Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

+ - WHY CAN'T WE CANCEL OUR SLASHDOT ACCOUNTS?-> 1

Submitted by cundare
cundare (1141279) writes """Amazingly enough, Slashdot does not allow users to delete their accounts. Worse, it does not allow users to change their nicknames.
So, if you're concerned about Web analytics making connections between your postings on Slashdot and postings made with stylistic language or nicknames similar to those of your Slashdot postings, you're shit out of luck. And such connections and inferences are far from mere paranoia. Analytics is what drives NSA data collection and most forms of clicktracking, and speaking as one who has worked in the field, I can confirm that the technology is still in its infancy. As recently as March 2013, Slashdot itself reported that researchers, using only Facebook metadata, could predict a user's sexual orientation, political party, IQ, likelihood to use drugs, and other personality characteristics. So prudence clearly dictates that online users should ALWAYS delete unnecessary traces. And Slashdot postings, which can get far more personal than Facebook "likes," should certainly be high on the list of deletable traces.
Amazingly, Slashdot refuses to provide this rudimentary service. It refuses to allow even half-assed attempts to hide one's identify by changing a nick. And it refuses to even accept email requests to discuss the issue. When I sent a message to Slashdot last week asking for help, I received a form letter apologizing for "Slashdot's inability to reply to every question about its new beta system."
Jeez, can't I even get kissed when I get fucked?
So I'll be submitting my story for the foreseeable future, until I get some kind of reaction from somebody who thinks that I'm raising a valid issue. In the interim, I STRONGLY urge anybody thinking of opening a Slashdot account, or to post other than anonymously, to think twice. Once you open that account, once you post that message, there's no redo."""

Link to Original Source

+ - Title correction: Why can't I delete my Slashdot account?->

Submitted by cundare
cundare (1141279) writes ""Amazingly enough, Slashdot does not allow users to delete their accounts. Worse, it does not allow users to change their nicknames.

So, if you're concerned about Web analytics making connections between your postings on Slashdot and postings made with stylistic language or nicknames similar to those of your Slashdot postings, you're shit out of luck. And such connections and inferences are far from mere paranoia. Analytics is what drives NSA data collection and most forms of clicktracking, and speaking as one who has worked in the field, I can confirm that the technology is still in its infancy. As recently as March 2013, Slashdot itself reported that researchers, using only Facebook metadata, could predict a user's sexual orientation, political party, IQ, likelihood to use drugs, and other personality characteristics. So prudence clearly dictates that online users should ALWAYS delete unnecessary traces. And Slashdot postings, which can get far more personal than Facebook "likes," should certainly be high on the list of deletable traces.
Amazingly, Slashdot refuses to provide this rudimentary service. It refuses to allow even half-assed attempts to hide one's identify by changing a nick. And it refuses to even accept email requests to discuss the issue. When I sent a message to Slashdot last week asking for help, I received a form letter apologizing for "Slashdot's inability to reply to every question about its new beta system."
Jeez, can't I even get kissed when I get fucked?
So I'll be submitting my story for the foreseeable future, until I get some kind of reaction from somebody who thinks that I'm raising a valid issue. In the interim, I STRONGLY urge anybody thinking of opening a Slashdot account, or to post other than anonymously, to think twice. Once you open that account, once you post that message, there's no redo.""

Link to Original Source

+ - Ask Slashdot: Why can't I delete my fucking Facebook account?->

Submitted by cundare
cundare (1141279) writes "Amazingly enough, Slashdot does not allow users to delete their accounts. Worse, it does not allow users to change their nicknames.

So, if you're concerned about Web analytics making connections between your postings on Slashdot and postings made with stylistic language or nicknames similar to those of your Slashdot postings, you're shit out of luck. And such connections and inferences are far from mere paranoia. Analytics is what drives NSA data collection and most forms of clicktracking, and speaking as one who has worked in the field, I can confirm that the technology is still in its infancy. As recently as March 2013, Slashdot itself reported that researchers, using only Facebook metadata, could predict a user's sexual orientation, political party, IQ, likelihood to use drugs, and other personality characteristics. So prudence clearly dictates that online users should ALWAYS delete unnecessary traces. And Slashdot postings, which can get far more personal than Facebook "likes," should certainly be high on the list of deletable traces.
Amazingly, Slashdot refuses to provide this rudimentary service. It refuses to allow even half-assed attempts to hide one's identify by changing a nick. And it refuses to even accept email requests to discuss the issue. When I sent a message to Slashdot last week asking for help, I received a form letter apologizing for "Slashdot's inability to reply to every question about its new beta system."
Jeez, can't I even get kissed when I get fucked?
So I'll be submitting my story for the foreseeable future, until I get some kind of reaction from somebody who thinks that I'm raising a valid issue. In the interim, I STRONGLY urge anybody thinking of opening a Slashdot account, or to post other than anonymously, to think twice. Once you open that account, once you post that message, there's no redo."

Link to Original Source

Comment: Climate change & differential calculus (Score 1) 279

by cundare (#46000165) Attached to: Heat Waves In Australia Are Getting More Frequent, and Hotter
You hear this argument every friggin' time there's a "hottest since..." record set. The best variation is, "Records are always being set. One record doesn't mean a thing." My response? When was the last time you heard of a record being set, anywhere in the world, for the coldest year of average temperatures on record. Another way to say the same thing: record highs and record lows, sure, still occur all the time. But consider the first derivative -- how has the ratio between the two changed? There's your trend.

Comment: Oppo WHO? (Score 1) 82

by cundare (#45385781) Attached to: CyanogenMod Powered Oppo N1 Will Be Released In December
How unfortunate that this outfit has the same name as the Oppo that makes the BDP line of pioneering universal disc/media players. (That's the guys at oppodigital.com.) Lots of unnecessary confusion will ensue, fostered in part by the telecom Oppo's own inclusion of a BDP review in the Press tab at the site linked to here.

Comment: The question that isn't being asked... (Score 1) 663

by cundare (#45318621) Attached to: A Math Test That's Rotten To the Common Core
...is: "What are the kids being taught prior to taking the test?"

Are they being shown the analytical techniques needed to answer these questions, or otherwise being given a frame of reference within which the questions make sense? A colleague's 7-year-old, for example, recently asked him to help the kid with his math homework. When he couldn't make heads or tails of the questions (despite an EE degree), he Googled the context, figured out how the teaching model worked and within 15 minutes, knew how to explain the material.

Here, the author has an agenda and doesn't ask questions that don't support the agenda. It's possible that this article may itself make a good Common Core question, should Analytical Rhetoric be deemed part of the curriculum.

FWIW, having never had kids, I have no friggin' interest in the Common Core debate one way or the other. But looking through the sample test, I found it pretty interesting and definitely capable of being a valid teaching tool. But the bottom line, as usual, is context. The text can only be evaluated in light of the aspects of the instructional method that complement it. The fact that some jerkoff journalist and his wife can't answer a question in a topic in which they haven't received instruction is irrelevant, and the journalist's assumption that the problem lies with the test, and not with his and his wife's ignorance of the subject matter, may be an example of the arrogance of not knowing enough to know what one doesn't know.

Comment: I've beem doing this for years (Score 1) 362

by cundare (#45224871) Attached to: Firefox's Blocked-By-Default Java Isn't Going Down Well
By using a Firefox plug-in called NoScript (there are others). Pretty interesting being able to view and manually kick adware to the curb. By globally revoking permission to scripts from domains like atdt, it's possible to greatly clean up your browser experience. And you always have a half-decent idea what's going on. I think this is a great idea on Mozilla's part, although it would certainly be appropriate to make this an opt-in feature.

Comment: Critical question for critical thinkers (Score 1) 365

by cundare (#45144749) Attached to: Buried In the Healthcare.gov Source: "No Expectation of Privacy"
I'd normally assert that my time is too fkn valuable to waste on this silly, manufactured debate. But this time, the referenced article is so idiotic that I just had to post. Good frigggin' grief! If you RTFA, it reveals that this code is NOT part of the displayed terms of the site. It's from a block of text embedded as a comment into the site HTML, apparently inadvertently left in the code when an author cut-and-pasted code from another site.

.If anyone tries to tell you that this a legally relevant "hidden terms of service," just walk away.

From the article:

"It is unclear why these sentences appear in the code at all since they are not displayed, although the code may simply have been copied from another website that does use the full warning. In this case, the unwanted portion of the warning was rendered inert with HTML coding tags ("") usually used by programmers for inserting comments to explain the purpose of a section of code. However, the code can be rendered "live" again by simply removing those tags, in which case the full text would appear on the screen to users. However, it is unclear why the paragraph containing "no reasonable expectation of privacy" would ever have even been considered appropriate in this context."

It's articles like this one that give Obama-haters a bad name.

Comment: This is new? (Score 1) 233

by cundare (#45102377) Attached to: Ford Showcases Self-Parking Car Technology
What am I missing? How is this different than what my 2010 Prius has been doing for me for the last three years. When I come up on a parking area, the Prius highlights candidate spaces on the touch screen and I select one. It then steers itself into the space. The driver keeps a foot on the brake in case of an event like a kid running behind the car, but otherwise, the Prius takes care of everything. Yes, this Ford system has a few greater degrees of automation, but I think those are just bells & whistles. I'm not so sure it's really a great idea that the driver doesn't have to be in the car, if only for the aforementioned safety reasons.

.

So I don't get it. Why is this news??

Comment: More stupid Slashdot tricks (Score 1) 196

by cundare (#45060351) Attached to: Google Wants Patent On Splitting Restaurant Bills
1. Applicant files overly broad patent application. Applicant is usually large tech outfit w/resources to gamble prosecuting an overly broad app that discloses subject matter that can be used to overcome expected rejection by narrowing claims during prosecution. This is a common (and common-sense -- you don't start a negotiation with your final offer) strategy for optimizing scope of an issued patent, but may appear to I-ANALs as a serious attempt to patent the overly broad claims.

.

2. Application publishes and is spotted by I-ANAL geek Web site which, not understanding what it's reading, pumps out a hack piece citing the application as further proof that the patent system (or intellectual property in general) is "broke."

3. Equally ignorant and/or confused I-ANAL Slashdotter posts story on /. with ironic comment. In some cases, there's no link to the actual application, making it difficult even for an IAAL figure out what the applicant was actually trying to patent.

4. Equally ignorant I-ANAL Slashdotters post comments that comprise: i) a terse pun; ii) "See, I told you the patent system (or IP in general) is broke!"; iii) A detailed, carefully reasoned analysis of an irrelevant detail of the patent; iv) A strange, off-topic, or unintentionally funny authoritative statement. (My favorite: "A design patent is basically a trademark.")

5. In many cases, a few IP or patent attorneys attempt to correct another poster's sillier misconceptions. Generally, the attorney's remark ends the conversation or, worst case, provokes an "anybody who knows what they're talking about is not to be trusted" kick-to-the-curb.

Just sayin'.

I've seen this episode before.

Comment: Re:Yes, but... (Score 1) 102

by cundare (#45005693) Attached to: New Headphones Generate Sound With Carbon Nanotubes
You're thinking of the Plasmatronics product line, which, I believe, debuted in the late 1970s. Heard a pair once in NYC way back when & the high-end was pretty remarkable. Suitable mainly for tweeters & supertweeters. They don't use an extraordinary amount of electricity and produce only a tiny amount of ozone. But they require a supply of halogen gas, which I recall makes an annoying hissing noise.

Those who do things in a noble spirit of self-sacrifice are to be avoided at all costs. -- N. Alexander.

Working...