Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



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

Comment Re: As the US surrenders control of DNS (Score 2) 237

Except, from TFA, "The data I see suggests China, an assessment shared by the people I spoke with."

But that's impossible in your mind...it has to be the US. It could never be a US adversary with principles that run decided counter to internet freedom, human rights, and so on. Clearly this is a US effort to leave itself a capability to "take down the internet", when we are the ones ceding control of ICANN and IANA.

Comment TFS leaves out most important piece ignoring info (Score 5, Insightful) 237

"The data I see suggests China, an assessment shared by the people I spoke with."

Of course, that will be buried in these comments that it's a US false flag, that obviously it's the US that's responsible, etc.

It couldn't possibly be someone like China.

Comment No...just, no. (Score 5, Interesting) 163

No one actually has to "hack" anything -- just get the thought out there. No matter who wins, stories like this will be cited by the losing side as "proof" the election was "rigged" or "hacked", and that the winner didn't win legitimately. I can think of few things more damaging to the democratic institution.

See also:

A Powerful Russian Weapon: The Spread of False Stories

Comment Re:How dare they hack NY Times reporters! (Score -1, Troll) 61

So...it's NSA's fault when foreign intelligence services conduct espionage against US political parties, media organizations, etc., and actively try to influence the outcomes of US elections, and manipulate the opinions of US citizens? You realize that no matter who wins in November, possibly millions of Americans will believe the election was stolen or rigged, and possibly by foreign influence?

I know, I know -- in this crowd, the US is the enemy, here, and we don't actually need to have any kind of foreign intelligence capability; NSA's sole purpose for being is to figure out ways to illegally spy on Americans so it can solidify the power base of shadowy elites. Or something. Whenever I need to be reminded of just how out of touch many people are with history, reality, or both, I read Slashdot comments.

Comment Re:Intelligent (Score 1) 406

While it is unfortunate for the opposition candidate to flaunt the Constitution in such a manner, note that we can also see the establishment candidate, Evita Peron^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H Hillary Clinton, is actually proposing to amend the Constitution in order to reverse a Supreme Court decision which allowed a group of people to advocate against her as a political candidate. She also has designs on her political opponents' second amendment rights.

Comment No. This is an unprecedented shit in nothing. (Score 0, Flamebait) 983

It is a remotely-controlled device, jury rigged for a purpose that is not at all its use.

I know people will become uncontrollably outraged about this, but it's a standoff weapon. Just like a spear, a bow and arrow, an explosive tossed through a door or window, a gun, or even a vehicle employed as a weapon.

The legal standard for lethal force is the same. Beware of academics or other commentators who will claim this is some kind of new territory for which there is no legal standard and that we have no idea how to approach.

But by all means: pretend this is an "Unprecedented Shift in Policing" instead of an improvisation under nightmarish circumstances.

Comment Re:Stranger Danger! (Score 2) 211

Luxury housing is always the first to be built in a highly constrained, under-built market like New York City. If you need to strongarm the city to get any development done whatsoever then you're going to focus only on the highest-value projects.

It upsets peoples' sense of egalitarianism, but it's still better for the overall housing situation than nothing. Of course, building enough housing on all levels of the market makes too much sense and will continue to be disallowed.

Comment Re:Benjamin Franklin.... Cruel irony? (Score 3, Funny) 265

Benjamin Frankly surely would have been pissed if he knew that his name was stamped on the ass of a megaship designed to carry everything from wind-up frogs to American flags all made in China while the American's shipped back raw materials and money.

*ahem*

"No nation was ever hurt by trade, even seemingly the most disadvantageous." -- Benjamin Franklin

Comment Re: Jingoism and Nativism (Score 3, Insightful) 242

Yes. Yes it can. Because that means you can't have a shop that really specializes in imported goods: you're burdening the shop operator with a responsibility to find local goods, stock them, sell them, keep track of exactly the amount sold of both, and stop selling the imported goods if the local goods aren't doing well enough (so unless you want to turn people away from time to time you'll need to maintain a decent safety margin). It rules out entire classes of very effective, proven business models (like the Apple store, or really anything you'd find in a mall that is focused on a certain brand. Swatch. Tumi. Banana Republic. Hugo Boss.)

Retail operations cost money. Tacking on a 30%-local-goods operation isn't going to be straightforward for many businesses, and ensures that only the largest players operating at scale are going to be entering the market. A straight-up punitive tariff might be less harmful for many businesses.

Submission + - Prominent civil liberties expert says he and Snowden were wrong on NSA 1

An anonymous reader writes: Last week, Geoffrey Stone, a longtime civil liberties stalwart, Constitutional scholar at the University of Chicago, and member of the National Advisory Council of the American Civil Liberties Union, moderated a live discussion with Edward Snowden from Russia. As a member of the President’s Review Group on Intelligence and Communications Technologies, Stone was given unfettered access to unfettered access to our national security apparatus, and told the NSA what he thought. This week, Stone offered more detail on his own findings that only someone with direct knowledge can provide: "So before I began the work on the review group, my general view was that, from what I learned in the media, the NSA had run amok and created these programs without appropriate approval or authorization or review. And whatever I thought of the merits of the programs, my assumption was that it was illegitimate because it didn't have appropriate review and approval. What surprised me the most was that this was completely wrong. [...] The more I worked with the NSA, the more respect I had for them as far as staying within the bounds of what they were authorized to do. And they were careful and had a high degree of integrity. My superficial assumption of the NSA being a bad guy was completely wrong. [...] I came to the view that they were well intentioned, that they were designed in fact to collect information for the purpose of ferreting out potential terrorist plots both in the U.S. and around the world and that was their design and purpose." Stone provided detail and examples, including rationale and justifications for the review group's findings, and concluded that Snowden "was unduly arrogant, didn't understand the limitations of his own knowledge and basically decided to usurp the authority of a democracy."

Slashdot Top Deals

Is it possible that software is not like anything else, that it is meant to be discarded: that the whole point is to always see it as a soap bubble?

Working...