for being a decent human being? #621258 up there has a great point. if people would hold each other accountable for their actions: we'd see that the previous US president was a scumbag, and deserves to be behind bars.
instead you're just sitting here perputating MORE hate, lying to yourself, and making the world a worse place again and again.
I'm not a religious person, but I hope for your sake that you are and that your local minister tells you how horrible a person you are: and you understand what he/she says.
or, providing you don't document all the terrible things you do.. or providing that the people doing the terrible things don't hate what they're doing.
all this shows, is that the USA, like other nations, does terrible things sometimes. the difference: somebody took a stand and disagreed with what they were being told to cover up.
As always: it's funny how many americans just don't understand that the world continued forward after the British attacked them in 1778. people in places of power are NOT ALWAYS OUT TO GET YOU.
though sometimes this mentality get's you burned: it's the only way we'll ever move forward as a species. loosing trust and assuming "trust no one but yourself" to be a statement of fact: will only lead to people destroying themselves.
Just because it's on your Facebook status, doesn't mean you want the whole world to know.
see what you did there? kinda contradicted yourself. if you post something on a site that's ABOUT sharing information with the world, (that openly has told people that several times) and only pretends to keep information private so people will stop thinking about it: it's public.
as much as people want to keep secrets, they seem to be really REALLY -REALLY- fucking bad at it. if you want to keep your preferences a secret: don't post them in "a secret corner of the internet"... there are none.
and for the record: I have a public facebook profile, that contains VAST amounts of data about who I am, where I am, even how to get a hold of me. I like people to be able to get any information they want about me: regardless of the scope of that. I have NO illusion's of privacy to my information on the net. the internet is a bulletin board: anybody can post, anybody can read, and anybody can edit. at anytime. with OR WITHOUT making a note about what they did.
Seriously, if it's any harder than that, you need to give up technology as a career choice.
omfg, you win at everything forever.
I HAVE to hope that the person meant to say: "The reason they don't do that is that while nearly everybody wants the encryption actually setting it up is challenging for -NON- geeks. "
I'd understand that. I've been known to leave out a few KEY words from time to time.:P
IMHO: a required one. if this drives up the costs (of people being stupid): then the company can contribute some funds to the country in question's education system to ensure that kids learn to setup standards based access points, and solve the problem for the future.
(I know, what a hell of a dream world I live in!:P)
Well analyzed. I don't get peoples explosions at Google for doing exactly what they advertise they do: collect data, and sell targeted ads to companies, while trying to anonomise the data that other companies see.
as far as it goes: they do a pretty damn good job of it too.
and will make it illegal for them to crack. just an attempt to secure your connection, as bad as the attempt may be, still justifies your intention to protect it.
You seem to think advertising is limited to popups and banners.
any location aware application IS advertising. that's almost ALL it is. knowing what local businesses are nearby through the use of a tool: is almost the definition of advertising.
advertising is a WIDE array of topics and applications. when you geotag a photo, and want people to see your photo with your name before anyone else's photos of the same subject: that's advertising.
uhhh.. maybe I'm out of the loop here: but it takes all of -zero- effort to setup encryption on a router.
I've likely been through twenty wireless routers in the last year, at least six major brands. never have I even had to think about the setup.
if manufacturers enabled it by default, throw a basic: "the key is [random string of characters] sticker on it" and match it in the firmware. hell, even if it's just basic WEP, it would still have prevented this whole fiasco.
Google is a very simple company in the grand scheme of things. All they want is to advertise to you.
All the free services they provide, allow them to get to know what you want, so their advertisements are better targeted: HOPEFULLY allowing you to find what you want.
I'm sorry: I fail to see the "evil" part of that. they don't sell customer information, they sell anonymous -group- information, and allow advertisers to target ads at those groups. I'm sorry, but I fail to see the evil in somebody knowing that the people interested in "fuzzy kittens" went up by one after you happened to search for it.
in Canada however, it is the responsibilities of the people that expect to profit from that information, or any corporations not to -retain- that data without a waver.
Exactly. they meant no harm by this: they just wanted to know where you ARE so the local ads server to your connection in the future would be more relevant.
Honestly, I applaud them for getting so much free advertising out of this. even people that have never used a computer/don't have internet at home now know who they are.
and who is going to get pinned at fault for all this? Google? the Consumer?
Personally: I think it should be equipment manufacturers. honestly: 99% of people want basic wep/wpa/wpa2 encryption. just build all consumer routers to REQUIRE it during setup, and provide a flash/an option to disable it.
for the 1% of people that want an unencrypted wireless router out of the box: they can stand to pay more, or learn enough about the cheap ones to know how to turn it off.
I don't disagree at all. In addition to assisting people in being stupid about their privacy, I personally think the whole idea's draconian and stupid.
again, Canadian privacy laws are some of the toughest.
even if the EULA said "we will keep your data for 5 years and try not to give anything identifiable to anyone" they still can't legally do it: even if you wave your right to let them.
without a clearly defined reason to keep the data as-is with the identifiable parts intact, you can't get somebody to wave their right to privacy here. unless you tell them everything you plan to do with their data, and only -ever- stick to that, you can't keep their data.
somebody already said this, but you forgot to put "in america" at the bottom.
in Canada, almost every statement you made is false.
if you stand on a public street, you cannot take pictures of people without consent forms, any trademarked items without consent from the owner, even structures without consent from the architect.
if you stand on your porch naked, PEOPLE cannot take your picture. hell, even if you go streak down main street in a major city they still cant. (they can, but cannot retain that data unless you consent to it. )
if you literally hand out photocopies of your visa, people are legally required to securely dispose of them unless they have a reason to believe they should have access to that data.
the AM bit is exactly what this is about. in canada, you can broadcast that, and anybody that would write it down, or remember it and use it at some point HAS broken the law.
and your last line there is just a different flavor of the AM one. you can tell your life story to someone over coffee and if they ever try to use those details without consent: they broke the law.
Canada has some of the toughest privacy laws anywhere.
just goes to show: I guess we all have big secrets to hide.
in Canada, if a patient at a hospital walks outside and hands you his medical records, you cannot retain them.
if a person decided to walk down the street buck naked and you snap a picture, you MUST get their permission to keep or use that image.
in Canada, to prevent people from getting burned for leaking information they wanted to keep private: nobody can store/use the information they gathered without the consent of that person.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd be interested to see who would host something like that.
if I had the bandwidth for a good price, I'd consider it.
"for a few hours, we lost the ability to end the world"
what a shame.
for being a decent human being? #621258 up there has a great point. if people would hold each other accountable for their actions: we'd see that the previous US president was a scumbag, and deserves to be behind bars.
instead you're just sitting here perputating MORE hate, lying to yourself, and making the world a worse place again and again.
I'm not a religious person, but I hope for your sake that you are and that your local minister tells you how horrible a person you are: and you understand what he/she says.
or, providing you don't document all the terrible things you do.. or providing that the people doing the terrible things don't hate what they're doing.
all this shows, is that the USA, like other nations, does terrible things sometimes. the difference: somebody took a stand and disagreed with what they were being told to cover up.
As always: it's funny how many americans just don't understand that the world continued forward after the British attacked them in 1778. people in places of power are NOT ALWAYS OUT TO GET YOU.
though sometimes this mentality get's you burned: it's the only way we'll ever move forward as a species. loosing trust and assuming "trust no one but yourself" to be a statement of fact: will only lead to people destroying themselves.
news at eleven.
Just because it's on your Facebook status, doesn't mean you want the whole world to know.
see what you did there? kinda contradicted yourself. if you post something on a site that's ABOUT sharing information with the world, (that openly has told people that several times) and only pretends to keep information private so people will stop thinking about it: it's public.
as much as people want to keep secrets, they seem to be really REALLY -REALLY- fucking bad at it. if you want to keep your preferences a secret: don't post them in "a secret corner of the internet"... there are none.
and for the record: I have a public facebook profile, that contains VAST amounts of data about who I am, where I am, even how to get a hold of me. I like people to be able to get any information they want about me: regardless of the scope of that. I have NO illusion's of privacy to my information on the net. the internet is a bulletin board: anybody can post, anybody can read, and anybody can edit. at anytime. with OR WITHOUT making a note about what they did.
Seriously, if it's any harder than that, you need to give up technology as a career choice.
omfg, you win at everything forever.
:P
I HAVE to hope that the person meant to say: "The reason they don't do that is that while nearly everybody wants the encryption actually setting it up is challenging for -NON- geeks. "
I'd understand that. I've been known to leave out a few KEY words from time to time.
IMHO: a required one. if this drives up the costs (of people being stupid): then the company can contribute some funds to the country in question's education system to ensure that kids learn to setup standards based access points, and solve the problem for the future.
:P)
(I know, what a hell of a dream world I live in!
Well analyzed. I don't get peoples explosions at Google for doing exactly what they advertise they do: collect data, and sell targeted ads to companies, while trying to anonomise the data that other companies see.
as far as it goes: they do a pretty damn good job of it too.
Thank you. it surprising how many Americans think that their "privacy laws" (if one can even call them that) apply to the rest of the world.
and will make it illegal for them to crack. just an attempt to secure your connection, as bad as the attempt may be, still justifies your intention to protect it.
You seem to think advertising is limited to popups and banners.
any location aware application IS advertising. that's almost ALL it is. knowing what local businesses are nearby through the use of a tool: is almost the definition of advertising.
advertising is a WIDE array of topics and applications. when you geotag a photo, and want people to see your photo with your name before anyone else's photos of the same subject: that's advertising.
uhhh.. maybe I'm out of the loop here: but it takes all of -zero- effort to setup encryption on a router.
I've likely been through twenty wireless routers in the last year, at least six major brands. never have I even had to think about the setup.
if manufacturers enabled it by default, throw a basic: "the key is [random string of characters] sticker on it" and match it in the firmware. hell, even if it's just basic WEP, it would still have prevented this whole fiasco.
Google is a very simple company in the grand scheme of things. All they want is to advertise to you.
All the free services they provide, allow them to get to know what you want, so their advertisements are better targeted: HOPEFULLY allowing you to find what you want.
I'm sorry: I fail to see the "evil" part of that. they don't sell customer information, they sell anonymous -group- information, and allow advertisers to target ads at those groups. I'm sorry, but I fail to see the evil in somebody knowing that the people interested in "fuzzy kittens" went up by one after you happened to search for it.
in Canada however, it is the responsibilities of the people that expect to profit from that information, or any corporations not to -retain- that data without a waver.
they however are regulated under national data protection acts not to release said information unless requested to do so by a court.
where as in this case, Google just collected the info: and was technically/almost legally able to do as it pleased.
Exactly. they meant no harm by this: they just wanted to know where you ARE so the local ads server to your connection in the future would be more relevant.
Honestly, I applaud them for getting so much free advertising out of this. even people that have never used a computer/don't have internet at home now know who they are.
and who is going to get pinned at fault for all this? Google? the Consumer?
Personally: I think it should be equipment manufacturers. honestly: 99% of people want basic wep/wpa/wpa2 encryption. just build all consumer routers to REQUIRE it during setup, and provide a flash/an option to disable it.
for the 1% of people that want an unencrypted wireless router out of the box: they can stand to pay more, or learn enough about the cheap ones to know how to turn it off.
I don't disagree at all. In addition to assisting people in being stupid about their privacy, I personally think the whole idea's draconian and stupid.
But that doesn't stop it from being the law.
again, Canadian privacy laws are some of the toughest.
even if the EULA said "we will keep your data for 5 years and try not to give anything identifiable to anyone" they still can't legally do it: even if you wave your right to let them.
without a clearly defined reason to keep the data as-is with the identifiable parts intact, you can't get somebody to wave their right to privacy here. unless you tell them everything you plan to do with their data, and only -ever- stick to that, you can't keep their data.
...?
/. users are from outside the USA.
the majority of the world and a LARGE number (I'd be surprised if we weren't the majority) of
(and just to clear up any confusion, I'm from Canada.)
somebody already said this, but you forgot to put "in america" at the bottom.
in Canada, almost every statement you made is false.
if you stand on a public street, you cannot take pictures of people without consent forms, any trademarked items without consent from the owner, even structures without consent from the architect.
if you stand on your porch naked, PEOPLE cannot take your picture. hell, even if you go streak down main street in a major city they still cant. (they can, but cannot retain that data unless you consent to it. )
if you literally hand out photocopies of your visa, people are legally required to securely dispose of them unless they have a reason to believe they should have access to that data.
the AM bit is exactly what this is about. in canada, you can broadcast that, and anybody that would write it down, or remember it and use it at some point HAS broken the law.
and your last line there is just a different flavor of the AM one. you can tell your life story to someone over coffee and if they ever try to use those details without consent: they broke the law.
Canada has some of the toughest privacy laws anywhere.
just goes to show: I guess we all have big secrets to hide.
If you want your trash to be protected by the 4th Amendment,
then try moving to the united states.
yep, second the above poster.
in Canada, if a patient at a hospital walks outside and hands you his medical records, you cannot retain them.
if a person decided to walk down the street buck naked and you snap a picture, you MUST get their permission to keep or use that image.
in Canada, to prevent people from getting burned for leaking information they wanted to keep private: nobody can store/use the information they gathered without the consent of that person.