Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:This is not about revisionism or censorship ! (Score 1) 193

by arobatino (#48476043) Attached to: Google Told To Expand Right To Be Forgotten

We enjoyed being forgotten until google came along. This is not about imposing a "new" right, this is about enjoying what we the previous generation has as a freedom. This is about reclaiming what search engine stole from us. As I already said multiple time on slashdot, a society which do not forget , helped by a seaerch engine, is a pathologic society which does not forgive, and ruins potentially lifes forever.

Google is a memory prosthesis. The fact that such a thing did not exist until recently, does not mean that there has ever been a right to ban it. We're in a transitional period where people haven't yet learned to adapt to it by properly discounting the importance of long-past events. If we just ban it now, we never will. The damage done by the transitional period is temporary, that caused by continuing to forget as before is not.

"Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness. When change is absolute there remains no being to improve and no direction is set for possible improvement: and when experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." -George Santayana

+ - Windows 10 Technical Preview Build 9879 Released

Submitted by jones_supa
jones_supa (887896) writes "Build 9879 of Windows 10 Technical Preview is being pushed out. One feature that is likely to be popular in 9879 is the ability to hide the Search and Task View buttons on the taskbar. Other improvements include new smooth window animations, in response to feedback that the previous animations were "a bit jarring". The "3 dots" — a stable of Modern UI design — are no more, and are replaced with 3 horizontal lines. A lot of issues with system hangs and app crashes have been fixed. A bunch of new touchpad gestures were introduced, too. OneDrive got a "selective sync" feature, allowing users to choose exactly what files and content they want synced to their PC. There are big improvements for Internet Explorer, with the introduction of new Edge rendering engine, focusing on interoperability. Edge will only be available in IE for 10% of testers. As the icing of the cake, Matroska Videos can now be directly watched in Media Player."

Comment: Misleading Title (Score 3, Interesting) 249

by arobatino (#48306357) Attached to: New Atomic Clock Reaches the Boundaries of Timekeeping

New Atomic Clock Reaches the Boundaries of Timekeeping

On Earth, maybe. It's not a theoretical limit - the article itself points out that you can put the clocks in space.

Ye suspects the only way we will be able to keep time in the future is to send these new clocks into space. Far from the earth's surface, the clocks would be better able to stay in synch, and perhaps our unified sense of time could be preserved.

Comment: Re:Speak for yourself, Mr. Emanuel (Score 1) 478

by arobatino (#47969957) Attached to: Bioethicist At National Institutes of Health: "Why I Hope To Die At 75"

You lost me when you assigned an arbitrary number as your cutoff rather than defining the cutoff on reasonably definable measures of physical and mental health.

Yes. Not only that, from the article:

As for the two policy implications, one relates to using life expectancy as a measure of the quality of health care. Japan has the third-highest life expectancy, at 84.4 years (behind Monaco and Macau), while the United States is a disappointing No. 42, at 79.5 years. But we should not care about catching up with—or measure ourselves against—Japan. Once a country has a life expectancy past 75 for both men and women, this measure should be ignored. (The one exception is increasing the life expectancy of some subgroups, such as black males, who have a life expectancy of just 72.1 years. That is dreadful, and should be a major focus of attention.)

Not only did he pick an arbitrary number, but he believes it should be used as public policy.

Comment: Re:Why 80% (Score 5, Informative) 278

by arobatino (#47436773) Attached to: William Binney: NSA Records and Stores 80% of All US Audio Calls

Incidentally, didn't Obama announce some changes he was going to make to fix the NSA?

This is the guy who disingenuously said "Nobody is listening to your telephone calls", knowing the monitoring is done by speech recognition and only a tiny fraction needs to be listened to by humans, and who appointed Clapper to establish an NSA review board, knowing he had already lied to Congress to protect the NSA.

Comment: After 1975, Mount Palomar wasn't the biggest (Score 1) 129

And this was in turn superseded by the 200-inch telescope at nearby Mount Palomar in 1947 which remained the largest telescope in the world until 1993.

Not true - in 1975, BTA-6 in the Soviet Union became the biggest at 236 inches, though it never worked properly.

Comment: Re:The problem with calorie restriction. (Score 1) 66

Foods-and-nutrition experts have known for decades that calorie restriction itself is a dead-end - and not for the reasons given so far in this article.

Turns out that, while calorie restriction does retard aging, it also retards the functionality of the immune system.

Since most humans now live in an environment which is much more shielded than what we evolved in, and evolution hasn't had time to catch up, it's plausible that a tradeoff like that might be worthwhile.

Comment: Re:The right to remember (Score 1) 153

by arobatino (#46997153) Attached to: EU Court Backs 'Right To Be Forgotten'

Everyone already has the right to remember something. It is as simple as saving the web page or printing it to PDF.

How can anyone exercise their "right" to "be forgotten" if saving local copies is allowed?

Nobody can stop you saving it.

Although this particular legislation doesn't ban that, laws already exist making it illegal to make local copies of certain content. Plugging the "local copy" loophole would be the next step.

The summary says that LINKS to outdated and irrelevant information should be removed on request. It doesn't say anything about the data itself.

You left out the quotes around the word "irrelevant", which were there because it's subjective. Who gets to decide that? Same for "outdated", even there were no quotes in the article.

Thus if a newspaper publishes a story about you being drunk at college when you're 21, in 20 years time you might ask Google to delete the link from its cache (the link is now to outdated and irrelevant information)

Even if said person is about to run for public office? (Just one example.)

but you can't ask the newspaper to withdraw publishing of the article for it owns the copyright, etc. Now it might be hard to find that information once the link is removed by Google but that's another matter.

If the newspaper is allowed to continue publishing the article, then the incident isn't "forgotten". Another loophole. To "protect" people's "right" to be forgotten, it's necessary to ban search engine links to the content, posting the content itself, and the making of local copies of it. If any copies survive, anywhere, the job isn't done. On the other hand, if your belief is that the goal should be to make access not impossible, but merely difficult, that just means that only the rich and/or powerful will be able to find the information. How is that a good thing?

The clash of ideas is the sound of freedom.

Working...