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

 



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

Comment Re:Asinine. (Score 4, Insightful) 425

They act as if these are nuclear or biological weapons. There is no compelling interest in keeping plans for primitive 3D printed guns away from anyway, and there is no possible argument that there is.

Exactly. One can't help think there is a hidden agenda here of allowing the government better control of DOMESTIC gun possession. I certainly hope the Supreme Court reviews this case. This represents a huge blow for First Amendment rights, and seems at odds with previous rulings pertaining to source code of encryption software being ruled free speech despite ITAR regulations controlling the export of cryptography.

Comment Re:Fake GPS location spoofer (Score 1) 395

How about using Fake GPS location spoofer? Is it able to send fake coordinates to Google Play, too?

I'm sure a GPS location spoofer, if such a thing exists, is highly illegal and would get you in big trouble to use it. GPS signals are on a licensed part of the spectrum, and interfering with those frequencies can cause not just your GPS device to fail, but possibly others around you. GPS is used in in some life or death applications, such as air navigation, so I imagine the feds would take this kind of spoofing very, very seriously.

Comment Re:No, why? Let them go nuts (Score 1) 41

This will help keep us on our toes and build better defenses against them.

It's rather hard to defend your computer against the government when they have the law on their side. The government can enlist (compel) the help of Microsoft, Apple, Google, or whoever writes your OS to assist them in hacking your system. It may be relatively easy to defend your computer from your average script kiddie, but it's quite a lot harder to defend it from the company that sold you your operating system and continues to push updates for it!

Comment Re: Completely wrong.... (Score 1) 618

As an example; technical education in India is about US$1000 per year (http://qz.com/445500/the-cost-of-getting-a-decent-education-in-india-is-now-staggering/). According to GP, that would be roughly 35 times cheaper at the very least.

Technical "education", in India, is also hardly worth the ink written to spell those words.

If that were true, American companies (and universities) wouldn't be outsourcing their IT to India, because the Indian workers would be incompetent due to their poor education. Clearly that's not the case.

Comment Re:For what, the last 20 years? (Score 1) 212

This is faulty logic. When your accountant makes a mistake with your taxes it does not make your accountant liable for paying the difference. This is always true: when someone else who is acting on your behalf makes a mistake it never absolves you of legal responsibility.

Ireland was not acting on Apple's behalf. Ireland was the taxation authority, not the E.U.

It's Apple's responsibility to check with all applicable laws and make sure things are on the up-and-up, regardless of what Ireland may have offered them.

The laws in question were Irish tax laws, and Apple was abiding by them. If Ireland's laws violated some E.U. meta-laws, that should be Ireland's problem, not Apple's.

Comment Re:For what, the last 20 years? (Score 4, Interesting) 212

Its also about what would happen to you, the private citizen if you pulled this shit. HUGE penalties on top of what was owed and decades in jail in most countries....

Really? Private citizens would get in trouble if their government gave them tax breaks? Ireland and Apple entered into a voluntary agreement whereby Apple would keep jobs in Ireland in exchange for more favorable tax treatment. If this violates EU regulations, then it is the Irish government, not Apple, that is in the wrong, and it is the Irish government which should pay the back taxes.

Comment Re:Selling stolen stuff (Score 2) 72

No he wasn't. He was simply providing a platform to host online files. All he did was not bend to US media cartels the way YouTube or Dropbox did nor give the US government control over the systems the way Amazon or Microsoft does. At one point his system was considered the best file upload facility as it was fully encrypted so no company or government could see what actually was on it.

The US government wanted him, a company not even based out of the US, to implement DMCA controls similar to YouTube's (where any one could claim infringement and the content taken down), he refused and his site was taken offline and he was arrested.

If what he was doing was so above board, why didn't he sell advertising on his site in an open and honest way? Why all the money laundering and hidden transactions? He made it clear from the way he handled money from his advertisers that he knew he was doing something wrong.

Comment Re:It only takes one... (Score 1) 69

"It's no possible for there to be misidentification"

It'll only take one false positive to introduce reasonable doubt. .

This is a civil lawsuit, not a criminal proceeding. The standard is proof by a preponderance of the evidence, not proof beyond a reasonable doubt. All the plaintiff has to show is that it is more likely than not, given the evidence, that the defendant was engaged in the conduct alleged. It's a fairly low standard, and an IP address in a log file might well meet that standard, even if there are multiple reasons why it may lead to the wrong person being identified.

Comment Re:Not possible (Score 1) 69

How did they "connect directly to the IP address"? Did they place a wiretap on each of the 84 IP address to siphon the data?

Most Bittorrent software shows the IP addresses where the data is coming from. Generally different parts of the file will come from different sources, but those sources are usually available.

Slashdot Top Deals

Between infinite and short there is a big difference. -- G.H. Gonnet

Working...