We've added these friends to your profile automatically.
If you do not want that we add these frinds automatically in the future you can opt out. This easy 30-steps-opt-out process is described somewhere in our FAQ.
Whilst the technology exists for the cloud to deliver fault tolerant distributed storage, when you choose to put data in the cloud, you are choosing to relinquish control of the data. You are placing it in the hands of someone else. Quite probably an organisation that you do not know intimately. Quite probably an organisation that is based in a different legislative region - probably another country.
So the only thing you can't opt out is that other people write your name next to a picture without your consent.
Which is a huge problem, if it is combined with face recognition.
Even if that is illegal, it is beyond me how it is the responsibility of FB to police such behavior.
The real problem is that FB stores the tag and uses face recognition - if FB only stores the names on people who have expressively given their consent, it's OK (so, Opt-in). And, it should be always illegal to keep a huge database with face recognition on people who have not opt-in to this special service. This has nothing to do with "policing".
If they snagged a photo of you, they probably did so because you interacted with them. At that point, what you do is public knowledge. The degree to which it is public depends upon the context and your friends.
Not everything, what is not secret, is public. Privacy is not binary.
Do most worms actually infect home machines by direct connection? WTF is running on people's machines to allow that?
Yes. Otherwise it would be a virus and not a worm. And what to run to allow that: e.g. XP before SP2 without a good firewall (remember "slammer"?). Or Linux with an old and unpached Apache. You would be amazed how many old installations are out there, which are not up-to-date.
Personally, I'll refuse any NATed connection if only on principle. Censorship evading technologies like Tor and Freenet depend on people being able to connect directly to each other. That turns the 'net into TV.
I understand the reasoning, but you still need a good firewall. Most people use NAT as a means as a firewall. And, of course, if you have a DSL connection at home, you need a NAT, unless you've found a provider that gives you enough IP addresses for all of your devices (or you have only one device).
Well, file sharing is for now legal in my country. Of course we're part of the world population that MAFIAA has in the watch list.
There is a fine difference between just "downloading" and "sharing", which is downloading and making available to others for download.
Then, you buy a Blueray or DVD with a region code that does not allow to play it in your country,
It does. I had to import a US Blueray player though, for which I have the invoice from the seller, and the VAT and the custom duties invoice from the custom office. So if they are saying that it's illegal for me to use something I bought abroad they should have their head checked.
Remember: Al Capone was sentenced because he did not pay his income tax...
They claim it is due to expense of the film stock because of the amount of silver actually used in film stock. I can kind of believe this but not 100%. So a movie company will make say 200-300 copies and ship them around the US to theaters. Once it has it run in the US, they get all 200-300 film copies back and they send them out to France or Europe or whatever.
No, the physical (analogue) copy is not reused in other countries - except in the UK or Australia, movies are dubbed in the foreign language. As the sound is part of the physical media on which the movie is, it cannot be reused (and by the way a movie copy quickly loses quality after some weeks of use).
The reason for region lock is that the industry wants to keep control over the schedules; e.g. avoiding to start two blockbusters at the same week-end, starting blockbusters in the US during summer, in Europe rather during winter, because Americans go more often in the cinemas during summer, and Europeans during winter.
And, of course, to sell you the same movie to completely different prices.
All of this did work a long as movies were shipped as physical goods to cinemas or as DVDs to your rental shops - however, it fails in the age of digital goods.
Actually, you are a double pirate: First, you download (illegally, I assume) a season. Then, you buy a Blueray or DVD with a region code that does not allow to play it in your country, so you circumvent this "copy protection". Actually, I think that in some jurisdictions, the downloading (if not sharing, i.e. uploading) is less sanctioned than breaking the "copy protection". Stupid world.
The description looks like that you want to store your projects 5-10 years (after all: would it still make sense to open them afterwards?). If this is true, DVDs or even Blueray make sense - or even cloud (but then use at least 2 independent providers and check often).
However, if you want to store them for more than 5-10 years, ask yourself first the question: How do you go to archive the programs that you need to open your projects? Open formats for the content, and open source for the programs would be a huge help. The you can think about the archive media for it.
No, most do not. But you can create your own CD for recovery with all factory settings (this is at least supported by the ASUS and HP laptops / desktops that I own).
Unfortunately, "factory settings" also means all the scrapware and adware stuff that you find nowadays on a retail PC. If I could chose a Windows installation CD or DVD instead, I would be a much happier customer - and reinstall each newly purchased PC right away.
>>Uh? And this price is already known? Before a long-term disposal "landfill" is operating?
The entire notion that we need a centralized waste disposal center (especially one that can last for millions of years) is misleading.
Dry Cask Storage is doing just fine, and if we ever get our collective heads out of our asses and start burning the 'highly energetic waste' as the fuel that it is, the problem goes away.
To the point: The disposal costs are not factored in, since they are not known.
Whether your proposal works or not will be determined in the future.
Decomissioning is actually included in the bill for nuclear power, as is waste disposal.
Uh? And this price is already known? Before a long-term disposal "landfill" is operating?
Are you honestly so clueless about how radiation works, "AtomicJake" that you don't see the idiocy about worrying about waste for 10 million years?
Hint: google this thing called "half-life" and its relationship to radioactivity.
Sight. No actually, I am not. Use 10,000 years instead. It probably does not matter. Sorry to being lazy and having used another "just too many year to be serious to plan for" number.
This could also be a Slashdot poll: How many IT pros (Web designers do not count, sorry) do you know who have a FB account? Personally, I do not know any...
>>Actually no, as a Libertarian I don't think you get neuclear power at all. These things only get built with subsides and loan grantees, that we don't support. The free market does not build these.
The subsidy rate for nuclear (20%) is lower than any other green power plant (averaging 50% or so).
You forgot the cap of insured failures. After that cap, the tax payer is paying for any exceeding damages. And, of course, the non-payment for storing the nuclear waste for the next 10 Million years or so. So, it's much more than the 20%.
Regarding the green energy subsidies, you are right. But here the goal is that the subsidies can be decreased continuously as soon as the green energy plants become more efficient (incl. more cost efficient).
Can we not repeat unsubstantiated rumors? I really hope this is just really bad reporting and our that Congress is not taking statements like "It was reported on a forum" as evidence.
Hey! This is slashdot. We only repeat unsubstantiated rumors. Where would be the fun otherwise?
Put an image on your PC and be connected to the internet... and the government can get it one way or another.. or show up at your house and take your stuff.
Right, but only with a valid search warrant. And in the case of non-US citizens, the US government has some more troubles to come to the house (well, some exceptions lately....)
If the government ever had interest in what you are doing it never took facebook to find it all out.
As I said before, it is totally voluntary. The internet in all its forms and security layers should always be considered public domain. Do you realize your slashdot debates and quips are adding to your portfolio?
Sorry, that's not true. The Internet is all its forms and security layers include public Web sites, private Web sites (login/password), Shopping sites incl. payments, backup sites, cloud computing sites, torrents and whatever. So, some should be considered public domain, some should be considered private groups, some should be considered really private. Facebook has the option to set your privacy level (awkwardly, but it's there). The issue is that if this level can be easily circumvented by the government that it's really a privacy issue. And as other mentioned: Another big problem is that you might show up in Facebook without even being a member. Having chatty "friends" is enough.
Also, your response to my #2 assumes way too much. What I said was true... What you think I implied -- that privacy is for criminals -- is not at all what I said. What I said is true, read it without your assumed implications and in the thought process regarding TFA.
If you did not imply this, then it is like the "and when did you stop beating your wife?" question, which does not (?) imply that you did actually beat your wife.
So yet again the same lesson: _never_ trust a computer on which you have not installed the OS yourself, and kept 100% secure from malware.
I fully agree - but all recent computers that my (larger) family bought came without Windows OS disks. You could get "repair installation disks" from the manufacturer - but those would also install again all the preinstalled crapware with it (and anything else, which you might not trust).
Any way to force the vendors to give you a clean Windows installation disk?
Note: This is a European experience - not sure whether this also applies to US sales.
The extra funny thing is that 1) Its voluntary, and 2) most people on facebook aren't thinking of themselves as criminals with things to hide.
1) Wrong. Membership in Facebook is voluntary, but (at least those who care) users do not share their status updates and wall entries with government agencies. The issue is that Facebook can very easily be convinced with mild pressure to share those data with those agencies. 2) Wrong. Not sharing with everyone (i.e. privacy) has nothing to do with being a criminal.
Slashdot Mirror
We've added these friends to your profile automatically.
If you do not want that we add these frinds automatically in the future you can opt out. This easy 30-steps-opt-out process is described somewhere in our FAQ.
Run your own recursive DNS resolver with DNSSEC validation.
Why would this help as long as the root DNS servers are located in the US?
Whilst the technology exists for the cloud to deliver fault tolerant distributed storage, when you choose to put data in the cloud, you are choosing to relinquish control of the data. You are placing it in the hands of someone else. Quite probably an organisation that you do not know intimately. Quite probably an organisation that is based in a different legislative region - probably another country.
Which is the real issue: No way for a European company to use a US cloud provider - Amazon, Azure, Google. The Patriot Act is prohibitive here.
That being, stopping wasting their money on buying patents, and using their considerable amount of cash to push the elimination of software patents.
Best post ever!
So the only thing you can't opt out is that other people write your name next to a picture without your consent.
Which is a huge problem, if it is combined with face recognition.
Even if that is illegal, it is beyond me how it is the responsibility of FB to police such behavior.
The real problem is that FB stores the tag and uses face recognition - if FB only stores the names on people who have expressively given their consent, it's OK (so, Opt-in). And, it should be always illegal to keep a huge database with face recognition on people who have not opt-in to this special service. This has nothing to do with "policing".
The whole damn site is a privacy violation.
You could say that about the entire Internet.
You could say that about spoken language. What's your point?
If they snagged a photo of you, they probably did so because you interacted with them. At that point, what you do is public knowledge. The degree to which it is public depends upon the context and your friends.
Not everything, what is not secret, is public. Privacy is not binary.
Do most worms actually infect home machines by direct connection? WTF is running on people's machines to allow that?
Yes. Otherwise it would be a virus and not a worm. And what to run to allow that: e.g. XP before SP2 without a good firewall (remember "slammer"?). Or Linux with an old and unpached Apache. You would be amazed how many old installations are out there, which are not up-to-date.
Personally, I'll refuse any NATed connection if only on principle. Censorship evading technologies like Tor and Freenet depend on people being able to connect directly to each other. That turns the 'net into TV.
I understand the reasoning, but you still need a good firewall. Most people use NAT as a means as a firewall. And, of course, if you have a DSL connection at home, you need a NAT, unless you've found a provider that gives you enough IP addresses for all of your devices (or you have only one device).
Well, file sharing is for now legal in my country. Of course we're part of the world population that MAFIAA has in the watch list.
There is a fine difference between just "downloading" and "sharing", which is downloading and making available to others for download.
Then, you buy a Blueray or DVD with a region code that does not allow to play it in your country,
It does. I had to import a US Blueray player though, for which I have the invoice from the seller, and the VAT and the custom duties invoice from the custom office. So if they are saying that it's illegal for me to use something I bought abroad they should have their head checked.
Remember: Al Capone was sentenced because he did not pay his income tax...
They claim it is due to expense of the film stock because of the amount of silver actually used in film stock. I can kind of believe this but not 100%. So a movie company will make say 200-300 copies and ship them around the US to theaters. Once it has it run in the US, they get all 200-300 film copies back and they send them out to France or Europe or whatever.
No, the physical (analogue) copy is not reused in other countries - except in the UK or Australia, movies are dubbed in the foreign language. As the sound is part of the physical media on which the movie is, it cannot be reused (and by the way a movie copy quickly loses quality after some weeks of use).
The reason for region lock is that the industry wants to keep control over the schedules; e.g. avoiding to start two blockbusters at the same week-end, starting blockbusters in the US during summer, in Europe rather during winter, because Americans go more often in the cinemas during summer, and Europeans during winter.
And, of course, to sell you the same movie to completely different prices.
All of this did work a long as movies were shipped as physical goods to cinemas or as DVDs to your rental shops - however, it fails in the age of digital goods.
Actually, you are a double pirate: First, you download (illegally, I assume) a season. Then, you buy a Blueray or DVD with a region code that does not allow to play it in your country, so you circumvent this "copy protection". Actually, I think that in some jurisdictions, the downloading (if not sharing, i.e. uploading) is less sanctioned than breaking the "copy protection". Stupid world.
The description looks like that you want to store your projects 5-10 years (after all: would it still make sense to open them afterwards?). If this is true, DVDs or even Blueray make sense - or even cloud (but then use at least 2 independent providers and check often).
However, if you want to store them for more than 5-10 years, ask yourself first the question: How do you go to archive the programs that you need to open your projects? Open formats for the content, and open source for the programs would be a huge help. The you can think about the archive media for it.
No, most do not. But you can create your own CD for recovery with all factory settings (this is at least supported by the ASUS and HP laptops / desktops that I own).
Unfortunately, "factory settings" also means all the scrapware and adware stuff that you find nowadays on a retail PC. If I could chose a Windows installation CD or DVD instead, I would be a much happier customer - and reinstall each newly purchased PC right away.
>>Uh? And this price is already known? Before a long-term disposal "landfill" is operating?
The entire notion that we need a centralized waste disposal center (especially one that can last for millions of years) is misleading.
Dry Cask Storage is doing just fine, and if we ever get our collective heads out of our asses and start burning the 'highly energetic waste' as the fuel that it is, the problem goes away.
To the point: The disposal costs are not factored in, since they are not known.
Whether your proposal works or not will be determined in the future.
Decomissioning is actually included in the bill for nuclear power, as is waste disposal.
Uh? And this price is already known? Before a long-term disposal "landfill" is operating?
Are you honestly so clueless about how radiation works, "AtomicJake" that you don't see the idiocy about worrying about waste for 10 million years?
Hint: google this thing called "half-life" and its relationship to radioactivity.
Sight. No actually, I am not. Use 10,000 years instead. It probably does not matter. Sorry to being lazy and having used another "just too many year to be serious to plan for" number.
This could also be a Slashdot poll: How many IT pros (Web designers do not count, sorry) do you know who have a FB account? ...
Personally, I do not know any
>>Actually no, as a Libertarian I don't think you get neuclear power at all. These things only get built with subsides and loan grantees, that we don't support. The free market does not build these.
The subsidy rate for nuclear (20%) is lower than any other green power plant (averaging 50% or so).
You forgot the cap of insured failures. After that cap, the tax payer is paying for any exceeding damages. And, of course, the non-payment for storing the nuclear waste for the next 10 Million years or so. So, it's much more than the 20%.
Regarding the green energy subsidies, you are right. But here the goal is that the subsidies can be decreased continuously as soon as the green energy plants become more efficient (incl. more cost efficient).
All US airlines are terrible compared to (most) non-US airlines.
Can we not repeat unsubstantiated rumors? I really hope this is just really bad reporting and our that Congress is not taking statements like "It was reported on a forum" as evidence.
Hey! This is slashdot. We only repeat unsubstantiated rumors. Where would be the fun otherwise?
Put an image on your PC and be connected to the internet... and the government can get it one way or another.. or show up at your house and take your stuff.
Right, but only with a valid search warrant. And in the case of non-US citizens, the US government has some more troubles to come to the house (well, some exceptions lately....)
If the government ever had interest in what you are doing it never took facebook to find it all out.
As I said before, it is totally voluntary. The internet in all its forms and security layers should always be considered public domain. Do you realize your slashdot debates and quips are adding to your portfolio?
Sorry, that's not true. The Internet is all its forms and security layers include public Web sites, private Web sites (login/password), Shopping sites incl. payments, backup sites, cloud computing sites, torrents and whatever. So, some should be considered public domain, some should be considered private groups, some should be considered really private.
Facebook has the option to set your privacy level (awkwardly, but it's there). The issue is that if this level can be easily circumvented by the government that it's really a privacy issue. And as other mentioned: Another big problem is that you might show up in Facebook without even being a member. Having chatty "friends" is enough.
Also, your response to my #2 assumes way too much. What I said was true... What you think I implied -- that privacy is for criminals -- is not at all what I said. What I said is true, read it without your assumed implications and in the thought process regarding TFA.
If you did not imply this, then it is like the "and when did you stop beating your wife?" question, which does not (?) imply that you did actually beat your wife.
So yet again the same lesson: _never_ trust a computer on which you have not installed the OS yourself, and kept 100% secure from malware.
I fully agree - but all recent computers that my (larger) family bought came without Windows OS disks. You could get "repair installation disks" from the manufacturer - but those would also install again all the preinstalled crapware with it (and anything else, which you might not trust).
Any way to force the vendors to give you a clean Windows installation disk?
Note: This is a European experience - not sure whether this also applies to US sales.
I put tape over my work laptop's webcam. A little paranoid... perhaps... but it makes me feel better.
Understandable. So you also put cotton in the build-in mic?
These stupid companies think they can treat their customers like children [...]
I definitely hope that nobody is treating children like this.
Excellent news for Android users. I guess that Apple would never accept a similar App for the iPhone - it might disturb the user experience.
The extra funny thing is that 1) Its voluntary, and 2) most people on facebook aren't thinking of themselves as criminals with things to hide.
1) Wrong. Membership in Facebook is voluntary, but (at least those who care) users do not share their status updates and wall entries with government agencies. The issue is that Facebook can very easily be convinced with mild pressure to share those data with those agencies.
2) Wrong. Not sharing with everyone (i.e. privacy) has nothing to do with being a criminal.
In summary: FAIL