Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Right to Privacy in One's Backyard? (Score 1) 1134 1134

Worst part:

"They didn’t confiscate the drone. They gave the drone back to the individuals," he said. "They didn’t take the SIM card out of itbut we’ve gotfive houses here that everyone saw it – they saw what happened, including the neighbors that were sitting in their patio when he flew down low enough to see under the patio."

IANAL
Now how is he supposed to prove his reasoning was justified? If they gave the drone back, what's stopping the owners from altering the data on it? His lawyers should move to dismiss, and it will indeed succeed but nothing good will come out of the result, unless he counter sues after winning the case.

Comment Re: HORNET vs Tor (Score 1) 59 59

I really doubt they're going for better service to the consumers here. It should always be impossible to make a large margin of profit from TOR, because TOR "customers" are anonymous, the only reason why they are using TOR in the first place. Sounds to me like they are shooting for scalability here. No thanks, I trust the Navy had anonimity in mind, not performance.

Comment What is this, the Dark Ages? (Score 1) 292 292

So I remember watching T.V. in Turkey in the early 90s and the interview was about a Turkish lawyer talking about the finer interpretations of a specific law. He said something I'll never forget when he was asked, "The language of the law is nearly Ottoman, how are the average citizens supposed to intelligably read and obey this law?" To which he responded, "It's not the job of every citizen to read and understand our laws, that's the job of lawyers, we need to know." Much like how some important points of law in the US is still in Latin. It makes 0 sense to expect a population to obey laws that aren't readily available and easily consumable.

Now to be fair, the spirit of the law must also be preserved. But I think that's what the Constitution is for.

Comment Smart Products... (Score 2) 77 77

We all have certain expectancies from products. Like owning what we paid for, and having the reasonable assumption that a random fishing hacker can't hack your gas oven and blow up your house. This all comes down to educated programmers. A programmer who isn't abiding by the ever evolving security standards and practices will leave your product looking like swiss cheese. Real life example being, an educated programmer will avoid SSLv3 in the first place even though it's the latest standard, and uneducated programmer will just go, version 3 is bigger than version 2, so it must be better. I personally prefer the not-so-smart toaster at my house, because one I don't have the time to reverse engineer yet another code base to analyze vulnerabilities, and the other reason being, it makes toast, I'm okay with sacrificing the ability to request a toast via my smart phone.

Comment Re:Boo hoo... (Score 1) 818 818

It's just a flag... Take the swastika for example. It means different things to many people. For Hindus it's not a hate symbol, but for most of the Western world it has extremely negative connotations. I think it's idiotic and sensationalist what Google is doing here, let whoever wishes to interpret whatever symbol enjoy their freedom to do so.

Comment Re:And still... (Score 4, Interesting) 31 31

There's an old Turkish saying, I'll be that guy and translate it. "A barking dog won't bite." It basically means that anyone who is serious about a crime (terror category or the normal category, not sure how it falls into which one, but I suspect one has more beards) is not going to advertise it online or otherwise. Take a look at 9/11, there weren't a lot of tweets about it before hand. Yes indeed sacrificing your privacy only buys paranoia on a large scale, bloated budgets, broken citizens, and smug authorities.

"From there to here, from here to there, funny things are everywhere." -- Dr. Seuss

Working...