Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Amateurs (Score 1) 129

To me there is a slight difference in porn that is legal and childporn that is not legal.

If I overhear on a company phone someone booking a weekend trip for him and his wife is also slightely different then hearing them ordering a hitman to kill his wife.

Nice dragging childporn into it. It is basically: If nothing illegal is done, let it go. If something illegal is done, take the appropriate action, depending on what that illegal action is.

This has NOTHING to do with IT, computers or Internet. The folder could be a printout in his briefcase that falls out in the elevator. Hustler? No problem. 7 year old lolita's? Problem.

To me what you could report is personal usage on a company PC, but that should be regardless of the amount of nipples. If you see a folder of his wedding, you must do the same.

Comment Re:Private mode, please (Score 1) 129

1 person company. He owns the computer. Why do YOU not click on 'No' when it is asked to open all the tabs.

Or do I need to browse in private mode, even though I am single, own the computer. Just so you do not see my porn? Yep and sometimes I look at very strange porn. So?

Why would I do that? Is it something I must feel ashamed about that I need to hide it in case somebody sees it? I am not. I do it and every man does it unless they are liars or sick.

Comment Re:Managers are dumbasses (Score 2) 129

I am still all for whitelisting. together with PCs that have complete Internet access on a separate network. That way enforcing strict rules is easy as people have access to their personal mailbox if they need it.

At one company we had 100% unfiltered access and a very liberal management team who did not care, as long as you did your job. Looking at porn was no different than reading a paper newspaper. Do whatever you want as long as work is not impacted.

One persons history of sites went a bit viral as it was ONLY porn during his personal time. No, not fired, because he was allowed to do so, but still funny. Best comments was from the girls (who were the ones sending the most rauchy jokes and images)

Fun times.

Comment Re:Managers are dumbasses (Score 2) 129

Do you think management are the only ones who are dumbasses? People are dumbasses. All of them, including me.

I have known of company secrets because the IT people where dumbasses. If I type a command I should NOT get a list of all the passwords the people use. In plain text. When I do not work in IT.
I have seen extreme high level secrets due to failing IT people. At one time I had access to ALL areas including those that I should not have had access to. Reaction from IT when I told them? "If you have access, somebody thinks you must have it, so you got it." How is that for being a dumbass.

So please get of your high horse, you are nothing special. I have had stupid managers who were capable of nothing and responding to EVERY question with "Please ask houghi" and protected by N+2. ObviouslyN+1 was fired when N+2 had to leave.
I have had managers who were great at what they were doing, yet did not had my knowledge, because that is why they had me. I have had people working for me. Some smart, some stupid. As a whole, some people are smart and some people are stupid.

I have know about afairs on several levels and all I was interested in was if it would affect the job. If not, I had as much interest in it as in whomever is on the frontpage of the tabloid. Unless they were friends, I would treat them as proffesional as always and who they have sex with is none of my business, regardless of their function.

I even had one manager who felt he needed to explain that the rumours of his afair with another manager were not true. I told him I do not care if it true or not. And to this day I do not know if there was some truth in it or not and I do not care.

I often am the person people feek the need to tell secrets to. They think it is because I can keep a secret. The real reason is that I do not care. I do not even exclude myself of being stupid and a dumbass. I have done some stupid things. Some where I was lucky not to get fired for.

So please when you say managers are dumb, please do not exlude the rest of the people.

Comment Re:Establishment clause (Score 1) 277

If I build a telescope on my private land, you have no right to interfere with that

Not sure if that is true where you live. Where I live you would need a building permit. There can be several reasons why it would be denied. Depending on where you live, it could be because it does not fit in. That means it does not look enough like the rest of the buildings.Or the neigbours do not like the design.
Another reason can be that you are not allowed to build there, even though other buildings are already present. This because it is destines to be farming land or whatever. Just because you own something does not mean you can do as you wish.
There are even places where you MUST build within X time. This can change from village to village, let alone country to country, so it might or light not be the case here.

Comment Re:More nation-wrecking idiocy (Score 4, Insightful) 592

I also do not understand the panic here at /. about this.

This is not a political decision. It is also not a "remove al the lines" policy. Different roads will be a affected differently. Some might even get more lines.

It does not mean that lines are unsafe or dangerous. It means that in some cases not having lines will slow down traffic. There might be lights and what not already there.

For those that say "but they will not see in the dark or with rain" there is a simple solution: adapt to the speed you can travel, so slow down. That is the whole purpose.

It wall also not be possible to now say for each and every country: all lines must be removed.

Similar studies on safety are done all over the place. In Belgium they reckon that removing the majority of the traffic lights would increase safety.

This does not mean they will remove all of them. IF they decide to go that road, they will look at it case by case.

Comment Re:Alternate title (Score 4, Insightful) 132

1) This is not directed at the poor. This is directed at others who are already able to pay. This has been posted and explained several times by people living in the country.
2) The downside is that it is not a complete free Internet service. Other sited are blocked. They are not a provider.

As some sites are blocked, there is no net neutrality. Now if they were to open everything and become a true free provider (with all the rules that come with it) that would be something else. This is not about what price they charge; but by what rules they play and they do not play by the provder rules, yet they clai, they are.

A rose by any other name is still a rose. Calling a tulip a rose does not make it a rose.

Comment Re:Surprised? (Score 2) 570

Did they want the UI change of Windows version to Windows version? My guess is no. People in general do not want change, unless they request it themselves AND are involved in the change process.

Windows is forcing change to users and it works. I believe XFCE and LXDE looks more like Windows than Windows.

The difference? Pre-installation. That makes people use Android. It makes people use MacOS and it makes people use Windows version whatever comes with their machine.

Except for the few elite here, people go to the store to buy a PC. They go home and turn it on. When the machine is slow, they go back to the store and buy a new one. Only a few will go for an OS. Now go to the store and ask for a Linux machine. If lucky, they will sell you an Android tablet.

And why do they get sold? Because they are pre-installed. No pre-installation, no usage in serious numbers.

Comment Re:Surprised? (Score 1) 570

People have been using Linux as a desktop for a long time now. The problem is that you can not buy it pre-installed. Sure, somewhere here and there you can, but not that big a choice.

People buying Android and there is no issue there, so it is possible.
Have it pre-installed and people will use whatever is available.

For the average user, a Linux desktop is good enough. Email, web and that is about it. Next are the gamers who will need Windows for their games.
Companies will have written code specifically for Windows, so they do not want to switch yet. If it weer up to them, they would still use Win95.

So have it pre-installed and people will use it. MS knows this and their customers are not the end-user. They sell to Dell.

The reason that there is no price difference, is because companies pay Dell and others to have their shareware installed. The cost for Windows is payed for by Norton and the others that are on your PC already. Without that income, the price would be higher and Linux would be a viable option for them.

And again: yes you can buy a PC with Linux installed if you look for it. Walk into a store and look how many of thm are Linux.

Slashdot Top Deals

Mirrors should reflect a little before throwing back images. -- Jean Cocteau