Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Overdue (Score 1) 495

Actually, they don't. Malware authors use No-IP because all you need to sign up is an email. Registering a domain with Godaddy, Enom, NetSol, etc requires you to hand over to that company your name, address, phone number, credit card details... hardly anonymous. The problem with No-IP is it's anonymous, so malware authors use it.

Comment Re:Sue them for all they're worth (Score 2) 495

Uh no, because Microsoft's security team don't give a shit about copyright infringement. That's another division's problem. I don't think you understand how big companies actually work. Hint: very dysfunctionally.

Of course, you'd never believe that, because your vision is too clouded by your blind hatred of Microsoft.

Comment Re:Sue them for all they're worth (Score 1) 495

We grant them that immunity simply because it's the only way to ensure their impartiality and unbiasedness. You start making them liable (beyond what can already happen should they be found to be perverting the course of justice, an actual criminal offense) and you eliminate that impartiality. That's the dumbest idea I've ever heard.

Comment Re:Sue them for all they're worth (Score 1) 495

How is it damaging their business? No-IPs paying customers are unaffected, because they use their own domain names with the No-IP infrastructure, and only the free domains were seized.

And if you actually read the notice of the lawsuit (which is publicly posted) you can see that Microsoft were actually quite explicit in the fact that they mean in 93% of cases where this malware was present, No-IP domains are used. They also point to Youtube videos where malware/RAT authors say "get a No-IP domain" (which No-IP has done nothing about, despite the fact that they should be very loudly decrying criminals pointing to their service). They also point to Cisco/OpenDNS/Symantec and others making the same complaints about No-IP for years and nothing being done.

No, it's pretty damn hard to fault Microsoft for their actions in this.

Comment Re:Did the editor know...this is Google/Android te (Score 1) 242

Do you actually know how chemotherapy works? It doesn't "bombard the human body with radiation". The accelerator is calibrated and targeted to fire a very specific amount of radiation directly at an area only slightly larger than the tumour. Because cells are at their weakest during division, and cancer cells divide at an exponentially higher rate than regular cells, they are far more vulnerable than the healthy non-tumour area around them. Which means the healthy cells are largely unaffected by the radiation, while the cancer cells are killed because they are weaker.

Comment Re:more interessting,.. (Score 1) 219

What you're referring to is nothing like what happened here. What they did was generalised psychological research. It was not commercial research, where the sole purpose is to test the commercial viability of a product or gain other commercial insights. What they did requires informed consent, which demands that they make all participants aware of the researchers, the nature of the study, the purpose of the study, and get explicit authorisation to include them.

Facebook broke the law. Period.

Slashdot Top Deals

The best way to avoid responsibility is to say, "I've got responsibilities."

Working...