Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



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

Comment so you don't have internet access already? (Score 1) 141

if you are already paying for internet access to.... you know... ACCESS THE INTERNET, like for instance to post on slashdot, then you cannot say it is a cost of Netflix or other online television subscription. you are already paying for internet access anyways, so netflix is only costing a whopping $7.99/mo

given the amount of content available on netflix as compared to whatever tiny handful of channels you get from your antennae, i'd say that's a $7.99/mo well spent

Comment Re:Raspberry Pi (Score 4, Insightful) 485

OK, my comment was too short for many people to grasp the point, for which I apologise (my wife had just yelled "Lunch!").

I was trying to suggest that as big manufacturers attempt to lock down their platforms, there will be an increasing need for those interested in software openness to create their own platforms which don't have this problem. When I wrote "like the Raspberry Pi" I didn't necessarily mean like it in power (although my Pi3 is capable of a lot of useful stuff) but like it in being produced by a manufacturer with a strong interest in it being readily programmable.

Comment Wouldn't they have said something? (Score 5, Funny) 142

Surely, if a fire started as described (in the cockpit, right next to the pilots) the voice recording would contain utterances like "Bloody hell, my phone's caught fire!" or "Hand me that extinguisher we've got a burning iPad" or similar (and in Arabic obviously). Does anyone know if this is the case?

Submission + - Tinder and Grindr dating apps linked to more than 500 UK crimes (mirror.co.uk)

schwit1 writes: Data compiled by almost three-quarters of police forces across England and Wales listed 523 crimes from the past five years where official logs included the words Tinder or Grindr.

It comes after serial killer Stephen Port was jailed last month for the murders of four young men, including Daniel Whitworth, he met on gay websites and apps including Grindr. Lib Dem leader Tim Farron warned: “I worry that these shocking figures could just be the tip of the iceberg.”

Submission + - Firefox 52 Borrows One More Privacy Feature from the Tor Browser (bleepingcomputer.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Mozilla engineers have added a mechanism to Firefox 52 that prevents websites from fingerprinting users using system fonts. The user privacy protection system was borrowed from the Tor Browser, where a similar mechanism blocks websites from identifying users based on the fonts installed on their computers, only returning a list of "default fonts" per each OS.

While sabotaging system font queries won't stop user fingerprinting as a whole, this is just one of the latest privacy-related updates Mozilla has added to Firefox, taken from Tor. Back in July 2016, Mozilla engineers started the Tor Uplift project, which aims to improve Firefox's privacy features with the ones present in the Tor Browser.

Submission + - Robot lie detector being tested by Canada (phys.org)

schwit1 writes: What could possibly go wrong? Canada’s border police are currently testing a robot lie-detector that would be used to screen travelers and flag those whose answers it doesn’t like.

AVATAR is a kiosk, much like an airport check-in or grocery store self-checkout kiosk,” said San Diego State University management information systems professor Aaron Elkins. “However, this kiosk has a face on the screen that asks questions of travelers and can detect changes in physiology and behavior during the interview. The system can detect changes in the eyes, voice, gestures and posture to determine potential risk. It can even tell when you’re curling your toes.”

Here’s how it would work: Passengers would step up to the kiosk and be asked a series of questions such as, “Do you have fruits or vegetables in your luggage?” or “Are you carrying any weapons with you?” Eye-detection software and motion and pressure sensors would monitor the passengers as they answer the questions, looking for tell-tale physiological signs of lying or discomfort. The kiosk would also ask a series of innocuous questions to establish baseline measurements so people are just nervous about flying, for example, wouldn’t be unduly singled out.

Once the kiosk detected deception, they would flag those passengers for further scrutiny from human agents.

This Elkins guy fits perfectly the 1960s stereotype of the scientist who is so caught up with the coolness of his invention that he is completely oblivious to its moral and ethical short-comings. Sadly, he appears to be finding lots of governments interested in buying his product.

Submission + - GRIZZLY STEPPE: Technical report on DNC hack (nymag.com)

schwit1 writes: Following weeks of accusations and insinuations — and counterclaims and skepticism — about the role of the Russian government in this summer’s hack of the Democratic National Committee’s email (an attack given the evocative name “GRIZZLY STEPPE” by the Department of Homeland Security) a new joint report was published today by the DHS and FBI. The question is, does the new report actually clear anything up?

Submission + - Facebook Buys Data From Third-Party Brokers To Fill In User Profiles (ibtimes.com)

An anonymous reader writes: According to a report from ProPublica, the world’s largest social network knows far more about its users than just what they do online. What Facebook can’t glean from a user’s activity, it’s getting from third-party data brokers. ProPublica found the social network is purchasing additional information including personal income, where a person eats out and how many credit cards they keep. That data all comes separate from the unique identifiers that Facebook generates for its users based on interests and online behavior. A separate investigation by ProPublica in which the publication asked users to report categories of interest Facebook assigned to them generated more than 52,000 attributes. The data Facebook pays for from other brokers to round out user profiles isn’t disclosed by the company beyond a note that it gets information “from a few different sources.” Those sources, according to ProPublica, come from commercial data brokers who have access to information about people that isn’t linked directly to online behavior. The social network doesn’t disclose those sources because the information isn’t collected by Facebook and is publicly available. Facebook does provide a page in its help center that details how to get removed from the lists held by third-party data brokers. However, the process isn’t particularly easy. In the case of the Oracle-owned Datalogix, users who want off the list have to send a written request and a copy of a government-issued identification in the mail to Oracle’s chief privacy officer. Another data collecting service, Acxiom, requires users provide the last four digits of their social security number to see the information the company has gathered about them.
Businesses

Qualcomm Fined $865 Million By South Korean Antitrust Regulator (zdnet.com) 14

South Korea's antitrust regulator has fined Qualcomm $854 million for what it called unfair business practices in patent licensing and modem chip sales, a decision the U.S. chipmaker said it will challenge in court. From a report on ZDNet: Qualcomm's business model includes collecting royalty payments from clients, which are calculated on the price of the handset using the chip, rather than the price of the chipset itself, and royalties from its patents. The KFTC has said it will issue a corrective order specifying the precise business practices with which it took issue, although Qualcomm has pointed out that this usually takes between four and six months. "Qualcomm strongly believes that the KFTC findings are inconsistent with the facts, disregard the economic realities of the marketplace, and misapply fundamental tenets of competition law," Don Rosenberg, executive vice president and general counsel for Qualcomm, said in response to the fine.

Comment Re:Good legal argument, but not a bonafide sale (Score 1) 163

Buying a DVD does give you rights to format-shift from DVD to something else. So VidAngel is selling the DVD to people, and format-shifting it to digital for people, and then delivering it to them. The end-user has the option to take physical delivery of the DVD, have VidAngel store it forever, or sell it back as a 'used' copy for slightly cheaper.

Not according to this. Granted, it's just a year-old article on a tech site, but according to them, the DMCA forbids consumers from decrypting discs to format shift. Stupid? I think so, but unless the courts change their mind, VidAngel is headed for a world of hurt.

Comment Re:More info needed (Score 1) 163

As much as I hate it, ripping for personal use is illegal under the DMCA (anti-circumvention). Ripping for the content editing I think is explicitly separately allowed, but I'm not sure if that's what makes it legal for them. They may be playing the physical disc with an EDL - I don't actually know.

As much as I hate to say it, you are correct (at least as of October of 2015). The legal wrangling came to the conclusion that because CDs were never encrypted, consumers can format-shift. But DVDs and Bly rays? Not so much. However, it seems to me that given the vast number of people that do this "under the radar" it can't be long before an "exemption" is granted to bring this in line with Fair Use.

Comment Re:so? this is NOT censorship (Score 1) 163

Filmmakers don't have the right to force you to keep your eyes open for every second of their film. But they do have the right to control how someone distributes a copy of their work. Because copyright, dammit.

I think this will be the salient point of the legal argument. Is VidAngel a distributor? Or are they only reselling discs with filters and letting the consumer apply them as they please?

Yes, the copyright-holders altered their own work. Which they could do. Because they held the copyright. Someone else who wants to do that needs to get permission from the copyright-holder.

Copyright, in part, protects an artist's expression from tampering by others. But they're free to "tamper" with it themselves, because it's their expression.

The only gotcha to this argument is the Family Movie Viewing Act, which is part of the Copyright act, specifically allows a person in their own home modify movies without consent of the copyright holder. VidAngel is arguing that this is exactly what is going on with their service. They provide the movie (unaltered), the filter and let the viewer apply said filter how they wish in their own home. Frankly, I hope VidAngel wins if only so that media producers run into some kind of limit to their seemingly unending power over the consumer.

Slashdot Top Deals

The first sign of maturity is the discovery that the volume knob also turns to the left.

Working...