Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment Aww. (Score 1) 174 174

As a person who has payed out ten metric fucktons of money and maybe used a thousand dollars worth of their precious entitlement from me, I'm not shedding a tear.

Most memorable was oncemanyl years go, I used a towing service that was "covered". Two weeks later, my insurance bill went up over twice the amount of the tow. No accidents, no tickets, nothing at all to raise it - and since I was paying twice a year at the time, they were quadrupling their punishment that I had the audacity to take some of their money. Cry me a fucking river insurance companies.

Comment Re:Is that even worthwhile? (Score 1) 51 51

Honestly ... do you really thing do not track means a damned thing? Are you that naive?

Do not track says "gee Mr Website, will you be nice and not attempt to monetize my traffic". It doesn't mean a damned thing.

You should pretty much assume that everyone on the internet will track everything about you they can at every chance they can get. You should assume some greedy asshole with an MBA and a tendency to be a sociopath doesn't give a fuck about your desire not to be tracked is making the decision to obey no not track.

Do not track was an industry attempt to distract people from regulations which would have tried to stop them.

Do not track is a complete fucking lie.

Don't be all surprised now to find out it doesn't actually do anything or hold any weight. Which is why you should be actively blocking as many of these things as you can, instead of relying on the kindness of some greedy sociopath asshole who doesn't give a crap that your browser has pathetically announced it doesn't wish to be tracked.

Hell, do not track, when ignored like we know it is, just gives them another point of data. I don't even set it, because I know damned well it's not going to do anything.

When a company publicly says they won't respect do not track, you can pretty much assume every other company is already ignoring it anyway. There is not do not track.

Comment Re:Is that even worthwhile? Serious Question... (Score 3, Insightful) 51 51

Everything about you they can get, all day long, as long as the app is running.

They'll figure out what they can make money off later. Like, do people buy more gas in the winter or summer.

This is just greedy assholes maximizing both greedy and asshole. And this why I look at apps as basically ads and analytics in disguise, and why I don't feel compelled to have a smart phone with a data plan.

You can always not play the damned game.

Me, I want Android to return the ability to selectively turn off stuff that apps can do. If your app keels over because I won't let it access my contacts, I don't want your fucking app.

I view most apps as about the same as if a retail store demanded the ability to rifle through my wallet before I came in the store, only in the case of apps it's pretty much all the time.

No thanks.

Comment Re:Please (Score 1) 322 322

Its like saying "Hey, Chevrolet, you know your customers like the radio station set to 101.9, why cant you engineer your cars to respect their choice instead of forcing your nefarious 101.5 agenda."

Yeah, but this is a Mozilla car analogy we're talking about here.

In the current 2015.7 model, release, the UX team has decided that a 5-button hamburger menu on an AM dial (and only from 1100Khz to 1150KHz in 10KHz increments) is all that's needed. Users who want to access a wider range of frequencies in the AM band are free to write an extension or purchase a third-party radio head unit.

To further improve the user experience, we remind prospective extension developers that in the Aurora channel for the 2016.1 model year, the about:config setting for frequency.megavskilohertz has been removed, along with the FM antenna. The UX team has made this recommendation based on telemetry that suggests that few drivers actually listen to FM radio, especially since the 2013.6 model, in which the AM/FM toggle switch was removed because the UX team for 2012.1 felt it was cluttering the dashboard.

Comment Re:IE all over again (Score -1, Flamebait) 322 322

Wasn't the ability for other browsers to set themselves as the default browser part of the DoJ settlement? So now Microsoft is deciding that doesn't apply?

Sorry, but Microsoft has gone well into the "we can do anything we want to your computer, any time we want, and unless you have an enterprise license you can't stop us".

That is complete bullshit. If they're going to assert ownership of my computer, they can help me pay for it. Until they do, it's my computer.

Comment IE all over again (Score 1, Insightful) 322 322

So basically they're doing the same thing with Windows 10 as they did originally with IE? Making it part of the OS and claiming it can't be removed?

Sorry, Microsoft ... but everything I hear about Windows 10 is making me say "fuck you, I'll stick with my Windows 8.1".

When will Microsoft realize we own the computers, we are ultimately the ones who make decisions about the computers, and they simply can't dictate to us what software is on our computers and how we use it.

And, like every other Microsoft product, I'm sure this new hotness is riddled with security holes an defects for their users to have to deal with.

But don't worry, because they'll update the OS as they see fit, and if they break it, that's your problem ... says it right there in the EULA.

Keep alienating your customers, see how that works out for you. You might even find the DoJ knocking at your door if they ever grow a pair and stop doing whatever industry demands of them.

Comment Re:When do I get to be a multinational corp? (Score 5, Insightful) 279 279

So you agree that you should be able to be charged under Thai laws for criticizing their king? Or Saudi laws for blasphemy?

Or do you understand there are such things as jurisdiction, and Google is saying "we reject your assertion of extra-territorial jurisdiction"?

Unless you think your posts on the internet should be under the jurisdiction of every piss-pot dictator on the planet, what the hell do you expect from Google?

Google is doing the right thing here. French courts have the right to make decisions on what happens in France. They sure as fuck don't have the right to tell Google what to do in every other country. The world doesn't work that way.

If that was true, we'd all be under Sharia law or whatever country mostly loudly decided its laws applied globally.

You enjoy the same protections as Google ... if in your home country France sends you a letter telling you that you must comply with French law ... you too can tell them to fuck off. Unless of course you live in France.

Do you really think that France has the right to dictate the behavior of the entire internet? If so, you're a fool.

Comment Re:How? (Score 1) 335 335

So, precisely how again do they suggest sites verify ages?

How do they verify anything? Do you really think people are going to provide a porn website with their actual names and dates of birth? Would you?

Why the hell would anybody trust a porn site with that? I wouldn't trust most any website with that information ... both because it's none of their damned business, and because I assume they're grossly incompetent at security.

These idiot politicians want a world which is wrapped in bubble wrap, and must be softened to accommodate children. And I'm sorry, but that's simply not possible.

But expecting every web site in the world to implement age verification to keep David Cameron happy is asinine. However, most news stories see about Cameron make him sound like a bit of an ass, so that's fitting.

What he want simply won't work, but he wants to appear to be doing something. Like every other damned politician who thinks they can legislate the solution to the problems of when society meets technology.

"There is nothing new under the sun, but there are lots of old things we don't know yet." -Ambrose Bierce