Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



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:Systemic and widespread? (Score 1) 489

by Zaiff Urgulbunger (#49441367) Attached to: The Courage of Bystanders Who Press "Record"

It doesn't show where the officer and the suspect were involved in a tussle as claimed by the officer, during which the suspect reportedly took the officer's stun gun.

If we're still talking about the officer Michael T. Slager case (I'm so /. hardcore, I don't even read the comments let alone TFA!), then part of the reason he's been charged is because the video shows him placing his Taser beside the victim after he'd been shot.

Not disputing your point about videos not showing the entire context though!

Comment: Re:If i can't work on my car (Score 1) 292

by Zaiff Urgulbunger (#49415359) Attached to: EFF Fighting Automakers Over Whether You Own Your Car
I seem to recall VW improving the repairability of a Golf so that the newer model _should_ have a better insurance group rating. At least, that's what they said.

But at least insurance does provide some way to incentivise manufacturers to improve repairability... in theory anyway. However, I believe cars are increasingly brought on credit with bundled insurance, so maybe that's how they deal with it?

Comment: Re:Web sites (Score 1) 277

I've not found the PC Mag 2012 best apps listing either, but here's a PC Magazine review of NQ Vault. They seem to be under the impression it provides better security than it actually does. Shame they gave it a relatively nice review despite acknowledging that it's kind of buggy! I note that user-reviews both on the Google Play page and the above PC Mag review mention it loosing their data... which isn't a huge surprise if it's buggy.

Being as it hails from Dallas, I'd assume they tried patenting XOR as a security method and then trolling every equally incompetent "data security" company they could think of before deciding to hack their own one together?!

Comment: Re:Experience (Score 1) 155

I do not know about New York, but if you take an Uber car and get into an accident, do not count on the driver's insurance. It was invalidated the second you got in the car, having promised to pay him.

Don't know the specifics of the case, but Yellow Cab in Chicago have filed for bankruptcy because they are presumably unable to pay damages to a customer who was injured in a crash.

There must be a bit more detail to it, because I would have expected Yellow Cabs insurance to cover it... but just goes to show... something!

Comment: Re:Why bring that up ? (Score 1) 122

by Zaiff Urgulbunger (#49185277) Attached to: Craig Brittain (Revenge Porn King) Sues For Use of Image

His name is public however because it is in the public interest.

I'd like you to back this up with reason, please. The justice system has its hooks in here. Punishment is in their dominion, not yours or mine. So. Exactly how does it benefit the public to further drag his name, address, family, future etc., through the mud?

Someone is found guilty of a crime, it's in the public interest to be aware of this. The justice system in (in theory) operating on behalf of society. So the news media report such things.

I'm struggling to understand why you feel this is wrong. Is there a circumstance (other than this one) where it would make sense to keep the identity of a guilty party secret?

Comment: Re:Why bring that up ? (Score 1) 122

by Zaiff Urgulbunger (#49167199) Attached to: Craig Brittain (Revenge Porn King) Sues For Use of Image
Your argument might make sense except that the perp in this case has been found guilty, and the crime he is guilty of was operating a business that traded off making peoples private pics public; essentially blackmailing them. His name is public however because it is in the public interest.

The thing I find strange/funny is that he must surely have learned a bit about what can and can't be made public whilst trying to defend himself, and yet... he hasn't, has he?

So on top of being a social low-life parasite, he's a stupid social low-life parasite. Double whammy!

In case of injury notify your superior immediately. He'll kiss it and make it better.

Working...