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 IT Angle [Re:Clinton is above the law] (Score 1) 434

"However she is a politician not a IT expert." - She employed numerous IT experts, however, and certainly could be expected to know the implications.

Please elaborate on the IT side.

A home server versus AOL versus a "regular" gov't office email server NOT designed for classified info* doesn't make any LEGAL difference. The existing laws say nothing about server selection or ownership. The real issue is that none of the 3 listed were designed for classified info.

If somebody "put" classified info on ANY of them, a mistake is being made. As far as whose fault it is, well, that's an administrative/authority issue and NOT an IT issue.

* The "other" office system that was for classified info is generally not considered to be "email".

Comment Re:Slop Sampling [Re:Clinton is above the law] (Score 1) 434

deleting emails after the authorities have started an investigation on you, claiming that they had nothing to do with the case,

She was asked to turn over "work related" emails. She was NOT OBLIGATED to turn over non-rework-related emails (at least not at that time).

Missing some due to imperfect review is usually NOT a federal crime except in extreme circumstances.

Most people would miss some also if they reviewed them themselves. Jurors would know this. If you have perfect eyes, well, you are a minority.

I agree and she agreed it was poor practice to use a private/personal email service, but it was NOT illegal. That's why Colin did it also.

The FBI did uncover some of those originally excluded from the "work pile" by unstated means. NONE had anything suspicious, and appeared to show that the (Hillary's) lawyers reading them didn't bother reading the whole email before categorizing them.

Comment Re:"Knowingly" [Re:Double Standard] (Score 1) 434

We don't know Lerner's side of the story. She choose the 5th. There have been many times where people have come to me about apparent contradictions in my IT/work-related statements, and there are perfectly valid explanations. Often because English is vague or I used a slightly wrong or poorly chosen word to describe something.

And those apparent contradictions are not directly related to biased filtering for exemption requests, but merely "side" administrative issue.

Also note this from the link: "We gave the IRS the weekend to provide a response. A spokeswoman said the agency was not able to offer an explanation for Lerner's remarks in time for our deadline."

A weekend for bigass gov't agency to answer questions? About as realistic as a quiet toddler.

Note also the reader comments:

"...seem at least to have read the TIGTA report, but you seem to be disingenuous in your attacks on Lois Lerner, at least with respect to "doubling" of 501(c)(4) applications. She seems to have taken her figures from the TIGTA report itself, which, as you give the report credence, you should allow her to do also. The chart in the report tells us that applications doubled in the time period. Yes this is a fiscal year chart, but isn't Lois Lerner allowed to think and speak in terms of fiscal years?"

Thanks for the link, though, I appreciate it, partisan angst aside.

Comment Meddling [Re:SJW] (Score 3, Insightful) 191

It may be a matter of not sticking ones nose in another country's business: fix our own backyard first.

Meddling in the Middle East just seems to make things worse. If they wanna be medieval and keep resisting modernization, there should come a point where we give up trying to modernize them and instead focus on issues closer to home.

Comment Re:Double Standard (Score 2) 434

But those tea party groups were still waiting, some are [still waiting]

Probably because they are dodgy: they claim to be a non-political organization in order to get tax breaks, when in fact they ARE political orgs playing games to hide their political angle.

If they are non-political, why are you even calling them "tea party groups"?

Comment Hanlon's Razor [Re:"Knowingly" [Re:Double Stan (Score 1) 434

There's no evidence she knowingly did such. There are things that perhaps she should have been more curious about in terms of the secrecy, but this is a grey area.

It's fair to apply Hanlon's Razor at this stage. Hillary didn't pause to smell the paperclips.

And there should have been an active review board at State Department rather rely on employees to police themselves. A good many mistakes I see at work are institutional: if you don't have good processes in place, human laziness and bias does its magic.

Slashdot Top Deals

Our business is run on trust. We trust you will pay in advance.