Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Just go ahead & disclose then (Score 1) 139

Go ahead & disclose it, you're corporations, you're above the law. The govt can't tell you what to do.

Nothing will happen, I promise you. Union carbide killed 8000 people and.... nothing. nada. zip. Same goes for the Exxon Valdez & BP.

Those corps harmed and killed average people. If you so much as sneeze in the direction of DC though, they'll fuck you every which they can because our Federal politians and appointed officials are far more valuable than anyone else on the planet. If you got a problem with that presumption, they'll find a way to stick you in PMITA Federal prison, Gitmo, or just kill you.

Comment Re:Good luck (Score 4, Interesting) 139

Maybe if they put some weight behind real change it would be worth it. I think they can see that most of their future revenue is going to come from services where they host user data. But if people understand that the Third Party Doctrine, or Business Records Exemption mean that that "their" data is totally and utterly insecure, then the market for those services will be severely damaged. America doesn't have much going for it businesswise any more -- we have a weapons industry and flush government contractors -- but if the government is broke because nobody has anything but a Walmart job, those industries are dead. Technology is the government's biggest potential cash cow -- it should probably NOT shoot it in the head.

I think the tech companies might actually have "good luck with that" perspective. But they have to be willing to make the point. And then support at minimum, legislative limitations on the both Third Party Doctrine and Business Records Exception. Even more preferable, would be a Constitutional amendment defining digital content (including metadata) whereever stored (drives, wire, airwaves) as "papers" and that government access to such data is not affected by where it is stored, i.e., it remains a person's private stuff and unreachable without a warrant supported by probable cause, even if stored offsite so to speak.

Comment Re:Two Other Outspoken Politicians (Score 2) 424

P.S. At the time that was true in the United States. It was a less dangerous time. The biggest problem we faced was nuclear annihilation in less time than it takes to eat dinner. Now we face guys who put black powder in pressure cookers.

This has got to be in the running for the most insightful quip of the year. Says it all.

Comment Re:Thanks Obama! (Score 1) 275

Total agreement. Although I think I'd start with criminal prosecution of Clapper for perjury. It's such a slam-dunk case that if we can't even do that, nothing is possible.

As long as we're wishing, I'd like to see three constitutional amendments:

1) clarifies that "papers" as used in the 4th amendment includes digital content of any type, including metadata relating to that content.

2) eliminates the business records exception and recognizes that in the modern world of digital communications, people's private "papers" remain the property of the person who generated them no matter where they are stored or temporarily exist (they're yours whether on someone else's HD, on the wire, in the air), and that the government may acquire such information only on a showing of probable cause.

3) establishes an independent prosecutorial body whose sole focus is to root out and prosecute federal employees and elected officials who commit crimes, and in particular, crimes against the constitution. Maybe a 5 member board, 1 appointed by pres, 1 elected by congress, 1 elected by all Fed. judges (not just picked by Supreme Court), 2 elected by citizens.

Comment Re:Nice (Score 1) 719

To be fair, I think it was actually because he isn't Bush.

assume: make an ASS out U and ME

Nobel committe should have paid attention to one of the oldest jokes in the world before laying that peace prize on Obama by assuming he wouldn't be GWB the Second.

Comment Re:Flawed Analogy (Score 3, Insightful) 107

The problem here is that we are wiretapping everybody to attempt to find evidence.

Honestly, I think the Feds know that collecting huge amounts of random data makes the job of finding bad people harder, not easier. But the point of the program isn't about finding bad guys, it is mainly to create a repository of information that can be accessed whenever they want to silence critics.

They don't care if they send you to prison because of your activism itself, they just want you in prison. This data collection coupled with a Federal code base so vast and vague as to be unknowable, basically ensures that everyone is a criminal and makes it trivial to suppress dissent simply by rummaging through the data store, finding some random bit of nonsense, and charging that person with 50 years worth of bullshit. Or as Snowden would say, it's "turnkey tyranny."

Comment Re:good advice (Score 2) 1737

Juries can be very fickle. Anyone who has done enough trials warns their clients that there is an element of pure unpredictable chance in every trial, and while the odds might be good (or bad), you can always still lose (or win). Eventually, every attorney is going to win a case they should by all rights lose, and lose a case they really ought to win, based on nothing but getting really lucky, or really unlucky.

Slashdot Top Deals

The universe is an island, surrounded by whatever it is that surrounds universes.