531 comments so far, that's what it's doing on Slashdot.

Fuck beta.

publishers pay the people who fronted money for the study

If only they did.

Funds paid to scientific publishers pay for editing, not for the original studies. Moreover, peer review -- the most important part of the process -- is almost universally done for free by other scientists in the field; the publishers are just mediators in that process, adding minimal value.

Someone's got to pay to fund the research.

...but that someone isn't generally the publishers running the paywalls, so how is that relevant?

"Running around the house setting the clocks" is the LEAST annoying part of the change.

How does that work? What database dump requires an executable? All the ones I know simply create a very large human readable text file.

Who the fuck would execute an executable from a bunch of hackers who claim to have hacked a financial site related to a whole digital currency with said currency residing on the same machine as the one you are running the exe on.

And I thought people that ran kitten.scr.exe were idiots.

First off, I get what you are saying and it seems pretty obvious to me.

But now for the hard and funny until you think about it, then you have to laugh so you don't cry.

Here it is:

And is your post part of such a program?

Where does the dis-information begin/end?

No I don't think you are, the shill accounts are rather obvious to stop, no real posting history, no jokes, no human observations, just shill posts. But when the lying has spread so far, how does a normal person know what is true and what isn't anymore.

And if you ask, why would they do that? So ordinary people give up because they just can't deal with it anymore. The feeling I am having for the last year.

I may be wrong on this, but in the US, HIPAA would rule the day on such a case, no? That would mean that 200k Pounds Sterling would be a wee drop in the bucket compared to the fine such an organization would face here should it face a data leak of that magnitude.

You're making substantial assumptions about what kind of teeth HIPAA has. When I worked at a medical software company -- wherein I was directly responsible for systems handling patient data, went through HIPAA training, and worked directly with our HIPAA compliance officer to determine technical measures -- it was damned near toothless; what we spent hiring said officer and taking said measures was much more than we would have been fined for a single breach. (We wouldn't have been able to sell the system or satisfy investors unless we could pass an audit, so it was the right business decision to make, but much of what our compliance officer told us was how much work we didn't have to do; the actual compliance requirements often fell far short of what I considered best practices).

The ringing is your brains signalling your taste center has never grown in, as you grow older but not wiser the ringing will increase trying to signal you to develop some taste and individuality.

Really? Metallica?

Have you no shame whatsoever?

Someone who has more time then me should do a matchup between those sicko's who think a fully clothed woman has no expectation of privacy in public with those who think a security camera is 1984 and see whether there are matches.

For me I learned today that Slashdot has a lot of creeps.

Dude, that is absurd. Even a BURKHA / ABAYA is vulnerable from some angle.

Obviously, I imagine an upskirt picture does not reveal any more than what you would see at a beach in any western country. I think the issue is that, a person being made to reveal more of herself than she is consenting to, to a person she does not know, and usually without her knowledge. It would be the equivalent of someone being forced to take off her skirt in public without her consent.

Also, what if the woman is not wearing any underwear? It is her business if she is, or is not, and by wearing a skirt she has a reasonable right to privacy in that matter.

Or anyone who serves gigabytes of content per hour and possibly terabytes per day -- google, facebook, wikipedia, imgur, etc.

You sounds pretty upset. Brace yourself, 'cause you're gonna be *really* pissed when they post it again in 2 days.

I just love how these stories ignore games like GTA 5. Massive investment cost followed by massive profits. All with a simple box priced product.

But hey, what is a billion in sales these days eh?

Steam has for me drastically lowered the value of a game, because while it is ONE thing to see game slowly decrease in price over a number of years, it is another to find prices slashed to 1/4 of the price seemingly at random.

Well okay then, I won't buy unless there is a deal going on... but I want to play right now, thepiratebay! Always the best deals!

I kinda like to know that if I pay a premium for a newly released game, that it is "worth" it and that it is not going to be on a sale for the fraction of the price a week later. It ruins the value of a product because it shows the product has no inherit price but is rather just a charge put on the product for the sake of it.

Same as say a public toilet at a station, they can charge 1 cent, a 100 cent or a 1000 cent and it has nothing to do with the cost of providing the service, it is just an amount someone thought up. If a product can be sold for 1/4 of the price on week, it never had full price value to begin with, that was just a sucker price.

I don't want to be a sucker. I am one but I don't like my webshop telling me that I am one.

Because I can tell the game producer they are suckers too by downloading the game for free.