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


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:"So why aren't we doing it?" (Score 1) 990

Now, if half the population starts using "equipt" to mean "equipped", then it will be added to the dictionary.

See also:

Equipt probably isn't exactly standard these days (I use all those other -t words, but would still use equipped), but it's hardly "newspeak ebonification".

Comment Re:People think google are different. (Score 1) 408

That is not Facebook deliberately selling personal information to advertisers.
That was a security flaw in their application API that may have, in the case where application developers did something wrong, resulted in an access key being logged in an advertiser's logs. It is also not Facebook passing that information on to its advertisers, it's the application developer passing it on to _their_ advertisers. It was a limited life access key which only provided access to the information that the user had authorised the application to have access to.

If you didn't use applications, then you had zero chance of that happening to you, and if you did use applications, it's still not a guarantee that it happened. (Though to be safe you have to assume it did).
Using an application is always a risk, and when you grant access to parts of your profile to an application, you are placing your trust in them to not do such things. Some of the most successful application developers proudly admit to being scam artists (Zynga for example), so trusting an application is inherently a silly thing to do.

So in short, that link does not in any way refute my statement. Facebook does not sell your personal information.
Once Google has apps for Google+ (which they will, eventually), the same potential issues will happen there.

Comment Re:People think google are different. (Score 1) 408

One major difference between Google and facebook is that Google sells your eyeballs to advertisers, facebook sells your information

Show me evidence that Facebook sells your information.

Facebook sells eyeballs just like Google does. Facebook does not give advertisers your information.

Comment Re:Imagine a car (Score 2) 272

Unity and Gnome3 especially seem aimed at smaller screens operating in full screen for applications

The worst thing is that if you actually try it on a small screen, it becomes clear that the developers have never actually used a computer with a resolution lower than 1680x1050. That screen hogging side panel hurts your brain when it starts collapsing and you find yourself having to chase icons around.

For small screens the old Ubuntu Netbook launcher was perfect - I even use it on a desktop (1366x768 - so still fairly low res), and it was touch friendly too. I don't know why they abandoned it so quickly

Comment Re:Tor (Score 1) 201

Your user-agent solution: So you're saying that my smart phone, which is on a slower network connection, with a lower usage quota should receive both the mobile page AND the multimedia heavy regular page, and then choose which to render? That's massively inefficient and will clog low-power, bandwidth restricted devices. Also, it's stupid.

That would be why he suggested the other option - a capabilities field.
It amazes me that there still is no capabilities header, despite similar existing for mimetypes and languages....

Comment Re:This could happen anywhere in the world... (Score 2) 162

As a New Zealander living in Austria that still visits New Zealand, I'd say New Zealand hasn't had a sane government for years.
Australia's is still pretty sensible (the internet filter stuff makes a lot of headlines, but no one seriously expects it to ever pass - and even Conroy seems to have given up on it now) for now. ..but god help us all after the next election if the Australian people don't stop believing Tony Abbott's lies and end up electing a Coalition government.

Slashdot Top Deals

A freelance is one who gets paid by the word -- per piece or perhaps. -- Robert Benchley