Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


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

Comment Re:So, let me get this straight... (Score 1) 156

I have a fantasy in which Liam Neeson gets a robo call and proceeds to dispense vigilante justice (and fire) worldwide.

I don't know who you are. I don't know what you want. If you are looking for a sucker, I can tell you I don't have money. But what I do have are a very particular set of skills; skills I have acquired over a very long career. Skills that make me a nightmare for people like you. If you take me off your list, that'll be the end of it. I will not look for you, I will not pursue you. But if you don't, I will look for you, I will find you, and I will kill you.

Comment Re: Equal amounts? (Score 1) 333

Assange never claimed to be objective, but as a purported newsman he doesn't need to. News organizations all over the world have taken an opinion in this race. Assange isn't pro-Trump; he's just anti-Clinton. As am I.

WikiLeaks was founded under the premise of exposing secret/leaked/classified information, as a non-profit. They have unpaid volunteers and pro bono lawyers. They operate on donated money. I think that people donating their time and money have a reasonable expectation for WikiLeaks to be at least somewhat impartial in their activities. I do have a problem with a political agenda emerging after WikiLeaks portrayed themselves for so long as politically agnostic. I think a lot of people who once rooted for Wikileaks do.

Do I think attacking the Hillary campaign is wrong? Not particularly. Especially if the information is being dropped right in their lap. I do expect them to release whatever damning information they receive. What I don't expect is for them to pick favorites. They can't even be bothered to make a token effort to find something on Trump.

Take the EFF. If they started showing partiality towards certain internet providers, certain media groups, certain tech companies, I would have an issue with that. If they gave Google a free pass on a major pirvacy goof, I would be concerned. They have a stated purpose, and I expect them to live up to it.

Comment Re:Equal amounts? (Score 1) 333

What do you propose? Should Wikileaks hold off on Clinton until they have an equal amount on Trump?

I don't know, maybe post anything at all about Trump?
Offer a bounty on his tax returns?

At this point, it seems like Assange is just trying to solidify a relationship with the Republican party in order to get the US off his back.
I'm interested in a Wikileaks that posts about all abuses and corruption in my government.
Not just the ones that help Assange meet his agenda.

Comment Re:Guessing the real story here (Score 1) 90

If I were Yahoo, and my reputation was damaged from this, and I had received a government FISA order that I couldn't talk about, then I would do exactly this same thing. I see this as similar to a canary

Well, that would be similar to a canary if they had done it when it happened, before their reputation was damaged. Now, the damage is done, and they're just looking for someone else to take the blame for them, as opposed to trying to expose unreasonable surveillance.

Comment Re:Cost? (Score 2) 228

even if the catalyst wasn't poisoned, a biofilm would clog those activity sites in an open body of water.

Intuition tells me that ethanol should destroy the biofilm. Research tells me otherwise. It actually seems to encourage it.

However, as hankwang mentioned, bacteria doesn't do so well in elecrolyzed water.

Algae might not be safe either:

Comment Re:Good and bad exposures (Score 1) 475

Julian Assange was a hero too [], as long as his exposures harmed Bushitler. But then things started to get weird. First, Wikileaks published a few bits about WMDs found in Iraq [] after all, leading to questions of whether Bush really "lied". That was still forgivable, because the found caches weren't "massive" [].

But now that his releases harm a Democrat, his words are, as the very first post here claims, "bullshit" and he is not to be believed. One can really be forgiven for suspecting, people call the same acts different names depending on whether they are useful or harmful to Democrats.

Maybe Assange tried to barter with or blackmail Hillary to get the US to back off and leave him alone. And maybe that failed, so he is forced to double down on Trump. Either way, god help Assange when Hillary is elected.

Comment Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? (Score 1) 269

The one-sided nature of the leaks suggests that either Wikieaks has an agenda, or it is the willing accomplice of someone who has an agenda.

Like Assange?

The US has been after him for years, all under Obama's administration.

Suppose Assange has appealed to Obama for leniency. Obviously, leniency hasn't happened.

Now suppose Assange approaches Hillary. And for whatever reason, she doesn't want to deal. Maybe she doesn't want to be tarnished by a relationship with Assange/Wikileaks coming out. Maybe Assange tried to blackmail her or force a deal, threatening to leak information if Hillary doesn't call off the hounds when she gets in.

Whatever reason Assange has for alienating Hillary, he may have an opportunity with Trump. Trump might throw him a bone for his hard work.

And having made Hillary into an enemy, Assange really doesn't want to see her elected.

Comment not aware of patient harm? (Score 4, Insightful) 66

Theranos later voided all results from its proprietary device for 2014 and 2015, though the company said it wasn't aware of any patient harm resulting form its tests.

They're just about inviting lawsuits with that gem. I hadn't thought about the patient harm aspect until I read that quote, only the fraud aspect. Once people realize that their misdiagnosis stemming from a false test result is what landed them in the hospital or prevented treatment of a disease, Theranos won't even need a clean up crew.

Comment Re:Stop treating this like it were binary (Score 2) 332

I'm no cop apologist, (often quite the opposite), but I wonder -
On one hand, you have bad cops - and "good" cops who don't turn the bad cops, and are corrupted by that and are therefore "good" instead of good.

On the other hand, you have any other job, where there is a balancing act of "getting the job done" and weeding out bad behavior. You have to get the job done, and you can only police your coworkers to a certain extent. You can report bad behavior, but it erodes your environment. Without higher level support, you are open to retaliation from coworkers (or even from higher ups). If you do not report the behavior, you are, in a way, complicit in it. But if you do report it, it may be near impossible to have an effective working arrangement to get the job done at all.

Not saying that makes it okay. But with body cams, it helps take the onus off the "good" cops to turn in their coworkers.

Comment Re:Selection very limited in the US (Score 1) 48

A contract is a contract. They agreed to it, they need to follow through until the contract is fulfilled.

I think this is important to keep in mind. If a small publisher had negotiated poorly with Amazon and wanted out of a contract, would Amazon let them off the hook?

Amazon is trying to leverage their way out of the situation. They have removed some of the publishers' content from the service, which will probably lower their costs for the rest of the contract. But it also sends a message, "Well, look at how much exposure we give you. It would be a shame if we had to cut back on it."

Comment Re:Does this even need defending now? (Score 1) 198

The argument FOR backdoors have crumbled, so is it really necessary at this point to defend encryption?

Every day there is another call from this or that government to backdoor or ban encryption. Often it is made with the claim that it will prevent terrorism. There are few voices supporting encryption. If Apple can make it fashionable, by all means, let us not dissuade them.

Comment Re:Wherever data is collected, it is abused (Score 1) 185

There are plenty of male prostitutes. They hook up with men more often than women. They are rarely portrayed as being awesome.

Perhaps the line to draw is between people who are empowered and in a position to choose whether or not to prostitute, and those who lack better options. It's one thing to say "I can do this thing I enjoy and get paid for it", verses "I have to do this thing whether or not I enjoy it." I guess that applies to most lines of work in a way, but prostitutes can't collect unemployment, disability insurance, and maternity leave.

Slashdot Top Deals

Despite all appearances, your boss is a thinking, feeling, human being.