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


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Does freedom imply privacy? (Score 1) 324

1. Freedom is your right to act as you choose so long as your actions do not harm others

No, Freedom is your right to act as you choose, without retaliation. Other people's freedom is their right not to be harmed in certain ways by your actions.

You might argue that lack of privacy can limit choices by the threat of embarrassment, but freedom does not preclude embarrassing actions from your choice set. In other words, freedom does not require your choices to be easy and embarrassment-free, just possible. This is not to say that privacy isn't a right worth fighting for. But I don't think we should use the right to freedom to justify the right to privacy.

Go live in a dictatorship for a while, and you will realize that while you might be "free" to do something, that doesn't mean that the government won't haul your ass in jail (or execute you) the next day if they found out about it. Much like in America you're "free" to break the speed limit, fuck a cow, copy music, smoke pot, or shoot off fireworks so long as the government doesn't find out you did it. If there is significant chance that your actions will be retaliated against, you're not really free to do them, even if you are physically capable to do so. It is for this reason that freedom requires privacy; if people take offense at your actions and retaliate, you are not really free to do them. You could argue that indifference on the part of everyone could substitute for privacy, but that will never happen. Inasmuch as people don't retaliate for things they don't know, privacy guarantees freedom.

Unfortunately, the sheeple won't realize that if you don't do anything wrong, you still might have something to hide (because illegal things aren't always wrong, and embarrassing things aren't always wrong), especially if the government should ever turn against its people.
PC Games (Games)

Submission + - Games for Windows - Live to Launch May 8

njkid1 writes: "Soon the PC gaming community will be able to experience all the unique features that Xbox Live gamers have been enjoying for years. And if you're already a paying member of Xbox Live you don't have to pay another cent to get it on Games for Windows. We speak with Microsoft's Kevin Unangst and Aaron Greenberg about the significance of bringing Live to Windows. 9&ncid=AOLGAM000500000000014"

Submission + - Federal Agencies Ban Vista

mjdroner writes: ZDNet has a story on two federal agencies that have banned Vista. 'There appears to be no compelling technical or business case for upgrading to these new Microsoft software products,' says a Department of Transportation memo. Among the reasons stated for not upgrading are compatibility concerns, cost, available funding, and a headquarters move.

Submission + - Tracking the Password Thieves

wiredog writes: From The Washington Post, yet another story about phishers, keyloggers, and viruses. The story is nothing new, but the author has a blog where he describes how he gathered the information that went into the story. Information including the locations of the victims, and the ISPs likeliest to be hit.

Some of the victims included "an engineer for the Architect of the Capitol" and a man who "works in computer security for IBM." One victim "was fresh out of college, where he'd just earned a degree in information security. (He was actively looking for a job in the field; I suggested he may want to go back to the classroom.)" A compromised machine was also found in "the new accounts department at Bank of America" (Score!)

Submission + - Cracking Google's 'secret sauce' algorithm

jcatcw writes: "There's more to placement in the Google results than the PageRank value. Google remains elusive about the 200 factors it uses to score pages and decide which goes to the top. One factor seems to be a ranking of the site that posts a link to the site under consideration. Is a link from slashdot worth more or less than a link from The advice: pretend Google isn't there."

Submission + - Who's behind the anti-Goog Information-Revolution?

mstrom writes: Walk on the tube (metro) in London anytime now and you'll adverts plastered around asking "Who controls 75% of the worlds information?", "Who is controlling your information?" inviting you to join the "Information Revolution" by going to Trouble is, it doesn't say who's behind this revolution. This revolutions most recent trick was to laser-beam a huge advert onto the Houses Of Parliament. It's homepage provides the answer to choice — a search box that lets you choose which search engine to use (well, one of the big-4 anyway) — this is the information revolution!

The entries on their site use hip hand-scrawled or sidewalk-chalked messages to give it a viral buzz as though this is truly a community-sourced revolution. Slick it certainly is, too slick. Hundreds of feedback comments on the site are questioning who is behind it and expressing huge disappointment that a campaign that truly got them to think led them to what seems to be a very expensive anonymous attack on Google.

The culprit looks like non other than — the domain name is registered by Performo who list Ask and Yahoo among their clients. But the actual website is otherwise shrouded in secrecy. The biggest clue is the search links on their homepage — is the first link and choose Ask as your search provider and then search for Google or Yahoo and hey presto! you get an "Information Revolution" advert courtesy of Ask. So a valid question — why does Google own most of the worlds information — but a bad answer — use Ask. The real question remains — why the secrecy, why is the Information Revolution anonymous and was Ask trying to trick us into thinking their really is a revolution against Google?

Submission + - NIST says No to Vista

sglafata writes: "Information Week is running a story on how NIST has banned Microsoft's new operating system from their internal computing networks.

"Word of NIST's Windows Vista ban comes a week after InformationWeek revealed that the U.S. Department of Transportation and the Federal Aviation Administration have both imposed similar blackouts on the operating system, as well as on Microsoft Office 2007 and Internet Explorer 7."

However, the National Security Agency (NSA) assisted in editing the Microsoft Windows Vista Security Guide based on this CNet article and covered on Slashdot."
Wireless Networking

British Military Deploys Skynet 172

rowleyrw writes "The BBC are reporting, 'The British military is set to take one of its most significant steps into the digital age with the launch of the first Skynet 5 satellite. The spacecraft will deliver secure, high-bandwidth communications for UK and "friendly" forces across the globe.' It's not yet the Skynet of Terminator, but how long before it becomes self aware?"

Submission + - No passport for Britons refusing mass-surveillance

UpnAtom writes: "From the And you thought Sweden was bad dept:

People who refuse to give up their bank records, tax records & details of any benefits they've claimed and the records of their car movements for the last year, or refuse to submit to an interrogation on whether they are the same person that this mountain of data belongs to will be denied passports from March 26th.

The Blair Govt has already admitted that this and other data will be cross-linked so that the Home Office and other officials can spy on the everyday lives of innocent Britons.

Britons were already the most spied upon nation in Western Europe. Data-mining through this unprecedented level of mass-surveillance allows any future British govt to leapfrog even countries like China and North Korea."

Management 'Scared' by Open Source 373

A discussion panel at EclipseCon exposed how managers are freaking out over open source. Apparently a disconnect exists between managers who set corporate open source policies and developers supposed to follow them, but who end up covering their tracks to make it seem like they are not using open source. Developers, though, end up using open source because of its ubiquity and not using it 'puts them at a competitive disadvantage because their competitors are.' And the Lawyers are in a panic.

Submission + - Subliminal messages might actually work

GrumpySimon writes: "New research has proven that subliminal messages may actually work. In a paper titled Attentional Load Modulates Responses of Human Primary Visual Cortex to Invisible Stimuli , Bahrani et al demonstrate that even though stimuli may not be available to consciousness, they are processed by the visual cortex. Whilst I'm sure that marketing agencies all over the world are rubbing their hands in glee at this news, the authors report that there's no evidence that this can make people buy things against their will, so with any luck the use of this in advertising will remain an urban legend."

Slashdot Top Deals

To communicate is the beginning of understanding. -- AT&T