Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Comments

top

Bioethicist At National Institutes of Health: "Why I Hope To Die At 75"

Aighearach Re:The WHO (386 comments)

Yeah, if he's stuck in a state of decline, he can still contribute. His argument is absurd. If simply not being able to contribute as much as you used to means you'd be better off dead, hey, I guess that means anybody 5% less capable than me is better off dead already. Totally moral and ethical fail from this so-called "bioethicist."

yesterday
top

Putin To Discuss Plans For Disconnecting Russia From the Internet

Aighearach Re:In case of emergency (240 comments)

My advice to you is to read the links before posting them. They do not describe anything like what Russia is proposing.

I only clicked the "you" link. First I'd like to thank you for noticing the similarity between myself and President Obama, though I am not actually Mr. Obama.

Second, I'd like to point out that these are very different situations. The power that the Senate Committee voted to give to the President is the power to order companies to shut down networks during cyber-attacks capable of causing massive damage or loss of life . There is not some nebulous "emergency" where he can do this; only during narrowly defined situations that threaten to damage the infrastructure being shut down, or threatening loss of life. So for example, if somebody cracks into a nuclear power plant and is causing it to overload, the President can order whatever ISP the power plant is connected through to unplug. Then everybody can slow down and think about, OK, which connections do we really need to shut down, and which can we turn back on? It wouldn't be a blanket "internet kill switch," it would be orders to individual companies whose networks are under attack. And the attacks would have to be stronger than any cyber-attack except for Stuxnet.

So in short, get a clue, and if you're linking to things that are totally different than what is discussed, try making and defending an actual point. Because those links don't speak to this issue.

3 days ago
top

Putin To Discuss Plans For Disconnecting Russia From the Internet

Aighearach Re:In case of emergency (240 comments)

Can you think of a scenario which can be called an emergency where you would benefit from protection from malicious misinformation?

Think hard.

No.

I can think of situations where providing accurate information from a more trusted source would protect me from "misinformation," but I can't think of any emergency or security situation where I would benefit from being cut off from [alleged] misinformation.

Just because people disagree with you, doesn't mean they didn't think "hard" enough. I always wonder though, what sort of people think that thinking is like lifting weights, where you can do it "harder." I mean, an intelligent person just thinks. It just happens. Trying to think "harder" means being distracted by some goal, and that doesn't improve the thinking process. If I think about the most difficult chess tournaments I competed in, my best wins against stronger opponents, I wasn't thinking "harder." I was thinking more easily.

3 days ago
top

Putin To Discuss Plans For Disconnecting Russia From the Internet

Aighearach Re:PLEASE! (240 comments)

Most of my SSH attempts come from Brazil

3 days ago
top

Snowden's Leaks Didn't Help Terrorists

Aighearach Re:Biggest joke a hundred years later (182 comments)

Only if necessary. However, the correct branches of Government still hold their respective powers, and elections continue to be free and fair. We have the system chose, the secret rules we continue to choose. It is election season, look around. Most voters are OK with it.

4 days ago
top

Once Vehicles Are Connected To the Internet of Things, Who Guards Your Privacy?

Aighearach Re:Who Guards Your Privacy? (130 comments)

Well, sorry to burst your bubble, but that isn't some conspiracy theory, or secret program, and the actual law that that program is designed to study will involve odometer checks not GPS. GPS is being used for the study, because it allows quick results. Having to manually check the millage of all the vehicles would not only delay the information, it would balloon the cost of the study, and quite simply the study would not even happen.

The reason we're doing pilot studies on the feasibility of mileage-based taxes is twofold:
* We have high adoption of electric and hybrid vehicles, and currently we're projected to run out of money to maintain roads because our road funding is mostly from the gas tax. No gas, no gas tax!
* Anti-environmentalists are complaining about gas vehicles having to subsidize electric without a vote, by avoiding the tax that is used to maintain the roads.

Care to elaborate on how any of that has anything to do with what you were replying to?

And by-the-way, any such future changes will be decided by a direct vote of the People of Oregon.

4 days ago
top

Once Vehicles Are Connected To the Internet of Things, Who Guards Your Privacy?

Aighearach Re:Matter of semantics (130 comments)

No, semantically we don't have any information about the views of the reader and who they view as undesirable, so it should be and/or.

4 days ago
top

Once Vehicles Are Connected To the Internet of Things, Who Guards Your Privacy?

Aighearach Re:Scam (130 comments)

The "Internet of Things" is a solution without a problem.

Tools are not problems or solutions.

The problem is, and I'm using the example that was often cited in the 90s, you're 3 hours into your vacation and are worried you might have left the stove or coffee maker on. Being able to login to your home network and check the status could save your vacation! Otherwise you have to worry the whole time, or call somebody and beg them to visit your house, and probably have to give up the location of your spare key over an unsecure line. Networked coffee makers were, of course, already decades old, though most were custom built.

I find it... unlikely... that you truly cannot find your own examples of where information about "things" is useful to the owner of said things. It should be... very easy.

4 days ago
top

Once Vehicles Are Connected To the Internet of Things, Who Guards Your Privacy?

Aighearach Re:We need to rethink things (130 comments)

... I think we need to consolidate both the authentication and the data storage of all of these different services. Whether you use Google Docs or Microsoft Office Live or some other web-based document editor, you should be able to store and manage the documents in a consistent place, accessed through a standard API.

You seem to miss the fact that the companies could do that now, but don't want to. You're basically proposing to strip freedom from service companies, and have some sort of government regulator determine where their storage Must Be, and what API they're restricted to only using. Otherwise, you'd simply be proposing that companies stop wanting what they want, and everybody to agree on a common solution. Which is silly, because human traits are distributed according to a known distribution, and it is guaranteed that both individuals and companies will want things from the full range of possibilities.

What we already have is a system where those of us who are intolerant of platform lock and restrict ourselves to only certainly types of tools that support interoperability can already do this.

And, by-the-way, Google doesn't have a walled garden, they have an open API and other companies can already integrate and let their users keep backend data in a variety of google services such as google drive. You can remix or mashup the services of any company that has an open API. And you can go the other way in most cases, and import your data stored in other services to the google services. It is only the companies that don't, that instead have a walled garden, that deny this ability. The fact that you conflate walled gardens and open APIs suggests to me that you don't actually understand the technologies you're discussing.

I've been saying "no, never" to platform lock since 1998, and interoperability has only improved. It has only improved. You're not sharing and inter-operating because you're willing to use sucky services. That is the only reason. You can't save others from their sucky choices without stripping their Freedom, you can only save yourself by making better choices.

4 days ago
top

Once Vehicles Are Connected To the Internet of Things, Who Guards Your Privacy?

Aighearach Re:The problem is compelled surveilance (130 comments)

Your State is obviously badly in need of a "ballot measure" system. In most US States, the type of law you imagine would only last until the next election, when it would be repealed.

Here in Oregon, State politicians who vote "Yes" on a law later repealed have a 100% rate of being replaced by their own party in the next Primary Election. The result is that anything controversial, they don't even vote on the law; they only vote on referring it to the voters. Voters don't punish politicians for asking us to decide, even if they asked us to say "yes" and we actually say "no."

Also, insurance isn't a licensed product, so it can't have a EULA. They would need a clear agreement, there would be a whole extra privacy form. And there only has to be 1 insurance company that doesn't require it for it to not actually be required. There would be instant demand for such an option, so it would be offered, because insurance is highly competitive.

And, the idea of a contractual requirement connected to a drivers license that has nothing to do with driving is pretty silly. That is unlikely to get past scrutiny from the Courts, even if you can find a State with voters so stupid that such a law would get passed.

4 days ago
top

Once Vehicles Are Connected To the Internet of Things, Who Guards Your Privacy?

Aighearach Re:Wrong Slogan (130 comments)

Way to put the SCO in CISCO.

4 days ago
top

Once Vehicles Are Connected To the Internet of Things, Who Guards Your Privacy?

Aighearach Re:PHONES YOU IDIOTS (130 comments)

Just because my phone is traveling in a vehicle, does not mean that I am driving or even IN said vehicle.

It doesn't mean you are "for sure" but it does mean you are "most likely" and "within x [very high] certainty."

The vast majority of times people who own cell phones don't have it with them, they either left it at home, or forgot it somewhere in a stationary location.

If it is usually where They think it is, that is more than good enough that they can be "pretty sure" where you are.

Privacy is not retained by there being a small chance that the invasion of privacy is rarely and temporarily incorrect.

4 days ago
top

Once Vehicles Are Connected To the Internet of Things, Who Guards Your Privacy?

Aighearach Re:PHONES YOU IDIOTS (130 comments)

Dumb cellphones give away your triangulated location to within a few dozen yards, too.

If you really don't want to be tracked, you can't even use a pager.

4 days ago
top

Once Vehicles Are Connected To the Internet of Things, Who Guards Your Privacy?

Aighearach Re:Not just cars ... (130 comments)

Its not the tech, it's the usage.

That's why I plan to stick to a private intranet of things.

4 days ago
top

Once Vehicles Are Connected To the Internet of Things, Who Guards Your Privacy?

Aighearach Re:Who Guards Your Privacy? (130 comments)

You won't be able to register your car if it doesn't have its snitchware.

That's a pretty idiotic proposal IMHO. I would vote "no."

That would never fly in my State (Oregon). If you think this could happen in your State, my advice, get a "ballot measure" system where you can exercise Direct Democracy. Then you don't have to worry about those kinds of idiotic conspiracy theories, because if they were to pass such a law, the People would simply revert it at the next election.

4 days ago
top

Snowden's Leaks Didn't Help Terrorists

Aighearach Re:Biggest joke a hundred years later (182 comments)

Actual "patriots" would sooner die than run away to Russia.

Real Patriots would face whatever consequences to do what is best for the nation.

Real Patriots who thought the government was acting illegally would stand up to that government at any cost they would not slink away into the darkness and hand national secrets to foreign governments.

Real Patriots would stay and fight for American principles against any threat, even a (nonexistent, in this case) threat of death.

Snowden didn't do any of that. He gave away national secrets and ran away, because he doesn't believe in America, doesn't trust American juries, and doesn't believe in Justice, or in fighting for it.

Snowden is not only a Traitor to America, he's also a Traitor to whatever American political forces would support his actions.

4 days ago
top

Snowden's Leaks Didn't Help Terrorists

Aighearach Re:Biggest joke a hundred years later (182 comments)

Maybe that is some sort of meme, but misunderstanding isn't "fixing," and neither is offering a different view.

4 days ago
top

Snowden's Leaks Didn't Help Terrorists

Aighearach Re:Then please stop snooping on us (182 comments)

You still didn't get it, there is a bunch of derp on your chin. Try wiping in bigger motions.

4 days ago
top

Snowden's Leaks Didn't Help Terrorists

Aighearach Re:Then please stop snooping on us (182 comments)

When they change communication methods is exactly when we discover new people to track. That works out even if we're slow to track their new methods, because we at least are tracking a small percent of the new method.

Mostly though this isn't used for "terrorism" or international law enforcement. It is used against governments where we're involved in military conflict, or might be. That is the main use case, hostile governments.

You can reasonably infer all of this by closely watching the military leaks during the early stages of new conflicts, such as Syria and Libya. When government officials try to go into hiding, that is exactly when we can break their whole communication system and find out what everybody is doing. That is what the signals people (NSA) see their job as, not any of the inane things people accuse them of, like industrial espionage. (which is handled by the CIA, if you believe any of the most credible accusations)

4 days ago
top

Snowden's Leaks Didn't Help Terrorists

Aighearach Re:The sad part is... (182 comments)

The report just says they didn't release or adopt any new encryption tools in a short timeframe associated with the leaks.

To meet the standard in the report, they would have had to have had more secure communication tools at the ready, but not deployed. They would have had to have known their security sucked, but have been communicating that way anyways, waiting for somebody to tell them that the NSA was listening so they would know to push the "super secret" button before talking, or something.

The report isn't a "lie" exactly, it is just totally full of shit.

4 days ago

Submissions

Aighearach hasn't submitted any stories.

Journals

Aighearach has no journal entries.

Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>