Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Trust us... (Score 1) 200

by superdave80 (#49302705) Attached to: NZ Customs Wants Power To Require Passwords

Instead, the department would only use the power if it was acting on "some intelligence or observation of abnormal behaviour", she said

And that 'intelligence' or 'observation' will be totally classified (you know, because of national security and stuff), so there will be no way to verify if there was actually a valid reason to break into your iPhone. But don't worry, we won't abuse this new power.

Comment: Re:Get rid of the financial incentive... (Score 1) 760

Currently the money goes to the city/police department, not the 'town'. They have a financial incentive to hand out more fines. I want the money to NOT go to the city/police department so that they will not have a financial incentive to hand out more fines. So, no, I do not want to 'increase that effect', I want to do the complete opposite.

Comment: Re:Get rid of the financial incentive... (Score 1) 760

Why? Because you think a guy with millions per year cannot afford a lawyer if he's victim of crooks?

No, because right now there is no financial incentive for cops to go after more expensive cars in the hopes of getting a big payday for their department. You make the fines income based and guess who they will go after the most?

Comment: Get rid of the financial incentive... (Score 5, Insightful) 760

If you thought it was bad how cops were targeting/ticketing poor people, wait until the police realize they can fund their whole budget if they can ticket a guy like Zuckerberg once or twice!

Before a system like this is in place, the financial incentive for cops to ticket people needs to be removed. Any fines need to be given back to the community via some type of property/income/sales tax rebate, rather than back to the city (which in essence goes back to the cops that are handing out the fines). For example, if $1,000,000 in fines were collected for a town with 10,000 property tax assessments, they could knock $100 off of each tax bill.

The same needs to be done with civil asset forfeitures. If there was ever a clearer case of conflict of interest, I haven't seen it.

Comment: Telephone? (Score 2) 169

by superdave80 (#49250861) Attached to: Swedish Authorities Offer To Question Assange In London

Swedish prosecutors are arranging to come to London and question Assange within the embassy

Sweden still needs to be granted permission from both the UK and Ecuador.

The phone, motherfuckers, pick it up and CALL HIM WITH YOUR QUESTIONS!!! I am constantly amazed at how people in charge of important things can make simple tasks so convoluted.

Comment: The completely wrong approach. (Score 1) 247

by superdave80 (#49200665) Attached to: How Activists Tried To Destroy GPS With Axes

He wanted to bring attention to the future problems of GPS. Fine. But I think he went about it in the worst way possible:

Grab an ax and start banging it on the side of a satellite.

Yeah, that will work great, because people generally think highly of people wildly swinging an ax around while destroying public property.

Comment: Still using the power grid? (Score 1) 374

by superdave80 (#49130061) Attached to: The Groups Behind Making Distributed Solar Power Harder To Adopt

...have passed revisions to their net metering policies that would included fixed monthly surcharges for residences and businesses that install solar to make it less competitive with conventional forms energy.

Well, that's not a biased statement at all, is it? I don't know all of the details of who wants want law passed to do who knows what, but I think there is a legitimate argument to be made for a fixed monthly charge.

A standard, non-solar customer is hooked up to the grid, and uses 100% of the power companies power 100% of the time. The power company knows this, so they are able to figured out what to charge the customer for things like power generation, transmission, distribution, etc.

Along comes a solar user, and they use 50% of the power company's power 50% of the time. BUT, they want to be hooked up and able to use the power company 100% of the time, so the power company still has to maintain the same infrastructure, but now they are getting less from the customer. Sure, they are saving on not having to generate the power for them sometimes, but the transmission and distribution cost are rolled into the cost of your generated power.

Look at it this way. Say they were earning $10mil a month from their customers, and $5mil was generation costs and $5mil was distribution costs. Suddenly, half of their customers go solar, cutting the amount of power generated by 20%. Now they made $8mil. Their generation cost was $4mil, leaving $4mil for distribution maintenance. But they still have $5mil worth of maintenance because all of their customers still are hooked up to the same system. How do you make up that $1mil shortfall?

To be fair, maybe the power company just needs to split the bill so that every household pays a fixed infrastructure charge, regardless of how much you use, and then tack on the cost of your actual usage.

Comment: Your's is better? (Score 1) 305

by superdave80 (#49034323) Attached to: Alcohol's Evaporating Health Benefits

"Beneficial associations between low intensity alcohol consumption and all cause mortality may in part be attributable to inappropriate selection of a referent group and weak adjustment for confounders. Selection biases may also play a part."

So, why is YOUR study automatically better than all of the other studies that came before you? This is why I generally ignore any 'study' that shows this is good or that is bad until there are LOTS of studies done on it that all say the same thing.

Comment: Good. (Score 1) 392

...by this he meant things like physical observation, bugging rooms, and breaking into phones or computers.

Which means that you will now have to have an actual agent go do this (hopefully with a warrant, but those are just soooo passe now days). This will limit their ability to just scoop up all data on everybody everywhere, and actually just concentrate on, you know, bad guys and stuff.

Adding features does not necessarily increase functionality -- it just makes the manuals thicker.