Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

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:Yeah! (Score 1) 514

On the issue/problem/topic of H1-B misuse, Sessions is correct! Glad to hear he really is following common sense. The Republican party is in the better position to make reform on this happen, just hope this does not get lumped in with the larger issues of immigration. By itself, both parties could agree on this and it could even overcome a veto.

Comment: Privacy/security/responsibility (Score 2) 79

by justsomecomputerguy (#42113963) Attached to: Amazon and Google Barred From UK Government Cloud
I'll bet is was because both of them had unacceptable policies regarding privacy, security/integrity and/or what they are responsible to do if a breach does occur. I'll also bet that those same policies were/are acceptable to various branches of American government, because our standards for those issues here in The United States lag waaaaay behind European standards.

Comment: Re:Drones watching you scratch your balls (Score 1) 387

by justsomecomputerguy (#41847519) Attached to: Seattle's Creepy Cameraman Pushes Public Surveillance Buttons
Ewww. THAT's creepy. But your point about the drones is only partially right. It's not so much the acknowledgement that "someone" is passively (but intrusively) watching you as it is the invasion of "your space" . One of those fragile Quad-Helicopter Drones would also be creepy, not because it could hurt you as much as it is invading your "space". My IMPLIED point was that anything that is mobile and right there in-your-face is creepy. I "person" holding the camera is probably the most creepy, the only way it could be creepier would be if he was just starring at you without even a camera. You could make it less creepy by having him keep his distance. Or have fixed position stand (aka a tripod). Or if the drone were high enough up that you didn't immediately notice it.

Comment: His actions/presence MAKE it different (Score 5, Insightful) 387

by justsomecomputerguy (#41847163) Attached to: Seattle's Creepy Cameraman Pushes Public Surveillance Buttons
His antics are DIFFERENT because he is a PERSON, and he keeps getting right up in other peoples face (within distance to physically touch or be touched) A much better test that would eliminate the CREEPY GUY factor, would be to just mount a camera on a tripod and place it by the doorway of a building or even in the middle of a crowd or public square and then walk away from it. Maybe have it mounted on a stand that can turn and focus... I could should that people were "afraid of balloons" if I stepped right up in there faces and stared at them while holding balloons. Possibly interesting idea executed very lamely. Next.

Comment: Re:Enough of this already (Score 1) 433

by justsomecomputerguy (#35333396) Attached to: Tolkien Estate Censors the Word "Tolkien"
"Fortunately, the trademark laws are fairly cut and dried. To be in violation, you either need to be using a trademark without permission in a way likely to cause confusion, or using the trademark in a way that causes "trademark dilution" which "dilutes the distinctive quality of the trademark". You seem to be doing neither in this case." Note - I am not a lawyer, I just found and paraphrased this by googling "referencing a trademark"

"The only way I can lose this election is if I'm caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy." -- Louisiana governor Edwin Edwards