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

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Shooting the messenger (Score 1) 55

by Gravis Zero (#65967260) Attached to: Experian's Tech Chief Defends Credit Scores: 'We're Not Palantir'

There are those of you who think that every breach is preventable and that the companies that got breached should be punished.

Not exactly. I'm of the mind that if you willfully retain information on individuals then you should be legally responsible for properly controlling it. If you lose control of the information then you are liable. This is not a punishment it is a safeguard against chronic under-investment in security. If a company know that losing control of personal information they gathered could ruin them then one of three things will occur:

1. They will no longer retain more information then absolutely necessary.
2. They will do absolutely everything in their power to ensure that information is kept secure.
3. They will eventually go out of business for taking insufficient care of personal information.

The net result of this is that the pipeline of private information being pumped into the black market will be drastically reduced.

There are those of you who think that every business deal that turns out to be a bad deal, could have been foreseen if proper due diligence was followed.

No, I fully understand that it can happen to many businesses and that is a risk. However, when your business is personal information, then that changes things radically. The number of safeguards that are in place need to be radically increased and mandatory security audits should be part of the process.

Maybe one day you'll actually be in a position to be in the wrong end of such a deal, and you'll find out that it's a lot harder than it looks.

It's not harder than it looks, it's more expensive than the alternative which is why it's not done. This is turn is why holding personal information should come with a financial risk.

Right now, security isn't even a high priority to companies and that is why companies are regularly breached.

Submission + - Truth hurts: Prosocial liars perceived as more moral, study finds (phys.org) 1

Submitted by alternative_right
alternative_right writes: It turned out that people who resorted to prosocial lies (those intended to spare someone distress) were evaluated as more moral than those who told the truth directly. "Prosocial liars" who provided overly optimistic feedback, were perceived positively, likely because they demonstrated sensitivity to the needs of the other party.

Comment Re:Finally. (Score 1) 28

by Gravis Zero (#65957906) Attached to: 'Hundreds' of Gatik Robot Delivery Trucks Headed For US Roads

I have no idea how the idiots decided to focus on consumer cars that go everywhere.

That's actually a very simple question: there is far less risk involved. The bigger problem with driving is pedestrians. It may seem easy to not hit people but that's not the case. Having an autonomous car hit someone at low speed is a serious problem for a company. Have an loaded truck/bus hit someone at low speed is typically fatal and a surefire way to get your vehicles banned.

In sum, the problem is not navigating the route, it's doing it without killing people and trucks/busses are far more likely to kill people.

Comment It must be FUBAR'd (Score 2) 17

by Gravis Zero (#65957880) Attached to: Nvidia GeForce NOW Is Now Available Natively On Linux

With GeForce NOW's Ultimate tier is where you are running on GeForce RTX 5080 GPU servers with support for up to 5K @ 120 FPS gaming or 1080p @ 360 FPS with up to eight hour gaming sessions in length.

I don't know about you but there sure reads like it's a highly unstable software that cannot run longer than a few hours before it crashes.

Comment Re:Shooting the messenger (Score 1) 55

by Gravis Zero (#65955692) Attached to: Experian's Tech Chief Defends Credit Scores: 'We're Not Palantir'

So, you cite a bunch of stores about criminals stealing from Experian, as evidence of negligence.

You should read them.

"Experian — one of the three national U.S. credit bureaus — reportedly sold SSNs through its subsidiary, Court Ventures, to the operators of SuperGet.info who then offered all of the information online for a price. The website would advertise having '99% to 100% of all USA' in their database on websites frequented by carders. Hieu Minh Ngo, the website owner, was recently been indicted for 15-counts filed under seal in November 2012, charging him with conspiracy to commit wire fraud, substantive wire fraud, conspiracy to commit identity fraud, substantive identity fraud, aggravated identity theft, conspiracy to commit access device fraud, and substantive access device fraud."

If you don't think that's negligent then you're a fucking idiot.

Comment Stupid. (Score 1) 18

by Gravis Zero (#65955626) Attached to: Software Company Bonds Drop As Investors' AI Worries Mount

"Software multiples have compressed amid uncertainty around whether incumbents can defend pricing power and sustain growth in an AI-first work-flow environment," wrote Bruce Richards

"AI-first" isn't even viable as Majority of CEOs Report Zero Payoff From AI Splurge and while some CEOs Say AI is Making Work More Efficient. Employees Tell a Different Story.

I think they investments are being moved over to AI because they are running out of funds to prop it up in hopes that it will be successful.

Comment Re:Shooting the messenger (Score 1) 55

by Gravis Zero (#65955618) Attached to: Experian's Tech Chief Defends Credit Scores: 'We're Not Palantir'

If Experian was negligent, then they would indeed share in the blame.

Experian is synonymous with negligence.

https://yro.slashdot.org/story...
https://it.slashdot.org/story/...
https://yro.slashdot.org/story...
https://it.slashdot.org/story/...
https://yro.slashdot.org/story...
https://it.slashdot.org/story/...
https://news.slashdot.org/stor...

I would say that the thief is the perpetrator, not Experian.

If it were a single mistake, maybe but it happens so often that it is a pattern of behavior.

Negligence is not being alleged in this article.

Of course not, that would make Experian look bad.

Submission + - Extremophile Molds Are Invading Art Museums (scientificamerican.com)

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes: Last summer I polled the great art houses of Europe with a seemingly straightforward question: Had they had any recent experiences with mold in their collections? Mold is a perennial scourge in museums that can disfigure and destroy art and artifacts. To keep this microbial foe in check, institutions follow protocols designed to deter the familiar fungi that thrive in humid settings. But it seems a new front has opened in this long-standing battle. I’d recently heard rumblings that curators in my then home base of Denmark have been wrestling with perplexing infestations that seem to defy the normal rules of engagement. I wondered how pervasive the problem might be.

My survey did not make me popular. Some museums responded quickly—too quickly, perhaps, to have checked with their curators. Ten minutes after receiving my inquiry, the press office at the Uffizi Gallery in Florence assured me unequivocally that there was no mold at the Uffizi. The museum declined to connect me with the curatorial team or restoration department. Many institutions—the Louvre, the British Museum, the Musée d’Orsay—didn’t respond to my calls and e-mails at all. I eventually came to suspect the Vatican Museum had blocked my number. Frustrating though it was, this is the reception I expected. Asking a curator if their museum has problems with mold is like asking if they have a sexually transmitted disease. It’s contagious, it’s taboo, and it carries the inevitable implication someone has done something naughty.

Consequently, mold is spoken of in whispers in the museum world. Curators fear that even rumors of an infestation can hurt their institution’s funding and blacklist them from traveling exhibitions. When an infestation does occur, it’s generally kept secret. The contract conservation teams that museums hire to remediate invasive mold often must vow confidentiality before they’re even allowed to see the damage. But a handful of researchers, from in-house conservators to university mycologists, are beginning to compare notes about the fungal infestations they’ve tackled in museum storage depots, monastery archives, crypts and cathedrals. A disquieting revelation has emerged from these discussions: there’s a class of molds that flourish in low humidity, long believed to be a sanctuary from decay. By trying so hard to protect artifacts, we’ve accidentally created the “perfect conditions for [these molds] to grow,” says Flavia Pinzari, a mycologist at the Council of National Research of Italy. “All the rules for conservation never considered these species.”

These molds—called xerophiles—can survive in dry, hostile environments such as volcano calderas and scorching deserts, and to the chagrin of curators across the world, they seem to have developed a taste for cultural heritage. They devour the organic material that abounds in museums—from fabric canvases and wood furniture to tapestries. They can also eke out a living on marble statues and stained-glass windows by eating micronutrients in the dust that accumulates on their surfaces. And global warming seems to be helping them spread. Most frustrating for curators, these xerophilic molds are undetectable by conventional means. But now, armed with new methods, several research teams are solving art history cold cases and explaining mysterious new infestations...

Slashdot Top Deals

Do you suffer painful elimination? -- Don Knuth, "Structured Programming with Gotos"

Close