Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



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

Comment Re:Comment (Score 4, Insightful) 208

Wikipedia is not an "entertainment database". This law is ridiculous and I hope IMBD, et al sue California in federal court for violating its 1st amendment rights. How can you enact a silencing law that only silences certain people? Isn't that discrimination? There are age-related anti-discrimination laws already on the books, and they should be plenty sufficient for protecting actors as well as all other kinds of labor.

Excuse me, would you kindly tell me where the land of free is?

Comment Re:Propose 'A' Technology? (Score 2) 199

Whats is wrong with "A" technology? It is a technology if it solves a problem. Technology is not singular (i.e. space technology, video technology), and it is not plural.

I actually agree with what this solution does. No one will care that their netflix packets are prioritized lower than their voice packets, since netflix streams and voice needs to be near real-time. Same thing for SSH sessions, page loads, or IM applications. They need faster response times than your Carbonite subscription or drop-box sync.

The rules should be really thought out. No application bandwidth limiting, just prioritization. Don't allow stupidity by allowing application developers to set their own preferences (sorry advertisers).

Large companies do this all the time to ensure the quality of their hosted VOIP phones and critical applications. It's called QOS (quality-of-service) or COS (class-of-service) tags. The packets themselves are tagged by some network-level equipment by policy sets. These are then respected by the edge routers so that the packets are either prioritized extremely urgent, or somewhat urgent, or not quite urgent, and then for everything else, its a catch-all "best-effort" solution.

Doing it this way (but making it adjustable to the home user by doing something like... right-click on the application and set its "priority" on a scale or something) could be really useful, especially in bandwidth-limited deployments when your backup starts and kills your phone conversation.

To the home user, especially with AT&T and T-Mobile now doing "Wifi calling", this would make that option much, much more palpable.

Comment Re:Slippery Slope (Score 3) 95

First and foremost: I completely agree. Now devils advocate:

How about unreasonable search and seizure?

Your choice to broadcast your signal gives implicit rights for them to read the signal, much like your choice to place your garbage into the county provided can on the curb.

No. There is a reasonable expectation of privacy. What about the privacy of the company who has licensed or purchased the spectrum? The signal is in their possession, and the government just trampled it like a heard of bison running over a bunny. Fuck no. Thats what warrants are for.

How about due process?

See above, there is not a due process violation if all they are doing is processing through the signal you sent.

Again, no. In court, if I can't inspect the device that grabbed what they *THOUGHT* was my signal, how could I defend myself? These law enforcement toys are secret, beyond discovery from defense attorneys. So how can you question the charges, or face your accuser, which you are allowed to do. Imagine for a moment that there is a bug in the logging software, and it reports your phone as the one trying to hook up with the 13 year old middle schooler. Just, fuck no. Again. Due Process.

How about manufactured evidence?

There is a chain of custody to be followed, manufactured evidence would require breaking a seal on the device, much like a radar gun.

Not what I was saying. What about "we can't let them know about how we learned about this, so lets say he logged into a bogus website, and generate some logs.

Is using the spectrum like this even legal? Aren't they violating the licensing laws of the spectrum?

One would hope they got a licence from the FCC. *snort* (sorry, couldn't keep a straight face on that one)

Seriously though, the same argument that has been set forth about using open WiFi APs and even breaking WEP/WPA to use APs that are broadcasting past a property line apply here with your phone and any cleartext that is sent / cyphertext that is broken.

I'm happily in a state where a warrant is required to use one of these... not that I think they are used anyway, but at least if there is no warrant the evidence is inadmissible and via poisoned fruit any evidence looked for because of one of these also becomes inadmissible (i think).

-nb

This is not that. In those scenarios, your listening. These devices talk and impersonate cell towers. They are broadcasting in that spectrum which a company has purchased outright. They do so against those licenses. Now wipe that smirk off your face, and get off my lawn!

Comment Re: The man is a traitor and should be shot (Score 3, Insightful) 343

Thats the wrong question. The better question is: How much harm has the apparatus done to our freedoms and economy? Europe will no longer trust its data in our hands, and much of the world becomes more adversarial. Is nothing sacred anymore? I shutter to think of the day our thoughts can be digitized, stored, analyzed, and archived.

As for the "intelligence apparatus" and its usefulness... Please. To do what? Protect human life? Congress could save more human beings THIS WEEK in the US by banning tobacco and classifying nicotine a narcotic.

Deaths due to terrorism since 1995 in the US: 3,264 (source)
Deaths due to second hand smoke this week: 9,100 or 1,300 deaths every day (source)

I should mention that although smoking kills 10,000 people a week, I don't support banning it, since that would require taking away our liberties and freedoms. But so does government surveillance, and I would ban that. Its too expensive, doesn't protect all that much life, and tramples on our ideology.

Comment Re:Smartphones (Score 1) 202

If you go about it like that, then you are in effect encouraging companies to remain quiet about defects and cause confusion. Its terrible when a product causes injury, and I would agree that people who were hurt before such a recall have a claim and should be compensated.

However for a company to come out and openly admit that there are faults in its product, opens it up to all sorts of claims. You don't want the government to have to sue each company into a recall, you want them to do it voluntarily. Offering them a liability limitation encourages them to issue the recall in the first place.

Comment Re:Slippery Slope (Score 5, Insightful) 95

No. We are way past calling this a slippery slope. Look up, theres the cliff we fell off.

How about unreasonable search and seizure? How about due process? How about manufactured evidence? Is using the spectrum like this even legal? Aren't they violating the licensing laws of the spectrum?

If they went to get a warrant, and asked the cell companies to give them the data, that would be legal. We can't allow them to trample on our freedoms and liberties because its inconvenient for them to go through the process the american people have approved. There is no consent of the governed here.

Comment Re:Smartphones (Score 5, Informative) 202

Even if they didn't know, they should be responsible. The news has been ADAMANT about reporting on this recall, and making a lot of hoopla about it. Samsung issued a recall. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE let them not win a lawsuit against Samsung.

If they sue, Samsung is in trouble cause it admitted a fault and issued a recall. Shouldn't we encourage companies to recall products when there are safety hazards and they are willing to take the financial hit and do the responsible thing? They will never admit fault if it exposes them to liability in court.

Comment Re: Completely wrong.... (Score 1) 618

It doesn't matter how much it costs. So long as the savings are passed on to new graduates, and the service levels don't degrade, please make education cheaper. If you have to go to foreign suppliers because domestic suppliers are too expensive, go foreign. Domestic suppliers will quickly realize they are uncompetitive and either change their pricing or change their product to deliver a competitive value proposition.

Seriously, since when does being an American mean we are uncompetitive and in favor of protectionism?

Comment Re: Dont leave moms basement (Score 2, Insightful) 100

Of course you did, it says so right here in the massive surveillance server farm that tracked your actions to do so. Seriously though, this is why encryption is so important. All throughout history, you can find examples of excessive government overreach and oppression. How can we in this world not value a right to be private amongst ourselves without massive public backlash? How has it come to the point where it just ends up being brushed off as "oh right, more tin-foil hat jokes, we knew the whole time how bad we have it"?

I believe in the 4th amendment, in principle and in practice, I think it is absolutely necessary in this age of information overload. The government should be spending those dollars on trying to catch the pricks who mean to do it harm, and not drag netting all over our inherent rights. Things have clearly gotten out of hand.

Comment Re: All according to plan (Score 3, Interesting) 256

The reason your doom and gloom is wrong is specifically that the economy doesn't shrink. It grows. Yes, automation reduces positions in the economy for work by people, but every person not working is his or her salary in terms of cost not invited to produce goods and services. So the price falls, so the affordability rises. The rising affordability means that everyone will have more. The reason the economy rises is that the AVERAGE person has more ability to consume than prior. And no, not just the 1%, the ordinary individual. It makes no sense in being able to make a million cars automatically if only 500 people can afford them. The more for less economy only works if more people can have more stuff for less. High unemployment is not a natural state, people will always find work, and be able to afford more with it. The 1% will make sure that people have propensity to consume. It's the natural order, and they have to have people buying their shit or they will no longer be in the 1%. Maybe most individuals will eventually own stock in the infradtructure.

Slashdot Top Deals

The reward for working hard is more hard work.

Working...