Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Oh for the love of fuck... (Score 1) 214

They're persecuting Snowden for removing plausible deniability. By rubbing everyone's nose in this, the powers that be can no longer make silly hand gestures to the general public and claim "paranoid conspiracy nonsense!" and "that's what you get for believing Hollywood fairy tales".

Of course, the only thing most of the general public is going to bitch about is how the NSA is messing with the voting on American Idol.

Comment Re:I don't want any of that (Score 1) 317

I'm with you 100% but unfortunately the car manufacturers don't get a $2,000 (at 3-500% margin) upgrade package premium for such a basic but functionally superior setup so we'll never see it as OEM equipment. There are a few third party head units that do this and for a small price can be wired into existing steering wheel controls.

Comment Re:Why does DSL still exist (Score 1) 120

The last Olympics needed ~6-7Mbps for 720p, ~8-10Mbps for 1080p so if you had two people in your house who wanted to watch different sports you'd very tight at 720p and SOL at 1080p. Those streams were also pretty blocky, the realtime compressors probably could have used 2-3x the bandwidth to make things smoother.

Comment Re:great announcement (Score 0) 120

Dude, this isn't going to reach from the cabinet, it'll have to be in a small box at the curb and at that point why bother, just run a piece of glass or plastic and have a network that will work for 25+ years instead of a 5 year stop-gap measure. To put this in perspective we run into 100m limitations within a single building, it often requires carefully planning where to place the IDF(s) to make sure that all drops are within the 100m length limit for ethernet, using this for a last mile solution is stupid.

Comment Re:Regional/cultural issue? (Score 1) 924

is this more of a regional or cultural problem?

Yes. It is a cultural thing. It is also an enforcement thing. Combine the two and interesting effects happen.

We have a local chain of theaters that is really good about enforcement.

In the lobby there are many posters and signs that you will be thrown out for cell phone use during a movie or during previews. At the start of a movie is a warning that you will be thrown out. There is a large food court and multiple eateries (not just popcorn), and if you sit out there for more than an hour or so you will see somebody being escorted from the theaters due to phone use.

I love going to the chain, but a few weeks ago I saw a movie at a different theater. It seemed like everyone had their phone out. I walked out and talked to the usher, they said they couldn't do anything.

Even in a region that has a problem with phone use, theater management absolutely can take control and fix the problem if they choose.

Comment Re:First, make sure *you* understand the implicati (Score 2) 168

If you can't articulate what the implications are then at least one of the following is true.

1) You don't actually have sufficient understanding of the situation 2) You're the wrong person to attempt being the spokesperson for the "opposition"

I very much agree with this. Unlike the IT worker in the headline I can articulate many of those implications. Unfortunately getting it through a child's view is difficult. Even communicating it to an ADULT is difficult.

We see these things on /. all the time:
* Goofy pictures as a teen, but as 47 year old fired from executive job due to bad public response.
* Seemingly innocent banter about being insane, Texas teenager in jail.
* Picture of children in a bathtub, ten years in prison for child porn.
* "Why would I want to live there?" to your friends, fired from Microsoft.
* Sexting images go public, lives ruined.

And those are the EASY cases.

On their surface none of them seem like threatening issues. I post pictures of myself, friends and, family. I publicly chat with friends. I hope that they never come back and bite me, but in this world even the smallest innocent thing can be taken out of context and destroy lives.

How exactly do you communicate rational responses (not just fear) for these actual risks that we read about daily without sounding crazy?

Comment HOW do you teach the implications? (Score 3, Interesting) 168

Obviously there are valid issues. The question is not IF we should teach them, but HOW.

Right now there are few ways to articulate the risk. There is the vague handwaving education of "bad guys will steal it".

Even when doing this professionally it is difficult to fully understand what the risks are, who exactly the "bad guys" includes, the kind of stuff they want to take, and the reasons they want it. The bad guys may include governments, vandals, corporate espionage, advertisers, news agencies, and more. The stuff they want may include not just credit card numbers, but also patterns of what you like, where you go, and who you are with. That stupid-looking photo may be cute today, but it may destroy your bid for public office two decades later. The fact that your facebook friends have some overlap with a suspected terrorist may put you on a watch list. Knowing the bad guys, and knowing the data they are looking for, is hard.

Then you have the difficulty of explaining it clearly. It is hard enough to explain to a teenager that their quick goofy photos (or much worse, sexting) might, twenty years from now, prevent them from getting their dreams fulfilled. Sometimes it is easier to point out that public stupidity can prevent them from getting a job in three years, but even that seems difficult to teach.

Since that wasn't quite asked, here's the evolved question:

HOW do you teach K12 students about the risks in the digital world?

Submission + - FBI paid informant inside WikiLeaks (

An anonymous reader writes: On an August workday in 2011, a cherubic 18-year-old Icelandic man named Sigurdur âoeSiggiâ Thordarson walked through the stately doors of the U.S. embassy in ReykjavÃk, his jacket pocket concealing his calling card: a crumpled photocopy of an Australian passport. The passport photo showed a man with a unruly shock of platinum blonde hair and the name Julian Paul Assange.
Thordarson was long time volunteer for WikiLeaks with direct access to Assange and a key position as an organizer in the group. With his cold war-style embassy walk-in, he became something else: the first known FBI informant inside WikiLeaks. For the next three months, Thordarson served two masters, working for the secret-spilling website and simultaneously spilling its secrets to the U.S. government in exchange, he says, for a total of about $5,000. The FBI flew him internationally four times for debriefings, including one trip to Washington D.C., and on the last meeting obtained from Thordarson eight hard drives packed with chat logs, video and other data from WikiLeaks.

Slashdot Top Deals

I judge a religion as being good or bad based on whether its adherents become better people as a result of practicing it. - Joe Mullally, computer salesman