Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:First post! (Score 1) 123

Both parties are guilty of this so voting down party lines isn't going to solve the problem.

What MIGHT help the problem is voting against every incumbent until they get the message.
If enough people did this we would see some real change for a change.

Someone should start an anti-incumbent party.

Comment Re:That's like saying... (Score 5, Insightful) 307

Yes, but I think the action here is the antithesis of patent trolling, is it not?

Here we have Apple, an actual tech company with
(1) products in the marketplace
(2) legit patents for meaningful inventions
(3) a desire to stay OUT of court so it can produce the products
(4) a settlement with the biggest name in computers at the time - not for cash, but for an INVESTMENT.

This is absolutely not patent trolling.

In fact, one could argue that this is the patent system operating at its best.
An innovative company with good ideas flounders in the marketplace temporarily (possibly due to anti-competitive behavior by MS?), leverages its patents to get an influx of capital, and subsequently becomes one of the profitable companies in the history of civilization?
Yeah, that sounds about right.

Comment Re:Are you kidding me? (Score 1) 218

Would you consider it satisfactory if your account balance was different every time you queried it?

This debate misses the point..

The question is not which technology gives us a warm fuzzy feeling that we instinctively trust.

The better question is which technology is better for eliminating errors: paper or electronic.

Comment Re:It's True (Score 2) 676

The purpose of government is not to cure every evil in society.

Commercial speech is protected by the First Amendment, and the proposed regulation would almost certainly be struck down.

What exactly what would be the text of this proposed regulation?

"Whoever publishes an image of a woman having a body mass index below 0.66 shall be fined $X.XX."

Please, someone in favor of this crap draft up a law that is not vague, over-broad, and just plain laughably ridiculous.

Comment Re:Anonymity vs. Accountability (Score 1) 218

Yeah. It's already a federal holiday so everyone has time to vote, what more do you need?

Wait... what's that? It's not a federal holiday at all?

Oh, that seems like a real bummer for the working class.
I'm supposed to get my boss to give me time off work to go stand in line to vote?
When he knows that I'm going to vote for the labor party, and he votes for the capital party?
And I'm supposed to go stand in line for two hours to vote while my kids wait for me outside of daycare?

Yeah, that seems reasonable.

Comment Lacking imagination? (Score 1) 218

I'm not going to attack their credentials, but I don't think they are really trying here. Seems like they have an illogical animosity toward electronic voting.
Anyone who works at RSA should know that an electronic encrypted link is much more secure than anything involving holes punched in a piece of paper and then counted by people.

Just look at the re-counts of paper ballots: a different count EVERY time. You're telling me we CAN'T do better?
Never. Ever. Not possible. REALLY?
That's just plain pessimistic.


"Superficially, you'd think the transactions are very similar [to financial transactions], but underneath, all the issues are completely different. The privacy requirements are completely different, for example," says Jefferson. To prevent coerced voting, or simple vote selling, "You're allowed to tell anyone how you voted all you want, but you're not allowed to have proof of how you voted." Rolling back results to investigate suspected breaches is impossible, Jefferson says, without exposing the actual votes of individuals, at the very least to election officials.

Vote buying and coercion. Seriously? I don't think the outright sale of votes is so hard to detect. You just look for people advertising to buy votes on streetcorners or on craigslist; arrest them; and throw them in jail. Same for coercion. And the problem is that some election officials will know how individuals voted? These have to be the three biggest NON-issues I can imagine. (even assuming, arguendo, that there is no solution to these issues in any online voting scheme imaginable). And this is the reason that online voting can't happen now, OR EVER. In an era when just about EVERY financial transaction other than cash travels via the internet?


Sorry, this just seems lazy and pessimistic.

Comment Re:Somehow (Score 1) 671

Yes.. BUT under the law, "you take your victim as you find him."

Which means that if you punch someone in the head for no reason, and it turns out they have a brittle skull, you are guilty of murder, not mere battery.

And if you invade someone's privacy by recording their sexual encounter, and they turn out to be mentally unstable and jump off a bridge, you may be going to jail.

Guilty on invasion of privacy and obstructing justice, not guilty on hate crime charges, sentence of a couple years in county jail.
Civil suit to follow for invasion of privacy, publication of private facts, and wrongful death, will settle for a large sum that leaves this guy broke for life.

Comment Re:Sue? (Score 3, Informative) 730

The EFF might be able to help:

The DMCA provides remedies against bad faith takedown notices:

Whether it is worth going to court over.. different story.
But HOPEFULLY the damages are enough to at least pay a lawyer to take the case.
Assuming that Congress wasn't bribed to make the damages so small as to be effectively worthless...

Slashdot Top Deals

The world is coming to an end--save your buffers!