Don't spoil the man's ancient beliefs by offering facts:)
I mean, there really seems to be something cultist about calling KDE heavy.
My experience is exactly the opposite, KDE is (for a full desktop experience) less of a memory hog than old Gnome and the recent RC for KDE4.10 shows even more improvements.
As others already explained we could finally run all the fine GNU/Linux programs out there.
As an example, we need a proper usenet client for tablets, I'd love to run something like Thunderbird on my Nexus 7, including pop3 support for offline reading of mail.
The reason(s) for a global emergency number are quite obvious.
Just take the example of the party of daft Brit mountaniers that some years ago got stuck on a French mountain.
Because the UK had retained their obsolete 999 these dimwits did not know about the EU-wide implementation of 112 and they had to call friends at home to get the needed help.
For a lot of us, successfully integrating into society, means having an FB account, just like having an email account. -snip- They might be big, but they offer a unique, necessary service, and should be regulated.
What a load of crock!
Society will run quite nicely without you spreading your personal life all over the net!
When you make your living off the public like as a politician, a top sporter or especially some Hollywood VIP you might have reasons for running a Twitter or Facebook account, for the rest of us it's plainly a liability.
I have helped a chef set up the privacy settings for his restaurant related FB account and it's a bloody nightmare, clueless friends and family keep dumping private information and it's near impossible to stop this nonsense.
So yes, for this lot at least the existing (EU) regulations should be upheld.
Obviously I don't have a Facebook account but several times I had requests by acquaintances to join them on Facebook, I then requested Facebook to stop all such requests and they honoured it.
This in itself does not do away with the monumental stupidity of my sister and some other 'friends' that 'shared' their contacts including my details with Facebook.
I haven't tried but am sure that under EU law I can request Facebook to remove any and all traces of my details from their database, especially because I don't have or wish an official relation with them.
The law is clear, in your example Facebook is responsible for the data on their server and any place they shared it with, not for what you've done with it.
Why is this simple concept for some so hard to understand!
The principle of EU privacy law is quite simple, even Facebook can understand it:)
Facebook is responsible for what it does with your data, not what their users do with it.
So when Facebook shares your data they have the responsibility to on request "unshare".
It's not just banks with tokens that don't 'get it' regarding security.
Some 2 months ago Danish Jyskebank had their authentication system breached by means of a Java vulnerability so for a weekend they shut down their system for updates.
When they came back up you only noticed the log-in applet was not showing, it required a call to the bank to be told you needed to update to the latest version of Java.
Then after log in they show links to documents explaining the changes, in Adobe pdf and Flash...
Also noteworthy is that Denmark's largest company's IT security policy prohibits the installation of Java on their systems, so no more Jyskebank for their employees:)
Indeed, since a couple of years we use a Cisco VOIP system were the old local numbers have been ported to.
There's such a phone on every desk around the world, when I'm logged in on it calls to my local number are automatically forwarded as if I were in my home office.
You can also call up an app on your computer and use the same VOIP number.
We do keep separate mobile numbers but it is possible for us or the reception at the home office to set a forward to the mobile.
Personally I hate being on the tether of a mobile phone so the only time I carry one is when a specific job (consignment, weekend duties) demands it, when that particular task is over the phone is returned to IT. As a matter of fact, we use some dumb phones (many days of battery life!) with their own number for weekend/night duties, the Duty Phone, and at the end of the duty it's handed to the next victim.
I couldn't do without the old fashioned office phone, that's how our clients contact me and it's a lot more comfortable than a mobile.
When a person has certain power there will be others wanting to influence them, at some stage this could involve bribery and now we call it corruption.
In my view that chance is a little less in the EU system as there are so many parties, all with their own interests.
Parties as in members of the EU Commission and Members of the European Parliament.
The first is split up over 27 sovereign nations who all keep a very close eye on what their commissioner is doing.
The second is split over 754 MEP's representing the 27 member nations via 7-8 loose alliances by a multitude of parties.
Buying a significant influence in this system is really hard, the best a lobbyist can hope for is to get the attention of an influential member of a particular commission.
For the organisations and companies involved this information equals capital and they will know quite well where to find it and who has access to the data.
According to EU law personal information will always remain the property of the individual, something companies and organisations operating in the EU are well aware of.
When the owner of said data sends you a take down request you have to comply, no ifs and buts.
We use Concur, a US based company, to do our expenses and even travel arrangements.
We also do business in and with for example Cuba and until last year in Iran, something the US has laws against.
I can see one of our employees having visited Cuba and done his expense claim via Concur being stopped at some US airport.
With this in mind and the document to support it I'll use my authority as a works council member to advise the company seek legal advise and possibly to re-evaluate our contracts with US data hosters.
Strange enough the first digital camera I used around 1994 was the Kodak DC-10.
The 333,000 pixels pictures could in my view easily compete with Polaroids.
I remember they (Kodak) made the first camera to match the resolution of a typical 35mm picture and it was an incredible 16 Mega pixel!
Now I have a 36 MP camera (Nikon D800) using that same 35mm frame:)
Later Kodak sold re-branded Minolta digital camera's, they probably had Kodak IP in them but the brand eventually went to Sony, Kodak lost their chance.
Film for Polaroid cameras available again
on
A Tale of Two Companies
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
At the original factory for Polaroid media in The Netherlands some guys are again producing the 'film' you need to continue using your late model Polaroid cameras: http://www.the-impossible-project.com/?nointro=1
Slashdot Mirror
No reboot is needed for changes by nvidia-settings, just connect the beamer/external monitor, set it up through nvidia-settings and be done.
I mean, there really seems to be something cultist about calling KDE heavy.
My experience is exactly the opposite, KDE is (for a full desktop experience) less of a memory hog than old Gnome and the recent RC for KDE4.10 shows even more improvements.
It's a honey pot.
I've got Thunderbird with a couple of years of private mail on an Atom powered netbook and it's fine.
Oh?
As others already explained we could finally run all the fine GNU/Linux programs out there.
As an example, we need a proper usenet client for tablets, I'd love to run something like Thunderbird on my Nexus 7, including pop3 support for offline reading of mail.
He he, try from outside the US :-)
Just take the example of the party of daft Brit mountaniers that some years ago got stuck on a French mountain.
Because the UK had retained their obsolete 999 these dimwits did not know about the EU-wide implementation of 112 and they had to call friends at home to get the needed help.
Yes there is a need for a single number!
We need more legislation regarding data sharing, not only do I want to be informed my data is shared, I need to know what's done with it.
For a lot of us, successfully integrating into society, means having an FB account, just like having an email account. -snip- They might be big, but they offer a unique, necessary service, and should be regulated.
What a load of crock!
Society will run quite nicely without you spreading your personal life all over the net!
When you make your living off the public like as a politician, a top sporter or especially some Hollywood VIP you might have reasons for running a Twitter or Facebook account, for the rest of us it's plainly a liability.
I have helped a chef set up the privacy settings for his restaurant related FB account and it's a bloody nightmare, clueless friends and family keep dumping private information and it's near impossible to stop this nonsense.
So yes, for this lot at least the existing (EU) regulations should be upheld.
It would be your (indecent without permission of the owners) action to share, not Facebook's. :)
Don't make it unnecessarily complicated
Obviously I don't have a Facebook account but several times I had requests by acquaintances to join them on Facebook, I then requested Facebook to stop all such requests and they honoured it.
This in itself does not do away with the monumental stupidity of my sister and some other 'friends' that 'shared' their contacts including my details with Facebook.
I haven't tried but am sure that under EU law I can request Facebook to remove any and all traces of my details from their database, especially because I don't have or wish an official relation with them.
All the law requires is they delete any and all information about the individual that requests it.
Because such data belongs exclusively to the individual.
Why is this simple concept for some so hard to understand!
Facebook is responsible for what it does with your data, not what their users do with it.
So when Facebook shares your data they have the responsibility to on request "unshare".
Some 2 months ago Danish Jyskebank had their authentication system breached by means of a Java vulnerability so for a weekend they shut down their system for updates.
When they came back up you only noticed the log-in applet was not showing, it required a call to the bank to be told you needed to update to the latest version of Java.
Then after log in they show links to documents explaining the changes, in Adobe pdf and Flash...
Also noteworthy is that Denmark's largest company's IT security policy prohibits the installation of Java on their systems, so no more Jyskebank for their employees :)
There's such a phone on every desk around the world, when I'm logged in on it calls to my local number are automatically forwarded as if I were in my home office.
You can also call up an app on your computer and use the same VOIP number.
We do keep separate mobile numbers but it is possible for us or the reception at the home office to set a forward to the mobile.
Personally I hate being on the tether of a mobile phone so the only time I carry one is when a specific job (consignment, weekend duties) demands it, when that particular task is over the phone is returned to IT. As a matter of fact, we use some dumb phones (many days of battery life!) with their own number for weekend/night duties, the Duty Phone, and at the end of the duty it's handed to the next victim.
I couldn't do without the old fashioned office phone, that's how our clients contact me and it's a lot more comfortable than a mobile.
In my view that chance is a little less in the EU system as there are so many parties, all with their own interests.
Parties as in members of the EU Commission and Members of the European Parliament.
The first is split up over 27 sovereign nations who all keep a very close eye on what their commissioner is doing.
The second is split over 754 MEP's representing the 27 member nations via 7-8 loose alliances by a multitude of parties.
Buying a significant influence in this system is really hard, the best a lobbyist can hope for is to get the attention of an influential member of a particular commission.
See Cenan's post above:
http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3297347&cid=42201913
Well spoken, +1!
According to EU law personal information will always remain the property of the individual, something companies and organisations operating in the EU are well aware of.
When the owner of said data sends you a take down request you have to comply, no ifs and buts.
We use Concur, a US based company, to do our expenses and even travel arrangements.
We also do business in and with for example Cuba and until last year in Iran, something the US has laws against.
I can see one of our employees having visited Cuba and done his expense claim via Concur being stopped at some US airport.
With this in mind and the document to support it I'll use my authority as a works council member to advise the company seek legal advise and possibly to re-evaluate our contracts with US data hosters.
I'm sure when an article mentions European (privacy) law the implication is we're talking about European Union law.
Strange enough the first digital camera I used around 1994 was the Kodak DC-10. :)
The 333,000 pixels pictures could in my view easily compete with Polaroids.
I remember they (Kodak) made the first camera to match the resolution of a typical 35mm picture and it was an incredible 16 Mega pixel!
Now I have a 36 MP camera (Nikon D800) using that same 35mm frame
Later Kodak sold re-branded Minolta digital camera's, they probably had Kodak IP in them but the brand eventually went to Sony, Kodak lost their chance.
Polaroid-compatible film is again manufactured in their old factory by old and new staff:
http://www.the-impossible-project.com/?nointro=1
At the original factory for Polaroid media in The Netherlands some guys are again producing the 'film' you need to continue using your late model Polaroid cameras:
http://www.the-impossible-project.com/?nointro=1