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


Forgot your password?

Comment: Did you RTF Affidavit? (Score 1) 334

by p00ya (#36956750) Attached to: Prosecuted For Critical Twittering
Some selected tweets:

ya like haiku? Here's one for ya: "Long, Limb, Sharp Saw, Hard Drop" ROFLMAO.
hey! who left the light on in the barn!
late at night at the edge o da farm, somethin creepin in the woods gonna do ya harm all ya gots 2 do 2 make it go away is pay pay pay pay

Seems to imply Cassidy had the property under surveillance, and sounds threatening to me. The last one is just your example with more innuendo.

Comment: Re:Abortion and Inflation (Score 1) 270

by p00ya (#34559728) Attached to: Watch 200 Years of Global Growth In 4 Minutes

Abstinence and marital fidelity are the only effective methods that can stop this deadly trend. In fact, in light of the scientific and historical evidence, it is gross negligence bordering on manslaughter to promote "sex education" as a cure when millions suffer from the effects of this "civilised" education.

Actually, public health policy based solely on abstinence has not been shown to be effective.; it has a failure rate at a population level.

Comment: Re:has any fortune 500 company gone Google Apps? (Score 1) 220

by p00ya (#34403408) Attached to: Microsoft Ups Online War, Says Google's 'Failing'

"They certainly have done due dilligence."

Is shipping the data to a country where it is known that you run an increased risk of agencies and interested 3rd parties taking a peek at the data 'due diligence'? Is that a 'reasonable' action in protecting the privacy of individuals and the execution of commercial contracts guaranteeing that privacy?

What if you zipped it up and put it on a public website with a readme.txt that said "don't download this"?

I don't have any particular knowledge about the increased accessibility of data in the US versus the EU, but it seems to me if you knowingly increased the exposure of the data that you're contractually meant to be keeping private, that might be a breach.

Comment: Secure bricks (Score 1) 218

by p00ya (#18959533) Attached to: OpenBSD 4.1 Released

Embarrassing? Why? Because they don't run a bunch of unneeded services off the bat like some other OS's do/have-done-in-the-past?
The bricks of my house have proved secure against *all* remote attacks, and I suspect they may be capable of RFC1149. If I start advertising them as a secure competitor to OpenBSD (0 is less than 2, after all, and who needs useless services like SSH), I'd have no reason to feel embarassed, right?

From Sharp minds come... pointed heads. -- Bryan Sparrowhawk