Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:What is the problem here? (Score 2) 137

by taustin (#48610055) Attached to: Microsoft Gets Industry Support Against US Search Of Data In Ireland

The order isn't against any person or entity in Ireland. It is against a US company, and US employees, who can access the data from their desks in the US. Under US law, it is certainly a valid order. Under Irish law, it is not. There is a conflict that the US prosecutor (and judge) do not want to (or can't, under current law) address. No matter what Microsoft does, they will break the law somewhere.

This is a surprisingly (for the source) thoughtful account of things so far, and explains the reasoning behind the order.

I doubt you will bother to ready it, and likely won't understand it if you do, and certainly won't care, but there it is.

Comment: Re:A matter of procedure... (Score 2) 137

by taustin (#48609925) Attached to: Microsoft Gets Industry Support Against US Search Of Data In Ireland

There are provisions that the Irish government has apparently said would be the right way to go. But the US courts are a lot more lax on standards of probably cause, apparently, and for reasons unknown, prosecutors do not want to show their cards to the Irish courts.

Comment: Re:The best gift? (Score 3, Insightful) 113

by taustin (#48584699) Attached to: 2014 Geek Gift Guide

I've never taken him seriously because the first time I ever heard of him was when he was running his web site with instructions on how to bypass parental filtering software. Mind you, nothing wrong with that, but he whined like a little girl when that web site got blocked by the very software he was trying to help people defeat.

Like a little girl.

Comment: Re:Spanish taxis drivers against: public buses (Score 1) 280

by taustin (#48557891) Attached to: Court Orders Uber To Shut Down In Spain

Given the unemployment (about 25%), and some generally fucked up bankruptcy laws (you can't bankrupt a mortgage, for instance, no matter how underwater you are), Spain has some pretty serious problem, and it shows.

However, it's not a very good comparison to, well, anywhere else in the world.

Comment: Re:Insurance? (Score 1) 280

by taustin (#48557851) Attached to: Court Orders Uber To Shut Down In Spain

But not commercial drivers licenses, or vehicle registration. And their insurance will hang them out to dry when they have a police report that says the driver was operating an illegal taxi service without the proper license. And US states, at least, are increasingly enacting regulations specifically to classify Uber and similar services as a livery service, which is a commercial use, This requires commercial license, as noted above.

Also, apparently, Uber's insurance only covers the passengers, pedestrians, and the other guy's vehicle. Not the Uber drivers's vehicle, which still isn't covered by their own personal insurance while they are driving for a livery service. And Uber's insurance only applies if their driver is at fault. If you get in an accident with an uninsured driver (and about 25% of California's drivers are, last I heard) who is at fault, you can sue the other guy for money he'll never, ever have, but neither Uber's nor their driver's insurance will ever give you a penny.

Insurance is the biggest gotcha on this kind of service. The most likely risk to bite you in the ass. And if it does, odds are, you're bankrupt, at best. Enjoy your cheap, illegal taxi ride, there, butch.

Comment: Re:too late (Score 1) 280

by taustin (#48557749) Attached to: Court Orders Uber To Shut Down In Spain

My question is how insurance companies are dealing with it.

For the most part, apparently, they're hanging drivers out to dry.

Uber may claim their insurance will cover you for an accident while you have passenger, but no insurance company in the world will cover you - or Uber - if it is determined that the driver is operating illegally at the time.

And at that point, not only are you responsible for the damage to your car, and the other guy's, but also for any medical bills for passengers in either car, as well. I'm not sure my personal health insurance would cover me if I were a passenger in an illegal taxi when injured.

Comment: Re:Greasing Palms. (Score 1) 280

by taustin (#48557663) Attached to: Court Orders Uber To Shut Down In Spain

Nope. You protest. And work to have them changed. You break them? You take the consequences and endure them. Hell, you do that in principle to SHOW that the current laws and regulations are dumb/wrong/immoral. So yeah, if you think the laws and regulations are not adequate, work your ass off to change them, not just ignore them.

That's the difference between real civil disobedience and the whiny little bitches we have today. Real civil disobedience is breaking the law so that you get arrested, preferably with the TV cameras watching. Not whining like a little girl that laws are enforced consistently.

Comment: Speaking of doing it wrong . . . (Score 1) 368

by taustin (#48543739) Attached to: Overly Familiar Sci-Fi

Charlie Stross, of all people, should know that science fiction isn't and has never been, about the future. It's about today, told in a way that makes it easier for people to examine the hot button issues without getting too emotional. Or it's put escapism, and it just doesn't matter whether the details are right or wrong.

Plus, anybody who makes up a word like "enculturation" should be beaten with a stick.

Comment: Re:In California you need to be making $83,000 (Score 2) 545

by taustin (#48534731) Attached to: Should IT Professionals Be Exempt From Overtime Regulations?

However, you need to know the precise definition of "computer employee" in California. It is intended to cover programmers, and specifically exempts people who work mainly with hardware. And if your primary job is manipulating data, you're an administrative employee, not a computer employee.

(I know all this because our then-new HR director tried to classify me as a computer employee, which would mean I'd have to start punching a timeclock. I objected - it'd be a pain in the ass to have to track whether or not I had to put my pants on when I got a weekend call, and, equally important, my employer does not abuse the salaried exempt status - I average about 40 hours a week, overall, despite occasionally having multiple 12+ hour days in the same week. And while I do hardware, and networking, and all those usual IT things, the majority of my time is spent manipulating data, so I managed to get reclassified as an administrative employee. I almost hope that we get audited by the labor board someday, and they object to me being exempt. I swear I'll show up at that meeting with my own lawyer, to represent me against the labor board.)

Not all employers of IT people abuse them.

Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad.

Working...