Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


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

Comment: Re: How is this news for nerds? (Score 1) 1078 1078

The restriction to look at now is whether the marital status of each spouse in the marriage at hand is single. Today it has to be. But there's not a good reason for it. (As already mentioned, administrative convenience is not a good reason). So why can't Alice, who is married to Bob, now also marry Carol? Bob isn't marrying Carol; the A-C marriage would be between two people only. You're treating Alice differently merely because she is already married.

So what happens to Alice's stuff when she dies? How are property rights naturally divided? I can tell you there would be different interpretations of what happens and that's a problem. You need new law or legal precedent to establish how that works.

Sure, it's not intractable, it's also not even something I'd be against. Equal protection, however, is based on "protected classes" and the state of "being married" is not one of those. Why should it be? Someone who is married is denied the joys of ... being married? That doesn't compute.

Comment: Re:That's FIne (Score 1) 272 272

Sprint is really in no position anyway to be dictating any terms to its customers. Of the top 4, it has the worst native network.

Which is really telling - even t-Mobile has stepped up their game - when I get service (major cities and outside of large warehouse-like buildings), it's phenomenal and much better than my coworkers' VZ and ATT networks. With wifi-calling and HD Voice, I get better calls than I ever did on AT&T or VZ.

I liked Sprint when I had it 20 years ago. But data is the game and all advances in mobile are driven by data. Sprint has got to improve their network.

Comment: Re:Huh? They had full control of the hardware. (Score 2) 46 46

These researchers had physical control of the hardware in question and were able to extract unencrypted data? That must have been difficult.

You can't do that with an iPhone. Hardware access that's in a locked mode shouldn't necessarily give you access to encrypted data. Oh, in one case at least it simply wasn't encrypted. Health data. Nice.

Comment: Reforms... are they positive? (Score 2) 500 500

The Huffington Post was live updating the proceedings, and said this:

USA Freedom Act advances 77-17

In a stunning reversal from last week’s drama, the USA Freedom Act was passed by a vote of 77-17. The bill, which passed the House overwhelmingly several weeks ago will now move forward and is likely to receive a final vote on Tuesday.

The bill fell three votes short of the needed supermajority to advance last week but with the clock ticking on controversial provisions of the Patriot Act, supporters of NSA surveillance thought that the proposed reforms were better than letting the program expire entirely.

Rand Paul stated that the Freedom Act will likely get passed on Tuesday.

Wait... did we win or not? Isn't this just a 2-day repreive?

Please note this [1] is one of the bills being proposed (by the sitting Senate Intelligence Chair, no less):

The bill Senate Intelligence Chair Richard Burr released last Friday is bad enough for the way it expanded the existing illegal dragnet. I argued here Burr’s bill would give the Intelligence Community everything they lost in 2009 and 2011. [...]

So think about it - is this just a 2 day reprieve or 2 days so they can rollback more restrictions and make things worse than they are now?


Comment: Re:What if I want the ad fueled web to die? (Score 1) 618 618

There is no right to make a profit. http protocol is displayed by a backend interpretation. I can do what I want with the data I fetch.

In addition I want the concept of ad revenue generated content to die.

Well then you better be concerned because according to TFA, they're going after ad networks but not ads within social networks. How logical is that? All this means is that Google's monopoly will be diverted to Facebook, and the same shit continues, except Zuck gets all the $$.

Comment: It's not a failure, this WOsD (Score 2) 143 143

The War on (some non-patentable, not pushed by Big Pharma) Drugs is a failure.

Ah, but I disagree. Its purpose is manifold, but the two biggies are the erosion of the constitution to keep the prison/security state growing and fed, and the profits of Big Pharma.

This sad state of affairs has been slowly engineered over decades by some very wealthy and influential people as a goal to increase their power and wealth.

It's not a failure - it's a wild success. Sucks that you and I aren't on that list of winners though.

Comment: Re:So how does this work? (Score 1) 152 152

Possibly - but then the best way is just to let any password open the vault.

This is highly undesirable. Even knowing which services I find worthy enough to include in my vault is important. If the attacker knows my gmail, linkedin, or more niche account username, and doesn't see it in the vault, then they will get suspicious.

Comment: April 1st comes again?!?!? (Score 4, Interesting) 27 27

I'm more amazed that Ed signed up.

But seriously between this, and the moves that the FCC will actually implement Title 2 protections to uphold Net Neutrality, my hopes for humanity (and the US Govt in general) have gone up a bit.

Fingers crossed...

Comment: Sure, defend the asshole (Score 4, Insightful) 776 776

She probably lied about it.

That's no justification for the employer's action. If your employee doesn't behave properly, you talk with them, maybe put them on performance plan, or maybe terminate their employment.

To talk with another employer to get her fired there is pretty unethical and evidence of douchebaggery.

Comment: Perspective is what you need (Score 1) 403 403

For the tiny percent of people who have tattoos that cover all the way down, why would they waste money or resources trying to figure out that last barely 1 percent or less? That makes no sense from a business stand point, on the other hand I totally agree with you on they should have a warning for those people with tattoo. For most, there is still time to return the watch, stop being major cry babies, thats how you let companies know there product has problems, RETURN IT.

So, GM shouldn't have fixed the ignition key problem because it affects even less than your "barely 1%"? And if a laptop design has barely 1% of cpus fail out of the box, that's okay? Or drugs or contaminated food shouldn't be recalled because it only affects barely 1%? Can you change your name from Anonymous Coward to Corporate Shill?

So is the Apple Watch not working with wrist tattoos equivalent to a malfunctioning car, failing laptop, or or contaminated drugs/food? You call the GP commenter a shill. You sounds silly and shrill.

If you have wrist tattoos (my guess is you don't) and the watch doesn't work for you return it. Get some perspective, and buy a Google Wear instead.

Comment: Re:TANSTAAFL (Score 1) 171 171

So I've read that what's happening is the proverbial "straw that broke the camel's back". Meaning all this activity only hastened the inevitable; an earthquake. Some geologists have stated that in hindsight, this may actually be a good thing in that it releases stress that would otherwise buildup and cause an even bigger quake at a much later date. Much MUCH later I would think. So I dunno, if a mag 7 goes off, could you really prove who or what caused it though??

Do you have a cite for this? I haven't heard anything like that.

Comment: Re:Legislate instead of educate (Score 1) 616 616

I hate that we have to legislate instead of educate people about vaccinations.

I hate that legislation is allowed to force people into something the state mandates.

There's no mandate. Just a removal of bullshit exceptions to an rule preventing unvaccinated children from attending schools.
Kind of like anti-dumping laws - you don't get to drain your sewer into the streets, just because you don't believe in "government mandated" plumbing.

Comment: Companies are full of people (Score 1) 279 279

companies in the US no longer DESEVE 2 weeks notice. the rules are no longer valid; they won't give YOU notice. don't give them any courtesy they won't give you.

Fact is, while I sure don't have personal relationships with companies, they are full of people that a) I have a working history with, b) can be references for future employment and c) may hire me again (or I may seek to hire them). It's not for the company that you give 2 weeks, it's for your coworkers. And you can, theoretically, just notice the folks who will be impacted by your departure and not your employer, but that's not really workable.

Pretending like you walking out on your coworkers is anything but antisocial is naive. Sure, some coworkers and managers are not going to care because your bridges are already burned, but personally, I've found most of my jobs through people I know and I've helped quite a few folks I know get gigs through connections.

In fact, I really prefer, when I depart, to try to find a replacement for myself - usually someone I know is looking for a gig, and my former employer is glad to get a recommendation from someone they trust.

"Silent gratitude isn't very much use to anyone." -- G. B. Stearn