Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


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: Re:And how, exactly, are they going to do that? (Score 1) 296

by tacokill (#49293777) Attached to: To Avoid NSA Interception, Cisco Will Ship To Decoy Addresses
I didn't say foreign country, I said restricted foreign country. As in Syria, Iran, North Korea, and the rest. And yes, if equipment shows up in a restricted country, they will chase it back to the day it was made on the Cisco factory floor and they will question every single partner in the supply chain trying to figure out how it wound up in that country.

You act as though Iran or other sanctioned countries can just go to eBay and buy whatever they want. That's not accurate as sanctions have real teeth (and costs for US companies that don't pay heed).

Comment: And how, exactly, are they going to do that? (Score 3, Interesting) 296

by tacokill (#49292121) Attached to: To Avoid NSA Interception, Cisco Will Ship To Decoy Addresses
You see, the US Government is very keen about governing exports. They prohibit shipping many products into restricted countries and they actively police it in a serious manner. Anyone who's product gets found in a restricted country is in hot water. It doesn't matter if the product(s) was sold through an intermediary or 20 middle men, the manufacturer is 100% responsible for asserting, under penalty of law, that their products will not end up in a restricted country and that's that. The treasury department even publishes a monthly list of offenders they catch but I apologize as I cannot seem to find it on google.

To address this issue, many companies that have been caught are required by the US Treasury Dept to document every single end user of their product. Yes, every single unit that is sold must be documented as to where it's final resting place is. I doubt Cisco is under this kind of requirement (unless they've been caught in the past) but it seems this new policy is a huge risk for them in that area. If you were an Iranian supply store trying to procure Cisco equipment, this seems like a good way to do it without anyone knowing or being able to track it --- and that's a serious risk for Cisco.

The minute one of those units gets found in Iran (or any restricted country), all hell will break loose. Again, it doesn't really matter how it got there.....

Here is a good overview of the requirements and Here is a company that has a good policy summary that they live by. Smart on them.

Understand that this has nothing to do with NSA or espionage. This is just a basic requirement of doing business overseas and exporting products. Doesn't matter whether it's plastic dog poo, Intel CPU's, lab equipment, cranes, or other engineered equipment

Comment: Re:I have counted no less than 3 anti clinton repo (Score 1) 538

They aren't reports, they are news stories. Or do you not think the Secretary of State of the United States of America not having a email address is a big deal?

I think it's astounding. We are not arguing over whether she had one and decided (for whatever reason) not to use one. She was never issued one.

Doesn't that bother you?

Comment: Re: Could be true, that (Score 1) 448

by tacokill (#49106907) Attached to: How One Climate-Change Skeptic Has Profited From Corporate Interests
Or he's investing in technologies and developments that he has openly and expressly said he believes offers the best economic potential due to what he has learned from those studies.

Hint: If those technologies and developments were not heavily subsidized then Al's investment in those companies would not be worth diddly as they are not economically viable when compared to other non-subsidized alternatives. That is the very reason those industries are subsidized.

To put it another way, I could make a killing if I sold i386 machines for $2000 and the government gave people a $2500 tax credit to buy my stuff. Take away the $2500 tax credit and there is -0- value of owning a company making i386 computers. Al Gore owns many i386 companies who simply cannot compete with other alternatives without massive subsidies.

Even the crown jewel of the greenies, Tesla, wouldn't be alive today if it weren't for massive subsidies.

Comment: Re:Be careful how you define Troll (Score 1) 467

by tacokill (#48991077) Attached to: Twitter CEO: "We Suck" At Dealing With Trolls, Vows To Kick Them Out
You haven't answered the issue: how and who differentiates between dissent and trolling?

To be clear, I 100% understand why Twitter is contemplating this action and I understand the issue annoys lots of people. But so do the Westboro Babtist people. Would they and their ilk be considered trolls or dissenters?

Comment: Re:Be careful how you define Troll (Score 2) 467

by tacokill (#48989629) Attached to: Twitter CEO: "We Suck" At Dealing With Trolls, Vows To Kick Them Out
The fatal flaw is obvious: How do you define trolling so it is differentiated from dissent? Answer: you can't in any meaningful way.

This is hard censorship, not the kind of soft self censorship that gets "encouraged". This is actual stifling of voices because someone disagrees with what is being said.

Twitter can do whatever they want because they are a private company. However, we the people can also do whatever we want and find another service. If they start censoring, people will leave for someplace that doesn't. It has happened before and will happen again until we learn that freedom of speech means exactly what it says and there are very few exceptions (threats, fire in theatre, etc, etc). The rest of the speech....even the part that makes us allowed

Comment: Re:Hidden agenda that might bite us? (Score 1) 379

by tacokill (#48983301) Attached to: Confirmed: FCC Will Try To Regulate Internet Under Title II
Duh. Regulation gives power to politicians and takes decision-making out of the hands of the citizenry. It should come as no suprise that politicians will use that power to further their own goals and not necessarily those of the public.

For a good example of how this could clusterfuck, consider this: what happens if the FCC sees CONTENT they don't like? Do you think they will stand back with hands off screaming "Freedom!"? No, they will find a reason to intervene and thus, the slippery slope will begin. Of course, that is unthinkable(!) now but give it a few years of regulation and I suspect we'll see that kind of action and more that we haven't even thought of.

Yes, the devil the definitely in the details.

Comment: Re:Second amendment zone of lawlessness (Score 1) 431

by tacokill (#48927165) Attached to: Justice Department: Default Encryption Has Created a 'Zone of Lawlessness'
You're not reaching but what you are asking for isn't necessary. We've already got good precedent for encryption with Phil Zimmerman and PGP back in the 1980's.

When they tried to ban his encryption, he just printed the source code in a book and dared them to ban the book. Same thing can happen again. Code = Speech.

Comment: Re:Time for Layoffs (Score 1) 784

by tacokill (#48831049) Attached to: Parents Investigated For Neglect For Letting Kids Walk Home Alone
Layoffs? In government? Are you kidding or are you high? The government never gets smaller. It is always getting larger and looking for "things to do". Of course they are overfunded and overstaffed. That is why they consistently seek more authority and say in people's lives.

I am surprised people are surprised because this is what governments do. Once whatever problem they have been working on has been solved or greatly diminished, they absolutely must find another reason for existing. This is why they continually seek more and more authority over everyone's life.

Comment: Stop with your silliness (Score 1) 1350

by tacokill (#48757415) Attached to: Gunmen Kill 12, Wound 7 At French Magazine HQ
How about finding some modern examples that have some relevance instead of going back 200+ years to find your "evidence"? Islam is currently trying to destroy civilizations. Not 100 years ago. Not just in one country. They are doing it across the world and across many different cultures.

That you see them as equivalents is laughable to all but the most gullible.

"Freedom is still the most radical idea of all." -- Nathaniel Branden