Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Compare cell phone plans using Wirefly's innovative plan comparison tool ×

Comment Re:Would they believe (Score 1) 324

Seems sad the govt assumes everyone has one or more of these accounts.

Just 8 short years ago, I was doing computer security inspections/reviews for US govt. agencies. We were told NOT to have such accounts as they are possible security holes. After all, if the bad guys know everything about you, you're easier to hack and or manipulate.

Comment Re:What event? (Score 1) 486

The worst confidential info "scandal" was when she gave the order to send talking points for the day...

So, you either don't actually know what SAP material is (in which case you're being willfully ignorant on this topic and should stop expressing opinions until you read up on it), or you DO know, and you're just being another liar in the service of a liar.

Comment Re:How hard is it to find emails? (Score 1) 486

Yeah, because the FBI knows nothing about gathering information, amirite?

The FBI can only gather what's given to them, or what can be forensically recovered. If she blew away 30,000 emails, and they've got under 20,000 of them to look at, there's some they couldn't get. It's not really very complicated.

Comment Re:What event? (Score 2) 486

seriously. What event? Aside from the scandal itself what, exactly, did Hilary do that was a) a criminal offense and b) revealed in the emails?

The emails revealed that she was incredibly reckless in handling classified information - some of it SAP-level stuff so sensitive that it can't even be talked about when it's 100% redacted, content-wise. People lose their careers and their liberty over such carelessness. And we're now seeing evidence of pervasive corruption as her family was enriched while their family business sold access to her while she was in office. So, you're either simply not paying attention or (more likely) you know all of this and are a Shillary.

While I'm on it, which is it? Is she a fool who couldn't run an email server or a Machiavellian genius who successfully evaded the FBI and an entire political party's attempts to bring her to justice?

False dichotomy.

She's had a long career of throwing underlings under the bus or having her party cover for Clinton Machine mis-steps. So yes, incompetence (but mostly arrogance). And no, she hasn't evaded the FBI or congress ... she's still hip deep in the mess she created.

Comment Re:How hard is it to find emails? (Score 5, Informative) 486

Her team did not "delete" emails -- that is a deliberately misleading term.

Yes, they did delete them. They even SAID they deleted them. That the server that had contained them had had all of its contents destroyed once they were done picking out the stuff that was work related.

What *actually* happened is they used discovery software to filter emails based on keywords.

But the lie she told was that her lawyers read each and every email. She knew that wasn't true, and so was lying. But that's OK, because her supporters know she lies to them, and they like being lied to.

People should really appreciate the amount of effort the FBI put into looking for malfeasance.

People should also recognize that they FBI could only look for corruption (and worse) within the material they had available. Clinton did not provide all of the requested material. She said she did, but that was another lie. Not an oversight, but a lie. Because we're not talking about "oops, a couple of emails you should have seen slipped through the cracks" - but "oops, thousands and thousands of emails you should have seen in that pile I printed out without header info were deleted."

In short: this fantasy that Hillary attempted to delete evidence is completely without basis

Other than the part where, you know, her records were deleted after her team put on a show of pulling out what they thought would make the appearance of complying with her requirements ... years after she was supposed to have turned ALL of it over to State so their archivists could make the distinction between personal and work-related records from her deliberately co-mingled collection.

What she *has* done is tried to *misrepresent*, the most egregious being her assertion that Comey agrees with her.

That was egregious, but it's hardly the worst of it. She knowingly, willingly, and repeatedly lied about her motivations and actions, and deliberately slow-walked and stonewalled at every turn. The fact that she'd whip up yet another lie to make it sound like the FBI's very clear identification of her multiple "untruths" on the matter is only egregious because it shows that she's still willing to lie even when she knows that we all know she's doing it. None of that matters, of course. Her supporters like that she lies, and none of that is legally meaningful. What IS legally meaningful is her testimony in front of congress. She spent long hours carefully avoiding direct answers to questions to she wouldn't perjure herself. We'll see if she's still as slippery on that front as her reputation suggests.

Separate from all of that, of course, is the actual content of the messages now being read. They exhibit a very clear pattern of tying access to her and her policy influence to being willing to dump piles of cash into her family business while she was in office. Legal jeopardy there? Hard to say. That would once again be Loretta Lynch's call, and we already know where she stands.

Comment Appraisals (Score 4, Interesting) 486

The people at State who have to appraise this material are the ones she was supposed to turn ALL of her co-mingled material over to on the day she left office. State's archivists are the ones who are supposed to weed through and figure out what's personal and what's not when someone in her role chooses to make everything personal. If she'd actually followed the rules and delivered all of it to them years ago as she was supposed to, she could have spent a solid year or two talking down all of the conflicts of interest and signs of corruption between her family business and access to her and her power as SoS and have Clinton-ed most of it into "the past" by now. She's got only herself to blame for deliberately ignoring her departure requirements, and then for slow-walking and hiding all of this stuff until it had to be pried out by the damn FBI and through suits pointing out FOIA shenanigans.

State will now say that it will take until next year to review this new material - plenty of time to stonewall and foot-drag past November. Her supporters are still running around claiming she hasn't once lied about any of this, and that nothing inappropriate to a private home-based mail server ever passed through her hands, despite the FBI pointing out the opposite.

Submission + - New Li-Ion battery with twice the capacity planned for release next year

lars_stefan_axelsson writes: MIT News reports that SolidEnergy, an MIT spinoff is preparing to release a new Li-Ion battery that provides double the energy density per weight and volume, compared to current batteries.

The battery uses a thin layer of lithium metal as the anode compared to the graphite which is used today. There is also a change to the electrolyte. The new battery can be manufactured using current process lines, and commercial release of batteries for smart phones is planned for early next year, with electric cars following in 2018.

So if this holds true, it's a pretty big step forward, in an industry that otherwise usually sees a couple of percent improvement per step otherwise.

Submission + - 18-Year-Old Random Number Generator Flaw Fixed In Libgcrypt, GnuPG (helpnetsecurity.com) 1

An anonymous reader writes: Researchers have discovered a “critical security problem” that affects all versions of the Libgcrypt cryptographic library and, therefore, all versions of the GnuPG (a.k.a. GPG) hybrid-encryption software. The bug has now been fixed, and he advises users of GnuPG-2 to update Libgcrypt to version 1.7.3, 1.6.6, or 1.5.6, and users of GnuPG-1 to upgrade to version 1.4.21.

Submission + - Internet Voting Leaves Out a Cornerstone of Democracy: The Secret Ballot

Presto Vivace writes: Maintaining the secrecy of ballots returned via the Internet is “technologically impossible,” according to a new report.

That’s according to a new report from Verified Voting, a group that advocates for transparency and accuracy in elections. ... A cornerstone of democracy, the secret ballot guards against voter coercion. But “because of current technical challenges and the unique challenge of running public elections, it is impossible to maintain the separation of voters’ identities from their votes when Internet voting is used,” concludes the report, which was written in collaboration with the Electronic Privacy Information Center and the anticorruption advocacy group Common Cause.

Comment Subject (Score 3, Interesting) 507

Honestly, yes. KDE was the first desktop environment I tried when I started dabbling around in Linux back in the late 90's. I continued to use KDE for several years into the 3.0 series because compared to Gnome it just felt more polished and capable. As a matter of fact I remember at some point one of the big Linux groups (may have been a branch of Red Hat) announced that they'd be adopting Gnome as their "official" platform and I immediately though "Well, that's the end of Linux as a desktop option, because Gnome sucks.".

Somewhere along the way though KDE did indeed stagnate, and Gnome and even XFCE started to feel just a little more put together. Eventually Gnome went a little off the rails too but thankfully Mint forked off Cinnamon and it is wonderful IMHO (though I did successfully use XFCE for a bit while Cinnamon was still stabilizing). I still will download and boot into some of the other DE's like KDE every now and then, but none of them feel right. Cinnamon on the other hand has manged to keep pace with technology and looks like not trying to upend the entire UI paradigm.

Unless it changes drastically though, I no longer have any interest in KDE - and my interest in Gnome is limited only to backporting the useful bits into Cinnamon.

Comment Re:Bullshit (Score 1) 365

Without a time machine we could go back and forth on this, but I'm quite confident that in a decade or so I'll be proven right on this, and you'll be about like the Cliff Stroll who in 1995 was writing about how the internet and online shopping would never take off:

http://thenextweb.com/shareabl...

Comment Re:An alternative gig (Score 1) 365

Some sort of autonomous Segway device or drone might come to the restaurant to pick up the food? It's a longer way off than driverless taxis.

Why would you think that? The "self driving" bit is the hard part. Once that's good to go adding in an electric box that opens and closes when provided a code (one for the restaurant to open with, one for a person to open to retrieve food) would be absolutely trivial.

Comment Re:Failed model (Score 1) 365

I'd wager that once Uber goes this route it won't be doing it with individuals providing their own car. It'll be a big fleet of cars owned by Uber that they rent out. That eliminates the need to share revenue with anyone else, and over the long haul the price of the car to them won't really be that big of a deal.

Slashdot Top Deals

This restaurant was advertising breakfast any time. So I ordered french toast in the renaissance. - Steven Wright, comedian

Working...