well then, thats the solution. (Score 1) 303

by Sassinak (#48747819) Attached to: FBI Says Search Warrants Not Needed To Use "Stingrays" In Public Places

You are right, but sadly all it does is feed into the problem.. because those hackers and leakers can be anyone.. with "better tools".. it gives them the moral "excuse" to justify more tools like Stingray (regardless of the fact that as your pointed out they created the enemy and will continue to make more enemies).. its a vicious cycle that won't break because both sides believe they are 100% right and their actions are 100% justified.

Comment: Re:Can't America get its acts together ? (Score 3, Insightful) 1059

by Sassinak (#42514767) Attached to: Congressman Introduces Bill To Ban Minting of Trillion-Dollar Coin

A line from My Fair Lady comes to mind:

"Higgins:You mean to say you'd sell your daughter for fifty pounds?
Pickering:Have you no morals man?
Alfred P. Doolittle:No, no, I can't afford 'em, gov'ner. Neither could you if you was as poor as me. Not that I mean any 'arm, mind you, but if Eliza's getting a bit out of this, why not me too? Eh? Why not? Well, look at it my way - what am I? I ask you, what am I? I'm one of the undeserving poor, that's what I am. Now think what that means to a man. It means that he's up against middle-class morality for all of time. If there's anything going, and I puts in for a bit of it, it's always the same story: "you're undeserving, so you can't have it." But my needs is as great as the most deserving widows that ever got money out of six different charities in one week for the death of the same 'usband. I don't need less than a deserving man, I need more! I don't eat less 'earty than 'e does, and I drink, oh, a lot more. I'm playin' straight with you. I ain't pretendin' to be deserving. No, I'm undeserving. And I mean to go on being undeserving. I like it and that's the truth. But, will you take advantage of a man's nature to do 'im out of the price of 'is own daughter what he's brought up, fed and clothed by the sweat of 'is brow till she's growed big enough to be interesting to you two gentlemen? Well, is five pounds unreasonable? I'll put it to you, and I'll leave it to you."

Comment: Re:So???? (Score 1) 447

by Sassinak (#41957693) Attached to: Samsung Hits Apple With 20% Price Increase

Actually remember, Samsung holds patents on several parts apple is using..
So the actual cost may not be 4 dollars.. might be closer to 10.. (just on the iphone).. what about the ipad(s), laptops, desktops, appleTV.. etc...

So net increase to apple (Across the product portfolio) may be something like 50 dollars.. PER device made.. (doesn't matter if its sold or not).. and don't forget.. rejects/faulty devices still require the increase.

Its certainly not putting anyone our of business.. but its a healthy chunk of change for Samsung.. a little reminder/sting to apple.. ("Do you REALLY want to f*ck with us?"), and helps to finance this insane zealot war that apple is pushing.

Comment: This was expected.. (Score 3, Insightful) 447

by Sassinak (#41957607) Attached to: Samsung Hits Apple With 20% Price Increase

Come on.. why would you sue and attempt to bully one of the worlds largest manufacturer chips/screens/etc... and especially those used in your own device. Its akin to me suing my employer while I still work for them.. You know there are going to be repercussions.. Its not a lot (most likely because anything higher than 20% could get them sued (ie: retaliatory business practices).

Sucks that its all going to get pushed down to the consumer. (with a suitable markup).. of course, this could be what Samsung wants.. (gets apple to price themselves out of the market).. because the carriers are not going to absorb that cost.. Apple sure as heck won't take it..

(Glad I'm an Android / Hackintosh guy).

Comment: Re:Looks like ACA (Obamacare) is with us to stay. (Score 1) 1576

by Sassinak (#41904645) Attached to: Barack Obama Retains US Presidency

Correct, it is a Health Insurance bill because the structure of the US healthcare system is rooted in insurance as the primary vehicle for most people to pay for medical costs coupled with a massive attempt to burden it with so many holes and weaknesses that its not as effective as it could be. So you have three choices...

1: Scrap it 100% and start over with a nationalized healthcare system (which will be a HUGE fight and doesn't solve all the problems either. But it would be a big step in closing the gaps)

2: Have a real rational action plan regardless of who earns less that fixes the problems (a dream that will never work).

3: Attempt to level the playing field by going after the insurance factor so everyone has the ability to be covered and keeping the existing system in place. (the only one that doesn't scream of "socialism", which for some reason this country seems to have a bug up its ass about and thinks its a dirty word.. (Medicare anyone? Medicaid? SS? Welfare? Government Scholarships/Grants? Public Schools?)

It does a lot for the current healthcare problems we have.. its not a band-aid on a gunshot wound.. to keep your analogy, its akin to a gauze patch over same said gun shot wound.. Better.. but its certainly not going to fix the big picture.. but mostly because there are many of forces that DON'T WANT IT TO CHANGE.

You think the health insurance firms that make trillions from this WANT this to change? (and lobby quite actively to not change by the way)
You think the doctors that get rich by simply over-billing insurance want it to change? (again, unions that fight this because they have to do the same level of work, but get less money because of better accountability)
You think doctors who go into medicine to make money first and heal people second want it to change?
You think the medical device and other services/product groups who are making billions/trillions on this want it to change?..

get real. Its a money game pure and simple and everyone wants it "better" so long as I don't have to pay for it.

I can certainly say as a world traveler that the US system is insane.. I've lived in Japan, Taiwan, the UK, Hong Kong, and France... and in general.. insurance is a supplement so everyone.. even the poorest of the poor can use to stay alive. Obviously if you have money and want to bump up quality and speed, you fork out some cash (insurance, direct payment, etc..).. its akin to First/Second Class Mail vs. Fedex. You want it CHEAP.. you go postal Service.. you want all the bells and whistles and can afford it.. you pay up. I know my retirement plans do NOT include the US for a lot of reasons.. but this is certainly one).

Comment: Re:It's not a must (Score 1) 200

by Sassinak (#36283740) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Best Smartphone Plan For a US Vacation?

I beg to differ, as someone that flys through Canada, I can most assuredly tell you that if you are not a Canadian citizen you get everything you get on the US side. Personally speaking north america is an off-limits place as far as myself, my family, my businesses, and my money (directly) are concerned.

"You're a creature of the night, Michael. Wait'll Mom hears about this." -- from the movie "The Lost Boys"