Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Hello from my iPhone... (Score 1) 62

So here are the results. As I write this, it's currently +5 Funny. Honestly, this is the intent, regardless of whether you believe me or not. So, we can say from this single sample point (obviously insufficient for true science) that the /. moderation system works! Here, however, are the moderations on this post:

  • Initial Karma: +2
  • Informative: +1, +1, -1 (user posted), +1; Total = +2
  • Funny: +1, +1, +1; Total = +3
  • Offtopic: -1
  • Flamebait: -1
  • Insightful: +1

Oddly, no troll moderations, but I assume that's because the person who chose flamebait didn't understand the difference. I am a little surprised at the Informative moderation. Do people not realize that you cannot set the default maps for apps to launch? to launch Google Maps (or anything else) an app would have to specifically configure it.

Comment Re:Stretching the laws for corporations (Score 1) 161

Apparently you're not interested in trying to explain to your 6yo what freedom of speech or proportional justice means either.

That's a stupid response. Do you honestly think the origin of the goatse name is appropriate for 6 year olds? What the fuck does freedom of speech have to do with this? Or, did you seriously fucking think I really mean for him (Weev) to be punished solely on the name of the company? Can't you understand sarcasm? The fact is that Goatse Security is a really stupid name and I hope the company never gets any customers. But, no, he shouldn't do jail time for it.

Comment Re:Stretching the laws for corporations (Score 1) 161

If AT&T had left printouts of highly personal data in a dumpster and someone had found it right there, then I don't think you would've had a problem fingering the culprit. AT&T, right? Dumpster diving would certainly not get someone 41 months in the slammer (e.g California v Greenwood).

In other words, it was right there in the open. Hence, the blame lies squarely with AT&T for not properly securing their customers' private information.

This is a terrible analogy, and tnk1 has covered most of it. Let me further clarify that most locations for AT&T that I've been to do not maintain their dumpsters outside their curtilage. This would negate the reference to Greenwood v CA. Additionally, I know AT&T regularly uses a shredding company, so any really important stuff (especially for government contracts) goes through that. In any case, I think the better analogy is if I place my wallet on a counter and walk away from it. I say that it's still my property and you do not have the authority to go to it, open it, and take the money. You, apparently, think it's perfectly okay to take the money out of my wallet. Or, if you think taking the passwords was not "stealing" then let's say I have a password on a piece of paper in my wallet, it's okay to open up the wallet, copy it, and put it back. Let's take this one step further, though, which is closer to what happened. Let's say you're skilled enough to pick my pocket (e.g., skilled enough to spoof addresses). You pick my pocket, copy off the passwords, and then drop the wallet or somehow give it back (reverse pick pocket?). That's okay to you?

Your obvious lack of parenting skills is not his responsibility.

This is almost a non sequitur. I don't care to explain the origin of goatse to a 6yo and I have an obvious lack of parenting skills? Honestly, I would have thought the opposite! Do you really agree with the idiotic response by VortexCortex? You must like goatse, then?

Comment Re:Stretching the laws for corporations (Score 2, Insightful) 161

Whoa, easy on the vitriol there, bub. Don't let bad design cloud your judgment of the actual case. It matters not how badly the AT&T folks implemented security (or not) on their system. The fact is Weev "stole" it (copied without permission) and then stupidly publicized it. What's more, he "shared it with various interested parties."

As far as I'm concerned, anyone calling their group Goatse Security needs to be punished anyway. I'm not interested in trying to explain to my 6yo what the fuck that means.

Comment Re:gag me with a shift button (Score 1) 153

I agree that the meaning of this one liner is not easy to guess but there are other more fundamental things that bother me in Lobster.

I think you're agreeing to something the GP didn't say. By virtue of the subject, he's referring to the number of times you have to use the SHIFT key to type up that line, slowing your programming down. Understanding the line is a different question.

Comment Re:Why the Education Board? (Score 1) 304

I understand that the hack wasn't really a hack, but that doesn't change the theory that this is an issue with the board rather than 1 or more students. Regarding the number of records changed, it certainly doesn't have to be more than 1 student doing the hacking. It's obvious to change several, or a lot, of records to hide the one you really care about.

Comment Re:What is patentable? (Score 1) 124

That's a terrible idea for two reasons. (1) It kills the little guy. Now, only the big patent trolls or large corporations will be able to afford the fee. (2) Who thinks giving the government an interest-free loan for a several years is a good idea? If it's not interest-free, then who pays for the management of all this money?

Comment Re:What is patentable? (Score 2) 124

That makes no sense. Application fees occur at the time application, typically many years before rejection or approval is known. Instead, perhaps apply a large Post-processing Rejection Fee and leave the application fees somewhat untouched.

On the other hand, they could look at the provisional application process. Maybe provide a cursory review, require certain fields be filled out so that these unpatentable patents get short-circuited at the beginning. For something that gets initially "rejected" through this new process, require a significant re-application fee.

Slashdot Top Deals

Algebraic symbols are used when you do not know what you are talking about. -- Philippe Schnoebelen

Working...