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


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:In all honesty... (Score 1) 235

They should have let him continue. It's not like he was contributing anything except masses of data for the cool-aid drinkers to misrepresent. And discrediting himself in the process. Now those cool-aid drinkers will have something unfair to point to.

On a side note, I'll point out that he's been dumping on Hillary with impunity, but as soon as he got into what the banks consider their private business someone gave Ecuador a call.

Comment Re:Good and bad exposures (Score 1) 474

This is exactly right. Daniel Ellsberg broke the law by photocopying and smuggling out classified documents about Vietnam War progress (or lack thereof) from the RAND corporation, where he was an a Ph.D military analyst. He provided those documents to the reporters from New York Times and Washington Post. The Nixon Administration filed an emergency injunction with the Supreme Court to suppress immanent publication by the New York Times. But the Supreme Court refused on the grounds doing so would imperil the first amendment by imposing court mandated prior restraint. See: New York Times v United States.

Now that does not mean Ellsberg could not have been prosecuted under the Espionage Act of 1919. He absolutely broke the law and admitted as such. He was an employee with a high security clearance entrusted to prevent the release of those documents. Not steal and release them. The justice department ultimately refused to prosecute. But as we've seen with the Bush and Obama Administrations, Espionage Act investigations and prosecutions are popular these days.

Just how the US Government plans to prosecute Assange under the Espionage Act is unclear. He's a non-citizen who never signed a US security clearance nor took an oath to protect classified materials. Furthermore, Wikileaks is arguably a journalistic endeavor. The government makes no distinction between official journalists and citizen journalists for first amendment protections. If the New York Times can do it, so can Julian Assange. And if they argue he's not a citizen and therefore not protected under the first amendment, how then can they argue as a non citizen he's bound by the US Espionage Act?

Perhaps a real lawyer can chime up here. I just took a grad media law class. But it sure seems like tortured logic to me.

Comment Re:Where's my new MacPro Tower? (Score 1) 114

I know a guy who hacked his old 2009 Pro tower with two new xeons and a Titan X just to give the thing a bit more life. Made it a pretty good machine performance wise and he didn't have to throw away his old software investment. But he's already transitioning off mac, so this was to keep an old tool chain functional.

Comment Re:Clinton, Podesta, Putin and Trump (Score 3, Funny) 435

Respected Avatar or NPC,

We notice that you are vigorously trying to overcorrect for your simulation's liberal bias. If you are unhappy in your simulation you can submit petition KB3035583 to request being moved to another simulation with a different bias.

The Operators

Comment Re:For them theoretically hacking a private org? (Score 1) 352

Do you have any sources? Election systems shouldn't be hackable. They should be networked but not on the internet. That's really poor planning.

I only saw the bit about 32 states on yesterday's CBS Evening News. They focused on Arizona, where IIRC the state voter registration database was breached (but supposedly not downloaded or tampered with).

They said there had been something like 190,000 attacks and probes, of which 11,000 considered serious. Unfortunately I didn't get the context for that (i.e., whether it was just election infrastructure, or what the time frame was).

You're right though - neither the election infrastructure nor any other part of our national infrastructure (public and private) should be exposed to attacks via the internet.

Comment Re:Too Late (Score 5, Insightful) 394

The should have released this stuff when she was running against Bernie.

Everybody knew (and still knows) she's in bed with Wall Street. That was probably the main issue that let Bernie get to the populist/left side of her.

She changed her tune to neutralize that advantage, but no one seriously believes she's going to get tough on Wall Street.

This is more non-scandal in search of a headline. But everyone should have forseen that as soon as they saw "Wikileaks".

Slashdot Top Deals

It is impossible to enjoy idling thoroughly unless one has plenty of work to do. -- Jerome Klapka Jerome