Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


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

Comment Re:Didn't (Score 2) 286

I've got my tinfoil hat on tight, so it's baseless speculation time: How do we know Apple didn't help them? They could have just done the court dance to keep up appearances, and help the Feds out on the sly. Win-win: Apple keeps their users happy and even gains extra points for standing up to the government, and they keep up good relations with the Feds.

Comment Re:unworkable (Score 1) 163

So this would raise the cost of selling rhino horns by forcing buyers to have every piece checked, right? Not that I'm sure this is a great idea: If the horns are similar enough to pass for real horns in some meaningful sense, then won't it be easier to hide real horns among legal, fake horns?

Comment Re:This was no AP. (Score 4, Insightful) 339

Which I guess is the major strategy of Al Qa'e'da - asymmetrical attacks Per Osama Bin Laden, their goal is to bankrupt the USA. They seem to have achieved a pretty good ROI if the returns are counted as dollars spend by the US fighting Al Qaeda. They don't even need to do anything these days, just having their name mentioned can cause costly countermeasures to kick in.

Comment Re:Do No Evil so why not delete the info? (Score 2) 138

say, you're actively committing fraud, by claiming that you're a doctor of alien sciences or some bullshit like that. should you be able to remove all criticism about your "alien artifact healing technology" or not?

should some random dude be able to remove _my_ information that I _want_ to be available?

To the first, I don't believe that is the kind of information Google is required to remove. To the second, Google requires verification of ID as part of the removal process.

Don't get me wrong, I think asking search engines to forget publically available data is censorship, and it seems like it must cost Google quite a bit to comply with such requirements. Still, let's at least criticize this development for what it is, not for what it might be in bizarro-world.

Comment Re:Unregulated currency (Score 1) 704

Hopefully the counterparty risk in trusting an exchange with your funds is now obvious enough people start demanding exchanges adopt procedures to let people check their BTC solvency at any time, and implement m-of-n transactions to ensure the exchange alone can't spend bitcoins without the user who owns the BTC signing off on it first.

Bitcoin is not designed to work in an environment where trust is important. It's designed to make it unnecessary to trust banks such as flexcoin to a large extent. That part needs some fleshing out, still, but the protocol offers a lot of opportunity for it.

Comment Re:No. (Score 1) 241

What does this even mean? If you can transfer "brain state" to silicon, why can't you just make a copy of a living person instead of a dead or dying one? And if you had a silicon copy of yourself, would you be willing to kill the meat-you? No? Then I'd say a brain-state copy isn't you, it's a copy.

In short, either all this business about a continuous, individual consciousness is largely illusory or we just don't understand the phenomenon very well at all yet.

Slashdot Top Deals

New crypt. See /usr/news/crypt.