Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
Get HideMyAss! VPN, PC Mag's Top 10 VPNs of 2016 for 55% off for a Limited Time ×

Comment Re: Why not? (Score 1) 812

And nobody has yet explained how the recipient of a classified email could have prevented it from being sent.

When you have a clearance, you (at least contractors do, I suppose government types might be different) have to undergo "training" on how to handle classified information. One of the things that you're taught is how to deal with receiving classified material on an unapproved computer.

Bottom line (for contractors at least) is that basically you immediately disconnect from the Internet, immediately stop using the computer (but do not close any running programs or turn it off), and immediately contact security who will start making arrangements to deal with it. Failure to do so is essentially a crime. (Or at least I sure thought it was. Apparently it isn't, if you're a Clinton.)

Receiving classified information isn't itself a crime, but receiving it and then not doing anything about it is. Or, at least, that's what I've been taught every time I'm forced to retake the Security Clearance Refresher Training.

Comment Re:Trump Trolling (Score 1) 812

ie the DNC generating good speeches and endorsements

They are? Everything I've heard about the DNC is that it's been an absolute disaster, with Bernie supporters constantly interrupting speakers who are spending most of their time castigating Bernie supporters for not falling into line after the DNC rigged the nomination for Hillary Clinton, to the point where something like half the delegates walked out after her coronation. Er, nomination. Sure, we'll pretend it was a fair nomination.

All the while Clinton is swinging rapidly back to her pre-Bernie positions, proving that she'll say anything for votes but her real priorities are supporting her Wall Street backers.

I'm not sure why Trump bothered to comment since the DNC convention so far is proving to be a complete disaster compared to the RNC convention.

Comment Re:This is NOT a matter of trademark violation (Score 2) 214

Not necessarily. Take a look at the relevant portion of the Lantham Act. It would have to fit one of the provisions therein. It might make a false suggestion of affiliation, but it's arguable.

15 U.S.C. 1125 - False designations of origin, false descriptions, and dilution forbidden

(a) Civil action

(1) Any person who, on or in connection with any goods or services, or any container for goods, uses in commerce any word, term, name, symbol, or device, or any combination thereof, or any false designation of origin, false or misleading description of fact, or false or misleading representation of fact, which

(A) is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive as to the affiliation, connection, or association of such person with another person, or as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of his or her goods, services, or commercial activities by another person, or

(B) in commercial advertising or promotion, misrepresents the nature, characteristics, qualities, or geographic origin of his or her or another person's goods, services, or commercial activities,

shall be liable in a civil action by any person who believes that he or she is or is likely to be damaged by such act.

Comment Why take amortgage to see a film in a crap theater (Score -1, Offtopic) 221

Making decent movies with talented actors that look really good on the big screen instead of computer generated pap might be a start to getting folks back into theaters. That and maybe an experience that doesn't set a family back $150.

How is Adam Sandler still making movies? How many times do we need to see Eddy Murphy in a fat suite? How many times will Pixar put out a computer generated fish film or some studio regurgitating a comic book through a stack of Silicon Graphics machines?

When I was growing up we as a family would see a film every week or maybe two weeks. But we didn't have to take out a mortgage to do so. I'm just not paying theater prices to see sketchy Hollywood pap on a screen only a little bigger than one I can buy at Costco.

Comment Re:Not running Windows 10 seems like a total fix (Score 1) 292

It is more resource efficient than Windows 7/8. Works better on low end systems.

Not for me it doesn't. I have upgraded two of my computers to Windows 10, and in both cases it is perceptively slower. In the case of my test system - a real low-end computer - I have taken a substantial performance cut since upgrading. I had been using the starter edition of Windows 7, and I upgraded it to 10 to lose the artificial restriction to 2GB of RAM. Yay! Now I can access all 4GB. But, boo! Not only does it run slower, but my computer fan runs more often as the CPU seems to idle at a higher percentage. This was done on a fresh install too.

The other computer (my work system) was a more modern, faster system. While the performance drop is far less pronounced, it is still noticeable. I upgraded the rest of our office and quite a number of people have complained how slow it seems.

I simply cannot understand why people claim that it is more efficient than previous versions of Windows - especially when compared to Windows 7. The most obvious slowness comes from the new don't-call-me-Metro user interface elements. It simply takes longer to display the new UI like menus and dialogs than the traditional ones. For example, it takes half the time for me to launch my old shareware spreadsheet Spread32 than it does to launch the new-look Windows calculator. The windows pop up in the same time, but it takes an extra second or so to display the buttons on the calc. And I no longer launch the calculator with a keyboard shortcut because 1) it is hard to set up as the tile no longer has the ability to set the shortcut (I had to create my own shortcut to calc.exe to make it work), and 2) it takes an extra two seconds to the launch time on my system when using the shortcut compared to clicking on a tile. This means it takes nearly 5.5 seconds to launch the calculator app via a keyboard shortcut. It is faster on my work computer, but it shows that Windows 10 does not run better on low-end systems.

You might think that it's just my slow computer to blame, but it never had this problem when it ran Windows 7 using half the memory.

Comment This is NOT a matter of trademark violation (Score 1) 214

You violate a trademark if you mis-represent a good or service as that of the trademark holder. And it has to be in the same trademark category that they registered. Having a trademark does not grant ownership of a word, and does not prevent anyone else from using that word. Use of a trademark in reporting and normal discussion is not a violation.

Comment Re:Teams (Score 1) 214

There's only one sane way for companies to respond: by continuing to post about the Ol****cs, but avoid using any of their trademarked terminology. For example, they could censor it (eg. Ol****c G***s), or even better, use hashtag #LameGames reflecting the way they are running things.

And if they sue, countersue. Try for at least a ten-figure payout.

Comment Re:The basest, vilest (Score 4, Informative) 812

Wrong. They recovered some of her emails, but not all of them. Some of the emails they were able to recover from the official servers, but an unknown quantity of emails were never recovered. To quote from Comey himself:

It is also likely that there are other work-related e-mails that they did not produce to State and that we did not find elsewhere, and that are now gone because they deleted all e-mails they did not return to State, and the lawyers cleaned their devices in such a way as to preclude complete forensic recovery.

The bottom line is that we'll never know just how bad Clinton's handling of email was, unless someone (like Russia) comes forward with the emails they copied off her insecure server during the time it was running.

Comment Re:Why? (Score 1) 79

Easy answer:

Some of those fjords are 200+ meters deep at the narrowest points near the outlet, i.e. where you would want to build a bridge/tunnel/submerged tube.

We already use tunnel crossings underneath a lot of shallower crossings, and several not so shallow, like the one about half an hour south of Oslo, near Drøbak:

The tunnel is 7-8 km long even though the fjord is less than a km wide at that point, the extra distance was required in order to keep the incline at or below the (highway) maximum allowable 7%. The problem is that 3+ km of 7% downhill (requiring a lot of braking for a heavy rig) and then 3+ km of steep uphill is sufficient to cause trailer breakdowns more or less every week. We also get truck/bus fires inside tunnels almost every year here in Norway.

I am currently in the Hvaler archipelago on the south-east corner of Norway, a few km from the Swedish border. The main/only road leading to the largest of the many islands is nearly 4 km long and still needed 10% descent/ascent angles to get deep enough.

This is dangerous enough to force the entire tunnel to close down whenever a truck with dangerous/inflammable cargo (i.e. gasoline/LPG/diesel) needs to pass through.

Comment Re:74 at time of crash (Score 5, Informative) 569

Apparently brakes were not applied. They believe it was a combination of the trailer being a solid light gray color that tended to visually blend in with the sky, coupled with the radar being designed to ignore large flat signs that cross above the road. So the trailer managed to be filtered out as an hazard and was ignored by the software.

Slashdot Top Deals

"All the people are so happy now, their heads are caving in. I'm glad they are a snowman with protective rubber skin" -- They Might Be Giants