Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×

Comment: Re:The reason is more simple (Score 1) 521 521

You have a charging station built into walls of your house already. In fact, there just might be electrical receptacles all over the USA!

So disregarding the fact that they require special connections let's review why you want me to use electric cars...

1. Emissions. This is a fallacy since you are transferring the emissions to the power station. There will be very little savings if you consider this.

2. Expense. This is offset by the cost of electricity. Want to see the electric bill skyrocket? Plug in your car every trip to the store and watch it rise. Speaking of that, charging stations outside of the house will also charge for the electricity used based on their billing which will also include a bit of profit making it cheaper to charge at home.

3. Maintenance. I don't see any savings here since the batteries in the electric cars are very expensive and can't be changed by the user. Most of the electric cars also have very complex circuitry making them very mechanic exclusive.

Comment: Re:Civil versus criminal law (Score 3, Informative) 210 210

...but if you do so maliciously and mendaciously...

That has nothing to do with the case IF what is said is true. Remember, truth is a defense against slander / libel. The motivation behind what is said is only considered if what was said is not true.

Comment: Re:Scare quotes? (Score 1) 141 141

Seriously, people don't want accountability for anything, and they're probably in the right of it judging by human history. But they sound hilarious when they get all ranty about it.

Quite the opposite actually. The stated purpose of doing this is for "transparency". That is also the reason for most government breeches in security. The rush to put everything on the Internet to be more transparent will be the cry for the foreseeable future.

Comment: Re:It doesn't matter matter who did it (Score 2) 144 144

First off let me start this by saying I work in Homeland Security for my state and used to work for the feds doing the same thing. I received my notice about the breach at a staff meeting. The word is it wasn't a hack into the computer but it was malware installed on a computer at OPM. It was installed in December and wasn't noticed until April.

Now the question I have is was the individual that brought it in disciplined?

Comment: Re:Surprise, Surprise! (Score 5, Interesting) 144 144

I tend to agree with your evaluation but want to add...

Why on Earth doesn't the government simply drop all packets coming form or going to their infamous lists? What is the reason to allow an IP originating from China to access OPM? Don't get me wrong. From what I read earlier this thing was malware installed in December and not found until April. Still, any packets coming or going to a Chinese IP address should be dropped at the router. Black hole them in other words.

Comment: Re:I am shocked, shocked. (Score 2) 235 235

Red Cross blood services has been separated from the National Red Cross Disaster Services for many years. I remember when it happened. It caused the closure of many Red Cross offices because it was Blood Services that was supporting the Disaster side. They have a separate management tree, budget and facilities. A big part of the cost associated with blood is in the testing for blood diseases and processing such as blood separation processes. The testing alone costs a small fortune.

So please keep in mind that although Blood Services carries the Red Cross name it really is a separate entity.

Comment: Re: Damn, I trusted them (Score 2) 145 145

They alter the Eula, your selections in the installer are overriden, and malware installs.

I wonder if the authors can bring a violation against their license if SF doesn't release the source code for an open source project they abscond with for those licenses that require reciprocity such as the GPL? Or a copyright violation for derivative works? Would be interesting to see if it happened.

Comment: Re:Private Profiles (Score 1) 166 166

It's right there in their privacy policy:

We collect the content and other information you provide when you use our Services, including when you sign up for an account, create or share, and message or communicate with others. This can include information in or about the content you provide, such as the location of a photo or the date a file was created. We also collect information about how you use our Services, such as the types of content you view or engage with or the frequency and duration of your activities.


We also collect content and information that other people provide when they use our Services, including information about you, such as when they share a photo of you, send a message to you, or upload, sync or import your contact information.

The list goes on and on. Most troubling is this is how they descrie their "anonymous" data:

For example, we may tell an advertiser how its ads performed, or how many people viewed their ads or installed an app after seeing an ad, or provide non-personally identifying demographic information (such as 25 year old female, in Madrid, who likes software engineering)...

It has already been proven that anonymized data can be unraveled and associated with an individual again. Facebook makes it even easier to unravel by providing the sex, age, likes and city of the victim. (Search /. for the multitude of stories on this). So don't feed me that pap on it being "anonymous".

Even given the policy, Facebook doesn't come right out and say EXACTLY what and with whom they are sharing information BEFORE THEY SHARE IT. It is intentionally nebulous.

Lastly, the default settings in the Privacy Center is to share as much as they can without triggering aggressive privacy concerns generating bad PR. Admittedly, that is the whole purpose of the site. So the idea to not use social media or at most provide as little private information as possible (or fake it when not avoidable) is sound advice.

Gosh that takes me back... or is it forward? That's the trouble with time travel, you never can tell." -- Doctor Who, "Androids of Tara"