Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


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

Comment Re:dust (Score 1) 271

The 3.5" DD ones weren't so bad, but the HD ones were terrible.

Agreed. The 1.44 MB format was EXTREMELY unreliable. I kept trying different brands, and they all sucked.

I started reformatting them to down 720 KB to make the "bits fatter'.

In general with floppies, I always tried to make backups on 2 different disks for anything important. It became a habit. It's probably good advice for any backup medium. Shit happens.

Comment Bundle Pushers (Score 1) 217

Some in the industry have argued that cutting the cord doesn't actually save you money if you subscribe to a bunch of streaming services like Netflix, HBO, and so on.

Well, of course, the cable co's try to shove bundling up your bundle because it's more profitable for them.

A good many people, including me, want to ONLY pay for the specific content and channels we want. Bundling has been a crappy deal for us.

Comment Re:"Knowingly" [Re:Double Standard] (Score 1) 396

and did not actually investigate her.

Please elaborate.

The IRS did target organizations based on key words and phrase that had political meaning.

That's because the IRS were doing their job. You have to be NON-political to get a tax exemption. If you have political words in your title or documents, you MAY be lying about not being political (requiring further investigation).

Comment Re:"Knowingly" [Re:Double Standard] (Score 1) 396

A briefing is not a "class".

Receiving classified information on a non-classified system and NOT REPORTING it is illegal.

When specifically did that happen? "Fox implied it" is not good enough. This is slashdot, NOT fox.

Sorry you can't seem to lie convincingly on this topic, or keep getting called out for it.

Project much?

Details Matter.

Comment Slop Sampling [Re:Clinton is above the law] (Score 2) 396

Actually the deletion of email was enough "evidence" of guilt because legally it can be assumed that doing so is evidence of guilt.

She only deleted those deemed "personal". It's true some non-personal ones actually also got deleted, but there's no evidence it was intentional.

Electronically recovered versions of the "mis-deleted" ones showed no signs of a pattern to hide, but rather sloppiness/laziness in filtering, being the "skipped" ones had trivial topics. Comey said it appeared that whoever filtered the emails for personal-vs-work only read the title and maybe the first few lines rather than the entire message to see if it were work-related.

Again, there is clear evidence of sloppiness, but NOT of "intent" to hide.

If anything, there's the opposite because those electronically recovered after the fact did not reveal any "secret pattern" to the deletion. It's true they couldn't recover all the emails, but those who deleted them wouldn't know which of the personal-deleted set would wind up being eventually recovered in the lab.

Thus, there is actually counter-evidence of intentional hiding, because the FBI got to sample some of those intentionally deleted (for allegedly being "personal" when in fact they were not).

Comment Re:Clinton is above the law (Score 1) 396

Note "willfully". That's right back the giant "intent" issue.

The existing federal laws generally don't make it a crime to be merely careless with gov't info and secrets.

There are a few exceptions, but it appears those who actually got jailed for "carelessness" are those with bad/cheap lawyers.

OJ's, Hillary's, and Cheney's don't have cheap lawyers.

Comment "Knowingly" [Re:Double Standard] (Score 1) 396

There is no evidence she KNOWINGLY sent or received classified info. Thus, it's not a "lie". Lies require intent.

Sloppy and "incurious", perhaps, but that's a diff issue.

Also, the State Dept. screwed up by not sending her to Security Class. That's not directly her fault (unless it can be shown she played hooky.)

Regarding IRS, your own source:

FBI investigation

In January 2014, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) announced that it had found no evidence warranting the filing of federal criminal charges in connection with the scandal. The FBI stated it found no evidence of "enemy hunting" of the kind that had been suspected, but that the investigation did reveal the IRS to be a mismanaged bureaucracy enforcing rules that IRS personnel did not fully understand. The officials indicated, however, that the investigation is continuing.[161][162][163][164]

DOJ investigation

In October 2015, the Justice Department notified Congress that there would be no charges against the former IRS official Lois Lerner or against anyone else in the IRS. The investigation found no evidence of illegal activity or the partisan targeting of political groups and found that no IRS official attempted to obstruct justice. The DOJ investigation did find evidence of mismanagement and Lerner's poor judgement in using her IRS account for personal messages but said "...poor management is not a crime."[165][166][167]

Other sources do show "bad practices", but that's not the same as intent of political favoritism.

Slashdot Top Deals

"All we are given is possibilities -- to make ourselves one thing or another." -- Ortega y Gasset