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


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Ah, but there is a good reason! (Score 1) 303

You should also try to read the treaty []. It's not a defence pact.

Sorry, it's not a treaty either. It's an agreement that doesn't obligate the parties to much of anything at all.

It's actually correct to call it a treaty. The link points to a memo, which supplement Ukraine's accession to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. To read the treaty would also cover reading the memos supplementing it. To link to a memo whose sole purpose is to supplement a treaty and use that particular word as the link's text content seems only logical to me.

But yes, it's just a collection of nice words that whole memo/treaty/agreement.

Comment Re:Missing context (Score 1) 106

How hard would it be for those releasing the information to make a few changes here and there to support their political ideology?

Extremely hard. Like AHuxley there pointed out, the emails are signed by domain keys and you and me, and everybody else, can validate the authenticity and integrity of every email that has the DKIM. To say that they would have forged an email in a way that still validates through a DKIM validator, WikiLeaks (or some other party) would've had to have stolen Google's and other domains' private DKIM keys. Mind you that these keys are *extremely* well protected, especially on Google's services.

That being said, to say that Podesta's emails have been forged, you would have to simultaneously argue that *every* email sent from e.g. Google's email servers are potentially forged or subject to forgery right now. If Google, for example, believed this to be true, they'd be changing their keys right now.

Submission + - WikiLeaks: Zuckerberg Got His Sheryl Sandberg-Arranged 'Play Date' With Podesta

theodp writes: In case you were worried that Sheryl Sandberg's request for a sit-down between Mark Zuckerberg and Clinton campaign manager John Podesta — so Zuck could "inform his understanding about effective political operations to advance public policy goals on social oriented objectives (like immigration, education or basic scientific research)" — fell on deaf ears, worry no more. WikiLeaks subsequently released a 2015-08-07 dated email from to with a subject line of "Thanks," which suggests Podesta came through on Sandberg's Make-A-Wish request for Zuckerberg: "John, I enjoyed spending time with you yesterday and our conversation gave me a lot to think about. Thanks for sharing your experiences with CAP and some of the choices you made as you put the organization together. I hope it's okay if I reach out as my thinking develops to get your ideas and reactions. If there are any other folks you think I should talk to, please let me know. Thanks again. I look forward to continuing our conversation. Mark". CAP apparently refers to the Center for American Progress (CAP), a 501(c)(3) nonprofit think tank which was founded by Podesta, and/or its "sister advocacy organization," the Center for American Progress Action Fund (CAP Action), a 501(c)(4) nonprofit, which allows it to devote more funds to lobbying. Several months after meeting with Podesta, on the day of his daughter's birth, Zuckerberg unveiled his and wife Priscilla's Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, a limited liability company ("we gain flexibility to execute our mission more effectively," explained Zuck) to be funded by Zuckerberg's $45B in Facebook stock, which may explain why Zuckerberg was so "hungry" for Podesta's advice.

Submission + - Clinton Foundation works with Big Pharma to keep the price of US AIDS drugs high (

Okian Warrior writes: A newly released Podesta E-mail explains how the Clinton Health Access Initiative (CHAI) works to keep the price of AIDS medicines high in the US. CHAI contracted with Big Pharma companies for AIDS drugs to be distributed in developing countries. In return, the group agreed to resist efforts to bring similarly lower cost and generic drugs to the US. The email is a reaction to "comments President Clinton made on lowering domestic AIDS drugs prices at the World AIDS day event":

[...]We have always told the drug companies that we would not pressure them and create a slippery slope where prices they negotiate with us for poor countries would inevitably lead to similar prices in rich countries.

[...] If we do try to do something in this area, we suggest that we approach the innovator companies that can currently sell products in the US with the idea of making donations to help clear the ADAP lists. For a variety of reasons, the companies will likely favor a donation approach rather than one that erodes prices across the board.

[...] I would guess that they would also likely favor a solution that involved their drugs rather than an approach that allowed generic drugs from India to flood the US market at low prices or one that set a precedent of waiving patent laws on drugs. ... We can go to war with the US drug companies if President Clinton would like to do so, but we would not suggest it.

Comment Re:So what? (Score 1) 437

Here in Europe companies, especially major ones, generally stay out of politics. They endorse certain policies, but stop short of endorsing politicians or parties. It's a good approach that keeps employees and customers happy, since they represent a wide range of ideologies and backgrounds. Having the media and corporations so strongly divided into opposing camps only degrades the quality politics and surrounding conversations.

Comment Re:Where's the BoA stuff? (Score 1) 437

Now there's a rotten story that never stops smelling. I suppose they are/were both "strong personas" that had a temper tantrum and the other one ragequit. Assange has his personality problems too, but deleting the information they possibly had was a loss for everyone.

Submission + - Votes Switched From Trump to Hillary in Texas ( 2

Okian Warrior writes: Early voting for the 2016 presidential election started yesterday for people in some areas who have been given the opportunity to avoid the long lines on November 8.

However, in Amarillo, a woman was shocked to see her ballot flip from Republican to Democrat.

“Gary and I went to early vote today,” wrote Lisa Houlette on Facebook. “I voted a straight Republican ticket and as I scrolled to submit my ballot I noticed that the Republican straight ticket was highlighted, however, the Clinton/Kaine box was also highlighted!”

“I tried to go back and change and could not get it to work. I asked for help from one of the workers and she couldn’t get it to go back either. It took a second election person to get the machine to where I could correct the vote to a straight ticket,” she added.

Comment Re:Ping pongged (Score 1) 16

I'm seeing all Trump submissions get flagged as "spam."

This submission hit 'red' status very quickly, got dropped down a few pegs a minute later, then went red hot after.

They submitted the safe story everyone else is running instead, which is pure fluff, instead of the things that are actually interesting out of the dump.

I noticed this too. Practically every story related to the WikiLeaks email dump has been recently flagged as 'SPAM', and quite fast, too. Some of the editors here may not want to flame up the discussion too much. Either that or they have personal preferences, which are showing in their moderation (judging from their Twitter feeds this is possible, too).

Nonetheless, there are some very interesting tech related stuff in there, which would normally easily pass the Firehose here.

Slashdot Top Deals

A university faculty is 500 egotists with a common parking problem.