Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Is anyone surprised? (Score 1) 4

TFA doesn't mention a court order, so apparently they didn't even require one. They've done that repeatedly with people's iCloud data and their location data, so I'm not surprised. No idea why the fanbois seem to think that Apple gives a shit about their privacy, I've never seen any indication of it.

Comment Funny... (Score 1) 70

Funny that they list 'passkeys' as a proof of human. Peel it back and a passkey is like an ssh keypair. They *could* try to employ attestation to limit to 'blessed passkey vendors', but it's going to be a tough scenario at all.

If folks are determined to 'bot' it up, a pretty legitimate passkey can be part of that. It was never designed to serve the purpose of proving 'human' interaction.

Comment No mystery here (Score 2) 64

There's no mystery here. The officer alleged to have verified the decision wasn't doing their job. You can frame this any way you like...the officer is overworked and couldn't keep up with the number of applications they're supposed to verify, or the officer is lazy, or the officer is incompetent, or perhaps the scientist's name identified their ancestry and the officer is a racist.

In my opinion (backed by some experience) the most likely explanation is the department relies on the fact that many applicants who are rejected won't have the means to appeal a decision, and the spokesperson is simply lying when they claim AI isn't used to recommend or make a decision.

Comment Re: The new MAD? (Score 1) 298

Of course not, and the F-150 isn't the same truck as when it was introduced in 1975. It's still the same basic vehicle except now it's got power steering, you can't get it with a manual transmission, and it has air conditioning. Sure, the Patriot has had some improvements, especially a better radar system (which now needs gallium that China won't sell us), but it's still the same basic vehicle.

Comment Re:Propaganda - de-lied (Score 1) 298

Easy to shoot down, until you run out of interceptors and have to spend half an hour or more to reload while the next wave is incoming. Then there is the simple fact that if you're spending $8,000,000 (two THAAD missiles, which are fired in pairs) to shoot down a $100,000 missile that's a serious self-own. (Of course if you don't shoot it down you may lose your $500,000,000 radar set.)

Comment Re:Why? Please, why? There are so many excellent . (Score 1) 134

What "excellent film adaptation" are you talking about? There's one old animated adaptation, and that's is. There's also a movie that bears the same title, but it's apparently a coincidence: nothing except the title and names of some of main characters matches, thus I don't see how it could be relevant to Tolkien's books.

The first thing about adapting a book is reading it at least once, and Peter Jackson skipped that step.

Comment Re:Why is it relevant to point out it costs the sa (Score 2) 298

It's a car analogy, a hoary old tradition on SlashDot. It's also a rhetorical technique that author uses a lot to make costs relatable to the general public. In a different article he pointed out that a billion dollar radar installation was taken out by a Shahed drone that cost about what you'd pay for a used BMW.

Slashdot Top Deals

Interchangeable parts won't.

Working...