Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
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:It's just smart business. (Score 1) 342

Yeah! Look at all the office clerks sitting out of work because computers automated their jobs! Individual banks alone used to employ thousands of people who've all been replaced by computers automating their job. What will all those people ever be able to do? How will they survive!

You should stop using a computer and go back to hiring people to do the same work instead. Think of how much more benefit you'll have on society!

No need to respond to this post unless you decide it's actually just fine for you to automate the work involved in posting on /. with a computer instead of hiring real people to do the work for you...

Comment Re:Democrats (Score 1) 326

So in summary, the FCC goes back to not regulating this, just like they didn't regulate this until oh... all of 6 months ago?

The rules Congress just disapproved were passed in October 2016. The Internet survived just fine for decades without the FCC's rules. Pretty sure the sky isn't going to fall as a result of these regulations only lasting a few months.

Comment Re:Ulterior motive (Score 4, Interesting) 57

And if Facebook knows what issues you care about and what parties/politicians you support, they can easily put all that together in order to sell political advertising campaigns targeting you to specific politicians and give them the specific issues to put in the campaign.

So really, this is about Facebook improving their product (you) for their advertisers (political buyers, in this case). Happy data collection. I'm sure Google and the other big advertising companies will follow suit if they can.

The fact they can get additional less informed voters (those who don't vote currently are on average less informed than those who do vote) to show up at elections (which will make the average voter knowledge lower) is just the bonus cherry on top of their advertising Sundae. But hey, as long as that gets them more advertising money to propagandize those less informed voters, it's all good, right?

Comment Re:A waste of money (Score 1) 67

Why can't you just use a different USB driver for your OS that filters, alerts on, requires additional permission for, or blocks whatever you want, rather than buying a new piece of hardware?

I mean, I get the voltage thing to fry a port, but that's a DOS attack no worse than someone who is physically there just smashing the port/computer. Why not just secure the USB device driver in the first place?

Comment Re:You make your own bed (Score 1) 244

Yeah. We have a Netflix subscription, Amazon Prime and an expensive Dishnetwork bundle. You'd think with all that there'd never be a need to stream from anywhere else.... nope. DVR missed some episodes of a TV show a month or more ago and you just now noticed? You can keep recording the new ones, but no way to watch the old ones but to find an "illegal" stream online.

At some point the video content creators need to figure out that people who've paid for their content at least once just want to be able to consume it how and when it's convenient for them, not have to get the magical time and space incantation correct in order to make sure they don't miss something.

Comment Re:Very true (Score 1) 74

the lower prices you can offer your customers (at least until you've outlasted the starving competition)

Except, the competition (people) is self-renewing, so you can never "outlast" it and then start charging more than the market rate. That's why Google doesn't charge more than other ad networks, and Apple can't charge more than a reasonable premium for their phones compared to Android phones, AWS can't charge more than competing cloud providers, etc... the whole premise of a market advantage resulting in a permanent monopoly status is flawed, which is why scientists* doing economics reject it. It also helps that we have so many examples of dominant players "losing" after a time at the top, i.e. Myspace, Yahoo, etc...

Comment Re:And any other CLI masking, please! (Score 1) 178

Under the current rules, providers are prohibited from doing this type of call filtering.

They'd like to (they have a shared database of provisioned numbers and who they belong to), but they aren't legally allowed to and still keep their common carrier status.

This wouldn't become a service they charge extra for. They'll do it just to reduce their own expenses in customer support and complaints. How effective it will be in the end is a different matter, but it's a trivial modification to make to their systems and it provides an incentive and ability for an easily proven damaged party (if they start spoofing a real phone #s) to sue the perpetrators and enforce anti-spam measures on foreign providers.

Comment Re:Statist thinking (Score 1) 38

Your random unattributed internet reference is incorrect. Even where some cities incorrectly try to call possessing a right-of-way "owning" the sidewalk to people, in a legal sense, the property still belongs to the property owner. If you look at the actual recorded deeds and maps in the recorders office, it's very easy to see the distinction. Some cities explain the distinction between owning the property and owning a right-of-way to a portion of the property very well, others fairly well, and some cities not so well, indicating whoever wrote their stuff doesn't actually understand it. For example, Champaign's web site talks about "owning" the right-of-way "property", then a couple of paragraphs later about the responsibilities of the "property owner" in that right-of-way, not meaning them. :)

The closer you get to an actual legal authority and real city or county recorders who deal with property descriptions, plat maps, easements and right-of-ways, the more you find people who actually understand the difference between the owner of the property and what a public right-of-way legally is. What it isn't is ownership of the property itself, it's the right to use the property for a specific purpose. So under various circumstances the property owner can recover the right-of-way from a city, profit from mining oil or minerals underneath it, etc... Pretty standard for a city street, the center of the right-of-way is the actual property line between property owners (they each own half the road) and the right-of-way extends 30 ft. in either direction.

If you ask a random city employee, you may be told the city "owns" the sidewalk, but if you ask a non-profit which exists to give cities and counties legal advice, you're likely to get a much more accurate answer, including legal citations. Let's not even talk about clickbait web sites who exist to get searchers to land on random "articles" like reference.com.

So yes, "It's better to check when you don't know what you're talking about." Wish more city website writers would check a little more thoroughly, but then, that's what lawyers are for, right? To be legally pedantic. ;)

Comment Re:Statist thinking (Score 2) 38

Sidewalks are owned by the property owner, typically, smaller roads are also. The property just has recorded against it a right-of-way for others to use the road and whatever that locality's legally mandated distance from the road is. As part of the right-of-way, people can drive over the road, walk along the edge, etc...

Cities typically legally take over responsibility for the road portion (and the road is currently usually built and paid for by the land owner at some point), but while the sidewalk is a public location for freedom of speech purposes, for example, it's still generally the responsibility of the property owner. If you are the property owner, if you don't shovel your snow and someone slips, you get sued, not the city. If you don't keep the sidewalk in good enough condition to be used, you get fined, etc...

So for the same reason you can drive without a license on your own private property, you can likely run robots across your property however you like, as long as they aren't violating some other law. Now, if you want to take advantage of the public right-of-way across someone else's property, that's a different story where you'll need to comply with the rules associated with that right-of-way.

Comment Re:Monopolies hurt everyone but (Score 1) 89

Yeah, cable company screwing you over? Just switch providers!.Oops, New York City has a Cable Franchise Agreement giving one company a cable service monopoly. Until that sort of thing stops, there won't be much competition there. A little bit of working around that using phone infrastructure and/or wireless, but even those have similar licensing issues and/or technical issues.

But don't worry, the politicians in NYC are there looking out for the people...

Comment Re:Yup (Score 4, Informative) 516

some people only count as 3/5ths of a person

Have you ever wondered why? It's because they were trying to reduce the influence of slaveholders. A default position of counting slaves as a full person for representation purposes would have led to the slaveholders (who actually voted for representation, not the slaves) controlling the federal government based on the number of slaves they held.

So the 3/5ths compromise as well as granting the power to restrict or prohibit the importation of slaves (also in the Constitution) were the Nation's first two anti-slavery measures, passed over opposition from the slave-holding States. They'd have done more, but then the slave-holding States wouldn't have ratified the Constitution in the first place, making any restrictions in it pointless.

Comment Re:Every hacker once knew? (Score 4, Insightful) 615

I worked in a building numbered 2600 with a bunch of developers for a few years. One day I pointed at the massive street numbers on the side of the building and said something like, "How appropriate." None of them had any idea what I was talking about.

Most kids these days have no idea what phreaking is, what a black box is, or a blue box, etc... Don't get me started on the contents of the anarchist's cookbook.

Most of them don't know what a MUD, MUSH or MUX was or how to program one, let alone about common door games (Trade Wars was the best).

Heck, I remember key cards which worked by perforations. Really easy to duplicate with a piece of cardboard. Remember core memory? Many "technical" folks nowadays probably can't do Boolean logic and wouldn't recognize most of the symbols. let alone binary operations or PEEK'ing and POKE'ing.

Thanks guys, now I'm starting to feel old. :)

Slashdot Top Deals

In a consumer society there are inevitably two kinds of slaves: the prisoners of addiction and the prisoners of envy.

Working...