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

In UK, Internet Trolls Could Face Two Years In Jail

Xest Re:Ahhhh.... (480 comments)

Thankfully in the UK "liberals" are something all parties try and claim to be like a badge of honour, rather than a target of hate.

None of them actually are of course, but at least it's something they all aspire to be rather than aspire to hate.

Well, the exception being the Tory far right and other far right parties like UKIP of course who are basically the UK's answer to the tea party.

Now if only we had an actual liberal party that had any hope of getting into power, then stuff like this would be history.

yesterday
top

In UK, Internet Trolls Could Face Two Years In Jail

Xest Re:Ahhhh.... (480 comments)

Um, this law is wholly illiberal, why would liberals ever want this? Anyone wanting this is not liberal by definition.

This is a classic conservative type proposition, not surprisingly, being put forth by the UK's Conservative party who sit on the centre-right (with a handful of far-right elements like Peter Bone).

I suspect what you really mean is "People I don't like will love this law", but whoever those people are, I assure you they're not liberals by the very fact that this law change goes against liberalism.

yesterday
top

In UK, Internet Trolls Could Face Two Years In Jail

Xest Re:Define trolling (480 comments)

Because Richard and Judy got a bit of backlash when Judy decided it was okay to grossly upset a rape victim by belittling the harm done to her and we can't possibly have a situation where it's okay for celebrities to grossly offend people but not do anything when they suffer an inevitable backlash from their stupidity can we?

yesterday
top

In UK, Internet Trolls Could Face Two Years In Jail

Xest Re:Right (480 comments)

Right but that wasn't the AC's question was it? The question was how many had received 6 month sentences.

The answer is very few, of the thousands you cite, most didn't even get jail sentences, and even fewer again got a full 6 months.

Part the problem we have with the act though is the use of magistrates in the first place. Magistrates are kangaroo courts really, untrained busy bodies handing down judgements based on their own social hangups.

Which is a wider problem, because magistrates sit over many other cases.

Ironically, the proposal in TFA might actually therefore be an improvement - more cases being passed up to actual real courts with trained professionals overseeing the cases rather than magistrate chimps wont likely me more and longer jail sentences, it'll just mean more cases being thrown out because they're so fucking stupid in the first place.

yesterday
top

In UK, Internet Trolls Could Face Two Years In Jail

Xest Re:Right (480 comments)

Except this is a reference to the provisions in the malicious communications act 2003.

2 days ago
top

Lockheed Claims Breakthrough On Fusion Energy Project

Xest Re:wow (564 comments)

So what? the point is that if we increase our usage to match the amount we have then we're not suddenly living in a world where there is an abundant supply, we'll just use more and have shortages just as much as always.

With that will be increased heat dissipation also resulting in another set of climate problems to that which we have now with CO2, unless we produce 100% efficient electronics, which isn't going to happen.

I'm not saying it's a bad thing though, I'm saying it's not going to be a magical panacea that lets us create a utopia. We'll still face similar problems to those which we face now, and we'll still have to deal with them.

5 days ago
top

Lockheed Claims Breakthrough On Fusion Energy Project

Xest Re:wow (564 comments)

Yeah, you say that now, but when we get more power, you can all but guarantee we'll use more power.

Probably, we'll start creating climate controlled neighbourhoods or something, live in Sunnyvale Town, where it's 30c all year around!

about a week ago
top

Google Rejects 58% of "Right To Be Forgotten" Requests

Xest Re:The big question is.. (144 comments)

Judges do have the final say, but it's impossible for judges to assess every single data acquisition and processing by every company, it would be an impossible task. Companies have to make the first decision as to what is and isn't acceptable, and if a company is believed to have made a wrong choice then that is challenged by whichever party in court where a judge (or jury) does have a say.

about a week ago
top

Google Rejects 58% of "Right To Be Forgotten" Requests

Xest Re:The big question is.. (144 comments)

As a European you obviously have no idea what the law protects you from if you're saying such a stupid thing.

Have a read here to get an understanding of how important data protection laws are and to understand what you're arguing against:

http://www.dataprotection.ie/d...

Despite what you say, you probably don't actually want to live in a world without data protection laws and there's no reason to think Google should be some special case that's immune to them.

about a week ago
top

Google Rejects 58% of "Right To Be Forgotten" Requests

Xest Re:What makes them the judge of these matters? (144 comments)

What? Google didn't even exist when the 1995 European Data Protection Directive was being discussed. This is the law which the courts deemed Google to have breached.

The 2012 refresh is STILL being discussed.

Google is not the final judge in the matter, the courts would be if someone feels Google has not made the correct decision, but as the data controller and data processor Google has a legal obligation to ensure that all personal data which it holds is accurate, uptodate, relevant, and obtained with permission.

These are the criteria Google must use when determining whether it should continue to hold such data. Thus, for example, claims (with proof) of data inaccuracy or outdatedness, claims against data which is not relevant to Google's task as a public search engine (i.e. personal medical history), and claims of data being obtained without permission (personal nude photos) would all pass the test for Google to remove them from search results.

Personally I thought Google was being quite difficult in that it was intentionally pretending it was hard done by by removing legitimate public interest news articles and so forth, but after the European Commission slapped it on the wrist and after it's competitors started following the law without trying to play politics Google fell into line and started fulfilling it's legal obligations without engaging in censorship for the sake of political point scoring. As such, and given the 58% rejection rate it would seem that Google is now doing what it's supposed to and hence doing a decent job of adhering to the law at last.

It still has the opportunity to get the law changed in it's favour through lobbying and negotiations over the 2012 Data Protection Directive update which is the correct avenue to pursue any issues it takes with the law.

about a week ago
top

Google Rejects 58% of "Right To Be Forgotten" Requests

Xest Re:Google crawls and indexes the public Internet (144 comments)

It's not even about not being able to report them, CRAs are just out and out not legally allowed to even store that information past a certain time. Once that period has elapsed companies must delete that data from their databases.

Data such as county court judgements in the UK are still held on file as part of public record past this point but corporations are not allowed to retain copies of or use that information and are hence not allowed to supply it forward as part of a credit report. I believe the cut off is currently 7 years for CCJs in the UK.

FWIW this isn't even part of any special laws regarding CRAs, this is just the plain old Data Protection Act (the UK's implementation of the European Data Protect Directive 1995). The only special treatment CRAs get is that they're allowed to gather and process personal credit data without first having to seek permission of the data subject - they can't even pass it on unless it's part of a formal request by the data subject (i.e. an application for a credit card). Everything else in the DPA still applies- they must hold it securely, it must only be kept if it's relevant to their job, it must be correct, it must be recent enough to be relevant and so on.

about a week ago
top

Intel Drops Gamasutra Sponsorship Over Controversial Editorials

Xest Re:gtfo (724 comments)

Yes, you missed the whole post. You seem to be claiming that the massive advantage I was referring to was simply the fact you got less abuse, when in reality it was the fact that you got given more free shit, got invited to groups more often, and got better spots in raiding parties more frequently. The game was much easier when teenage boys made the incorrect assumption that female character = female player.

Again, try reading the whole post next time rather than cherry picking the bits you feel like arguing over despite the fact said argument then makes absolutely no sense because it's based on half a point and not the whole point.

about two weeks ago
top

Samsung Paid Microsoft $1 Billion Last Year In Android Royalties

Xest Re:Samsung should just work to invalidate them... (93 comments)

Agreed but as I understand it it's possible that the agreement stands regardless of the validity of the patents, so if their agreement with Microsoft is such that they're paying for these patents regardless of validity then there's no point them focussing on invalidating the patents, hence why I suspect they've instead decided to try and invalidate their agreement by arguing that Microsoft is now a smartphone manufacturer where it wasn't before- just as Microsoft managed to argue that payments should be made regardless of patent validity, Samsung probably managed to argue the agreement was only valid whilst Microsoft is not acting as a smartphone vendor itself.

about two weeks ago
top

Samsung Paid Microsoft $1 Billion Last Year In Android Royalties

Xest Re:Nevertheless, Microsoft is doomed (93 comments)

Have Google ever sued anyone that hasn't sued them first on patent issues? I don't think Google has, which would still make it purely defensive and not an aggressive patent troll like MS is.

Samsung isn't being told by the EU it faces a fine for using patents offensively and not defensively, it's being fined because it's being told it can't use those specific patents at all in court action because they're too fundamental to be allowed to do anything with them as compared to say, swipe to unlock. As such Samsung's potential fine still says nothing whatsoever about the defensiveness or lack of of their patent litigation.

I don't think the GP was saying Google/Samsung haven't sued, I think he was just saying that they've only ever counter-sued in response to being sued on these particular issues, which may still be wrong, but I can't think off the top of my head of any examples of Google/Samsung suing first in the smartphone race rather than simply as a response to being sued by someone else - i.e. neither of them sued Microsoft/Apple or whoever until Microsoft/Apple had already sued them.

about two weeks ago
top

Darth Vader, Yoda, Chewbacca Aim To Invade Ukraine's Govt. In Upcoming Elections

Xest Re:Internet Party of Ukraine (63 comments)

Problem is, look what happened to Estonia, they were victims of a Russian state sponsored cyber attack which was quite problematic because they had built their state around heavy internet focus for provision of services and so forth.

It's a good idea, if you're a nation that has enough control of it's borders to prevent physical access to important internet infrastructure from Russian agents, and if you can withstand Russian cyber attack both focussed hacks and dumb DDOS attacks, but I don't think Ukraine is there right now, and it would probably just result in a quick and easy way for Putin to dig his claws back into the country.

I like their idea, most definitely, but I don't think the Ukraine is ready for it just yet, it doesn't have the independent strength of security to protect itself from Russian cyber-attack and meddling - they're having a hard enough time protecting themselves physically from Russian soldiers invading their territory, let alone protecting their digital infrastructure which will likely require decent physical security in the first place.

about two weeks ago
top

Intel Drops Gamasutra Sponsorship Over Controversial Editorials

Xest Re:gtfo (724 comments)

Um, try reading the rest of the post and you might make a bit more sense.

about three weeks ago
top

Google Threatened With $100M Lawsuit Over Nude Celebrity Photos

Xest Re:Makes Sense (225 comments)

"This is more true than it should be. There's a whole generation of people using the Internet who literally don't know how to browse to a website directly. They don't know how an address bar works, and go to google to look up whatever they want."

To be fair, that's actually in part Google's fault. On my Android phone now Chrome has completely merged the Google search box with the URL bar, they are now one and the same, there is no longer an explicit distinction there between entering a URL and searching on Google.

about three weeks ago
top

Google Threatened With $100M Lawsuit Over Nude Celebrity Photos

Xest Re:Makes Sense (225 comments)

The problem Google has it's that it's not just acting as someone's bank, it's profiting from the content via ads, and that opens up a fair argument of complicity.

I'm not about to judge as to whether that means it deserves to bear all responsibility for content- certainly I think it's unrealistic that it should have to scour all it's servers and make a judgement on whether every bit of content is or isn't there legally, but I don't think it's unreasonable that if someone points it to a specific bit of infringing content, that given that it both hosts the content, and profits from the content, that it should have to take it down, else I don't really see how Google can argue against the suggestion that it's knowingly profiting from illegal content at that point - if it's hosting the content, providing access to the content, and the content is known to be illegal, and it continues to host and provide access to it, then surely it's pretty clear cut that it's intentionally profiting from illegally provided content?

But I think that's the key thing here, it has to be knowingly doing so. That puts the onus on the alleged victim to put the effort it and make it clear to Google that the content is not being legally distributed - and even there Google should have recourse to get the courts to rule if it's not certain and should be protected until the courts have decided, but it most definitely should not put the onus on Google to try and figure out what content is illegal.

Your analogy would be better phrased as someone having stolen money from you, stored it in a bank and the bank is profiting off that cash by investing it, and continues to do so and refuses to hand it over even when it's been made clear to the bank that that money has been obtained illegally. In that case yes, I think the bank absolutely can no longer pay the innocent party - once it's been informed of alleged or proven illegality then it has a responsibility to investigate and act.

As for the demands of $100m? well, that's a different issue - that's just the US' stupid sue everyone for everything culture.

So as for this particular case, if they've given Google specific URLs and Google hasn't acted then apart from their stupid financial demands then I don't think they're really much in the wrong. If they've just blanket told Google to scour every inch of their server and make arbitrary judgements on legality then these folks should be told to go screw themselves or to come back when they have something more concrete.

So all in all, I think this sounds like it's probably a stupid case, but that doesn't mean Google should necessarily be given a get out of jail free card from knowingly profiting from illegally hosted content- there has to be at least some degree of responsibility held by them to act if genuinely and reasonably informed.

about three weeks ago
top

UK Copyright Reforms Legalize Back-Ups, Protect Parody

Xest Re:EUCD is (approximately) DMCA for the UK (68 comments)

But what exactly is the point?

No one was prosecuted for doing this even when it was completely illegal, now it's legal if you're not circumventing DRM, but still no one is going to be prosecuted are they? The police have better things to do and it's too cost prohibitive and largely impossible for the industry to do it themselves.

So whatever the change it's completely meaningless all the same.

What I'm intrigued about though is the talk of not being able to share with your family, how does this apply within a household if family or friends live together? I can buy a music CD and can't lend it to my partner to play elsewhere in the same house?

What if we go to the shop and put a fiver each towards a £10 CD, who owns it? If the shop has allowed us to make a joint transaction then how is the owner defined - statutory consumer rights on what the shop sold us would normally overrule civil issues of non-commercial copyright infringement? Presumably if it was jointly owned however what's to stop someone putting up a website that allows 1000 people to contribute 1p to the price of a CD? is it jointly owned by all 1000? I'm intrigued to know how this works legally.

As I say it all seems academic regardless and no one's getting prosecuted over this stuff anyway, but I'm intrigued to know what the limits are.

about three weeks ago
top

Intel Drops Gamasutra Sponsorship Over Controversial Editorials

Xest Re:gtfo (724 comments)

"I'd say that you'd find an amazing amount of hatred for each of those categories."

On the contrary, when I played Dark Age of Camelot playing a female char was a massive advantage as all the desperate teenage boys assumed you were actually female, sucked up to you, gave you a load of free gear, and regularly invited you into groups. On large raids they were always given the best spots, and allowed first dibs on good items.

Females were always at a massive advantage in that game at least and any abuse they took wasn't even close to the amount that males took from other males.

It's just an anecdote of course, but it's certainly not universally the case that minority groups (minority in game that is) always inherently get treated worse than others in games, not at all.

about three weeks ago

Submissions

top

Man jailed for trolling

Xest Xest writes  |  more than 3 years ago

Xest (935314) writes "A man in the UK has been jailed for just over 4 months for trolling, and has also been given an order banning him from using social networking sites for 5 years. The trolling in question involved insulting a person who committed suicide by jumping in front a train by posting offensive remarks on a page dedicated to her memory, and creating a YouTube parody of Thomas the Tank with the deceased girls face in place of Thomas'.

Is it about time trolling to this extent saw this kind of punishment, or is this punishment simply too harsh for someone who perhaps didn't realise how seriously his actions would be taken by the authorities?"

Link to Original Source
top

Android takes 2nd place for the quarter

Xest Xest writes  |  more than 3 years ago

Xest (935314) writes "For the quarter July, August, September Android has now pushed into second place for handset sales accounting for 25% of all phones sold, with Apple taking 3rd place and RIM taking 4th. Symbian is of course still king, largely due to it's massive userbase of low end phones in places like Africa, India, and China where handsets such as the iPhone and high end Android devices are simply unaffordable to many. The article notes that sales by smaller handset manufacturers such as HTC, Huwaei, and ZTE who often develop phones on behalf of other companies to brand themselves now account for a third of phone sales. With devices like the Orange San Francisco developed by ZTE selling at £99 without a contract and sporting an AMOLED screen whilst also being able to run some of the most popular games and applications today such as Angry Birds, perhaps even Symbian will see itself displaced over the next few years to be replaced with some of the highly competitive Android devices beginning to trickle out."
Link to Original Source
top

A brighter future for freedom in Britain?

Xest Xest writes  |  more than 4 years ago

Xest (935314) writes "Over the last decade on Slashdot since the events of 9/11 we have constantly been bombarded with stories reporting the continued deterioration of freedom and civil liberties in the West as governments come up with their new latest and greatest scheme to track down terrorists and criminals however negative the effect is on the rest of the law abiding population.

Today, Nick Clegg, the deputy prime minister of Britain's new coalition government who came to power just last week outlined the new government's vision for the future of British civil liberties. The government has so far confirmation that they will be abolishing Britain's ID card database, abolishing the National Identity Register, abolishing the ContactPoint database, look into reforming libel laws to protect freedom of speech, will be restoring protections for the right to peaceful protest, and will improve the fairness of the DNA database to ensure innocent people's DNA is no longer held on it. This all begs the question; is the tide finally turning against deterioration of our rights and freedom?

The results of this rhetoric are yet to be seen, but if they are sincere in their aims, and truly even wish to allow citizens to recommend laws for removal as stated, then might we perhaps even see the dreadful Digital Economy Act repealed? Right now it's too early to tell, but a positive vibe on civil liberties from people now in power is often news in itself when taken in the context of the last decade of mostly doom and gloom for civil liberties and freedom."

Link to Original Source
top

PS3 plagued by similar problems to the XBox 360s i

Xest Xest writes  |  more than 5 years ago

Xest writes "More and more reports are appearing of Playstation 3 consoles failing in a similar way that the earlier models of the XBox 360 did, except for Sony, it's the Yellow Light of Dead. The BBC has an interesting article, which suggests the problem could be almost identical to that which caused the earlier XBox 360 models to fail — poor soldering connections. From the article:

"Several of those businesses have told Watchdog that the vast majority of consoles they see with the "yellow light of death" can be repaired by heating up specific parts of the circuit board. This process is called solder re-flow. By heating the connections between the components and the circuit board to temperatures in excess of 200 Celsius, the metal solder joints melt, just like they did when the device was first assembled. Console repairers say that this process method is commonly used to repair fractured connections, or dry joints."

But it's not the only rule from Microsoft's playbook on the issue that Sony have been following, whilst they have admitted 12,500 out of 2.5million (a convenient 0.5%) of systems have failed, they refuse to release full figures of failure rates citing them as being commercially sensitive. Unfortunately one rule Sony does not appear to be following Microsoft on is an extended warranty, stating that if it fails after 12 months, it is not their problem. In the UK however at least, the Sale of Goods act would disagree with that statement."

Link to Original Source
top

Microsoft announces "YouTube for Games"

Xest Xest writes  |  more than 6 years ago

Xest (935314) writes "At this years Game Developers Conference, alongside the announcement of Gears of War 2 due for release this November, Microsoft have announced another interesting feature — homebrew game sharing. Utilising XNA, developers and gamers will be able to share games that they have created over XBox live and rate them in a similar manner to YouTube's video sharing service. Microsoft have released 7 games to showcase the capabilities of the service at the event.

If this idea is extended to Windows users through Microsoft's Live for Windows program and with XNA Game Studio being a nice environment for amateur and professional game developers alike this could provide a powerful new path to mainstream users for indie game developers."

Journals

Xest has no journal entries.

Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?