Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
Get HideMyAss! VPN, PC Mag's Top 10 VPNs of 2016 for 55% off for a Limited Time ×

Comment Re:A no-brainer... (Score 1) 324

It's not more secure than Windows 7. How can it be more secure if it leaks your information, without your knowledge, to a third party, AND if the software update mechanism is so user hostile (unrequested reboots, machine slowing to a crawl at random times) that the only workaround is to disable updates completely, either at the firewall or via hacks?

I like a lot about Windows 10, but it's less secure, more resource intensive, and less responsive. I'm keeping Windows 7 machines around in my home for a reason.

Comment Re:Naturally they'll investigate to help HRC. (Score 1) 145

They're not prosecuting, they're investigating. And in terms of them being treated equally - they did investigate HRC, but found there wasn't enough wrongdoing to make it worth prosecuting.

And... it's unlikely the FBI will prosecute any of the hackers, albeit this time because the hackers are likely not within any US court's jurisdiction.

    • .

Comment It wouldn't make sense anyway (Score 1) 103

I don't want my TV producers negotiating with my hardware manufacturers or software developers. I want them negotiating with me, the person who watches the TV. Why the fuck should such a totally-unrelated third party be involved? How can that possibly be in my best interests?

It's not just a little weird; it's totally absurd. It's like if a I drive to the store to buy some socks, and what socks are available depends on a deal between the textile producer and my car manufacturer. WUT?! Believe me: this is not a way to get me to buy your socks or your car. This is something a sockmaker or carmaker thinks up when they're out of ideas and know that there are vastly better and cheaper socks and cars available.

Comment Anything to steal someone else's work (Score -1, Flamebait) 98

It's always fun to watch people justify why they can steal someone's work and not have to pay for it.

"I'm so poor I can't afford to pay $1 per song", says the person with a $600, or more, PC.

"Meh, I wouldn't have bought it anyway," says the person who now has the very product they wouldn't have bought.

"Greedy capitalists. I'm sticking it to you by stealing because you make too much!" says the person who demands they be paid what they think they're worth.

And on and on. Excuse after excuse, even trotting out, "People who steal software/music/movies buy more" despite the obvious contradiction of the statement.

Even the fallacy, "it's not stealing, it's sharing" as if the person intends to return the product.

But whatever. There's always excuse for everything. So long as you can justify it in your own mind, that's all that matters, right?

I guess when I steal something you've created and don't pay you for it I can justify it however I like, right?

Comment Re:So in other words... (Score 1, Informative) 302

Maybe if you had read the Constitution you wouldn't be spouting such crap. The power starts in the Preamble:

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Then there's Article 1, Section 1:

All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

In other words, Congress has been granted the power to pass legislation of any kind, which includes regulating things.

Then there's Section 7:

Every bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a law, be presented to the President of the United States; if he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the objections at large on their journal, and proceed to reconsider it.

Again, Congress passes legislation and the President approves or vetoes it. This includes regulating things.

Article 1, Section 8:

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

The general welfare. In other words, the power to use taxes to inform people of the crap their ingesting or smoking to let them make an informed decision. It's also called regulation.

The last sentence of Section 8:

To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

Can you read and understand what those words mean? Congress has the power to make any law it deems necessary for any department to carry out its duties. That includes regulation.

Want more? I can keep going. There's an entire document I can go through to keep showing how you're ill-informed and just plain wrong.

Comment Re:So in other words... (Score 1, Flamebait) 302

Seriously, making any sort of health claims about e-cigs was already illegal

Bullshit. The federal government has both the power and duty regulate such devices. If people choose to ignore the evidence that is their right as well. This has nothing to do with free market and everything to do with getting facts out to the people.

Further, if you want to go down the "control" path, that's fine. Don't control these things. At the same time I shouldn't have to pay for injuries or damages caused by people using these things by raising my insurance rates. They should be solely responsible for everything, free market and all that.

The same with my mandated health insurance tax. If smokers and vapers want to ignore the scientific evidence of how harmful both items are to their health that is their right but again, I shouldn't, nor should the government, have to pay for their medical bills.

Fair enough?

Comment More crap to turn off (Score 4, Funny) 98

Word rarely does what I want it to do so I've turned off most of the "help". Once we're forced to upgrade to this crap this will be more cruft to disable.

I can't wait to hear from our users when they whine about not being able to get their work done because Word is trying to be "helpful".

Word for Office 365: Revenge of Clippy

Comment Re:The basest, vilest (Score 1) 999

Richard Armitage was not the source of the leak, Dick Cheney was. We know this because Libby's own notes stated he, Libby, learned Plame was an undercover CIA agent from Dick Cheney.

The reason Libby was convicted was because he lied under oath, not because he was the one who outed Plame.

Further, no one, despite what Bush said, was ever held accountable for outing an undercover CIA agent. None.

How many other agents had their covers blown because of their association with Plame? How many may have died because of Cheney's political vindictiveness? Talk about a breach of national security.

Comment Re:Why not? (Score 1) 999

In context, with Trump denying the DNC hack was Russia trying to help Trump out, yes, this one can be seen as a very obvious joke. Just because he frequently makes horrific statements doesn't mean he doesn't occasionally also make jokes.

I don't think he's ever claimed that the wall comment was a joke. I don't think he ever will.

    • <quote> <dl> <dt>.<dd>..


Comment Re:Why not? (Score 0) 999

He was making a f---ing joke. He has brushed off the notion that Russia was doing the hacking in the first place. He made the comment at a press conference intending to ridicule the concept, not via a semi-secret text message to Vladimir Putin.

I'm no Trumpist, I mean, I'm going to vote for Hillary Clinton in November and you have NO IDEA how little I want to do that, but I'm in Florida, so my vote may make a difference between Trump or Clinton, and Trump really is THAT BAD. But, in this one instance, the collective left and political establishment has lost their minds, and apparently their sense of humor.

Comment Re:Does this surprise anyone? (Score 1, Informative) 999

University thing? You mean Trump University where he defrauded people to the tune of tens of millions of dollars? The University where employees were told to extract as much money as possible from people via high pressure sales tactics?

That's the University you're talking about, correct? The one run by the shyster.

Slashdot Top Deals

He's dead, Jim.