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


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

Comment Re:More to the point (Score 1) 60

That is my point though, the users don't really leave. You have to offer them some token credit monitoring or something for a few months and 80% probably would not even change their password if you did not make them. They certainly are not moving their e-mail and web searches elsewhere.

So the value of Yahoo! isn't actually impaired by the breach at all. Basically the attitude should be "breach smeach"

Comment Re:What selfish bastards (Score 4, Insightful) 138

Just increase immigration to compensate and better outcomes for all.

Maybe, or it could me a worse outcome for all. I won't talk about race, race has been more or less scientifically proven to be a not a real thing. While there may be some clustering toward the lower and upper bounds of the normal range for various characteristics in some populations its not big enough to be relevant.

Culture on the other hand is. Europe has had a huge problem with 'multiculturalism' you can't allow just any immigrants to show up and form ghettos. Its curcial to recognize and value ones one culture and probably ones national identity. I am all for legal immigration but the people who come here (speaking as an American) so do so because they want to be Americans, not ${former nationality}-Americans, no ${former continent}-Americans, or ${ethnic-population}-Americans but just plain simple Americans. I am all for freedom of religion and am okay with whatever they want to do inside their homes, or at their meeting place on ${Weekday} or if they don't want to ${food item} etc. In general though they need to join the rest of secular society, see the same movies, talk about the same sports, eat most of the same foods, date people no from their orign group, etc. Its simply wrong to place equal value on other cultures. Western civilization is superior its brought like to a dark world that other cultures frankly have not made lasting contributions to in terms of thought and ideas since before the fall of Rome.

'We' as individuals are not better than 'them' but 'we' as a culture certainly are. If 'they' want to immigrate grate as long as their desire is to be like us. If its to come here or to Western Europe just to live in Little-${whatver} but collect a bigger public assistance check than is available back home, no we should not want them and we should not let them come. Recently cultural appropriation has been branded a bad thing. Its not its great thing, imitation is the highest form of flattery! Cultural appropriation is in fact the correct and proper way to value other cultures. You recognize what is best about them and perhaps better than our traditional way and adopt it! That is the melting pot model, we take the best ideas from everywhere and made them our own! Everyone should be welcome who wants to add and integrate. Unfortunately this idea that we have to allow them to instead replace, in the name of respect has taken hold.

Comment Re:More to the point (Score 2) 60

fraud was it? You are required to disclose know problems with most assets prior to sale, at least to the degree you are not misrepresenting the nature of thing.

If I sold you a car and did not mention that when I had the head off the other weekend I noticed the block was cracked that would be fraud. On the other hand if I fail to mention its due of an oil change nobody is going to come after me for violating a lemon law let alone fraud.

This is where the wicket gets sticky with Yahoo! Is a data breach a serious impairment? I mean with the exception of Avid Life Media most companies end up not being really harmed from a PII related breach. Look at all the retailers that have bounced back just fine, look at the social media platforms, etc. Its a short term problem most of the time. Any of the security professionals will tell you its not if but when you are breached anyway. So if "it happens to everyone" and you are not an especially sensitive use case should have to disclose a breach at all? I would argue: No!

Comment Re:This simply means we're succeeding. (Score 1) 221

It's often also cheaper. It costs me less to take a train to Stansted airport, then an Easyjet plane from Stansted to Edinburgh and a bus to the city centre than it does to take a train from Cambridge to Edinburgh. Even including faffing at the airport time, the plane is a bit quicker. I'll take the train given the choice, because it's more comfortable and I can get some work done on the way, but it's a close-run thing.

Comment Re:Exposing those who store plaintext passwords (Score 1) 124

Make sure that you let them know that, because you have gone through responsible disclosure, if they are compromised then you will happily testify in court that they were aware of the insecurity of the personal information and that this makes them liable for increased damages for any compromise resulting in a failure to address the issue in a number of jurisdictions.

Comment Re: Bandiwidth is *free* fallacy.. (Score 1) 208

"Of course their analogy is highly questionable, since transmitting data over a network doesn't actually consume anything, now does it?"

It's s more like this:

When you stream your new favorite YouTube video, actual bits of data are sent to your device. And when I request MY favorite YouTube video, my bits are requested also. Eventually many users, those of us using this same ISP, all asking for data, ask for more than can be delivered quickly enough so that no one is disappointed by their video stuttering. At any of several points long the paths all that data takes there is only so much capacity. In its all used no more data.

Your ISP, if they are popular enough, is confronted by this problem sooner or later. Their choices of how to resolve it range from buying more equipment to changing the configuration of their systems to discouraging demand at peak times to outright shutting off some users to, well, doing nothing and hoping they don't lose too much business. Buying more equipment could force them to charge more, make less money, or go broke. Charging more risks losing customers. If they are so damned popular that they have customers out the wazoo, they may charge more or just ignore the poor blighters. If they enjoy a monopoly, same situation basically. But don't believe the hype that your ISP just sucks up money and doesn't do anything. I've done this, back when it was a fraction of the trouble it is now. It's expensive. Users don't know or care. They shouldn't.

Comment Re:Bandiwidth is *free* fallacy.. (Score 1) 208

Bandwidth isn't free. However technology makes it cheaper to produce every day.

My cable internet has the same cables it always had for decades. As the companies course of business where they replace their technogy it gets faster and faster. So for your current price you should expect increased bandwidth.

When I was a kid I use to run a BBS. It was first at 2400bps. Then after the modem died I went to 14.4k my users liked the extra speed and there was no way I could find a 2400bps at the store anymore. Then after that died I went 56k modem.

Having a modem die was part of the risk running a BBS replacing it cost money but it was mostly the same amount each time and we get faster speed.

Slashdot Top Deals

With your bare hands?!?