I vote that instead we make blind people wear red flashing lights on their heads so electric car drivers will be able to spot them more easily as they nonchalantly amble into the road.
Re:You can't win if you don't play
on
Linked In Or Out?
·
· Score: 1
By default your profile is visible to your friends only. There is an option to extend this to "friends of friends" but there is no "show to everyone" privacy option. This is why I don't understand this claim that recruiters can check out your Facebook page, unless they happen to be on your friends list, in which case they probably know you anyway, so won't be needing this info in the first place.
If you're not friends [of friends] with someone, then all you can see is their profile picture, their name and their list of friends. So unless your profile pic is particularly embarassing / unprofessional then you have little to worry about with respect to what you're making available to random people, such as recruiters.
Re:You can't win if you don't play
on
Linked In Or Out?
·
· Score: 1
How were you able to see a potential employee's Facebook profile without already being friends with them?
I agree with you in pricipal, but in practise you are overlooking one thing - Facebook does what it does so much better than any site before it. Compare it to MySpace and it is not difficult to see why it is now the defacto site as MySpace slides into its inevitable decline.
While it is possible that another site could implement these same features, or more, and perhaps even better, the traction that Facebook now has with its (well deserved) incumbency means that IMO the likelihood of its demise is small.
On Facebook you control who can view your profile by (in theory) allowing only people you trust to have access. By default, the most you can see about someone you are not friends with is their main profile picure, their network, and their list of friends (though this can also be disabled through your provacy options of you so wish).
Furthermore, every time someone tags a photo of you, you receive a notification telling you so, and you are free to (permanently) remove this tag if you so wish.
So as far as I see it, a college should have very little chance of obtaining information on you through your Facebook profile unless you specifically grant them this privilege.
> The reason that universities don't do this is that they want logs for their own purposes, for example to track down infected machines, or people posting rude messages about the vice-chancellor.
I am one of these web "masters" of which you speak and am genuinely interested in (but unfortunately ignorant of) what you say. Would you have the good grace to explain to someone who knows a lot about programming (web and otherwise), but is still yet to grasp the intricacies of encryption, why MySQL / SSL is inappropriate for distributing large popular files?
>> And the government has bailed them out with over £1,000 for each man, woman and child in the whole United Kingdom - an utterly colossal sum of money. Is that good value for your taxes? It certainly doesn't look like good value for money for mine.
> That depends on whether there's a good chance of getting it back, doesn't it?
> Certainly the government takes a lot of my money and does things I don't approve of with it. But in this case, if it really is effectively just a loan and it avoids a financial melt-down, it's probably a loan I'd rather make.
And where do you suppose this money came from? Does the UK government have billions of pounds lying around spare like this? I certainly hope not, or we're paying (even) more taxes than we should. This bail out loan is most likely itself a loan from the Bank of England, which it would have created out of nothing (which is a whole different controversy). This means there are now more pounds in the economy with the same amount of goods, which can only lead to inflation. So not only is the taxpayer underwriting this loan, we will be paying for it twice through the devaluation of the currency that it, and the inevitable future bailouts, will create.
At some point in an economic model built on nothing (or "trust" as you like to call it), something has to give, and tax payer bail outs are only a short term solution.
...isn't the real story here that you will be able to construct your shopping list at home and, through the power of the pipes, have it appear on your shopping trolley? The fact it's going to have ads is pretty much a given as it is a free service. What's all the fuss about? If you don't like it then don't use it FFS.
> Yes, it sounds like NWO-Alex-Jones mumbo-jumbo
Your entire post is spot on until this. If Alex Jones simply reports on what Bush Senior / Kissinger / David Rokerfeller and other influential characters have continually espoused, it automatically becomes conspiracy mumbo jumbo? Do some research FFS.
> Doesn't the guy have better things to do with his time > than to send takedown notices for 29-second video clips?
Smells to me like it's the record label doing this to MAKE PRINCE LOOK BAD. He pissed a lot of people in the industry off when he released his last album for free in a UK newspaper.
While i agree that Apple should be forced to sell unlocked phones
Er... Apple should be allowed to sell whatever they like as long as it isn't dangerous. If you don't like their product, then it's your choice not to buy it.
Slashdot Mirror
I vote that instead we make blind people wear red flashing lights on their heads so electric car drivers will be able to spot them more easily as they nonchalantly amble into the road.
Woosh! (Or should that be Flash?)
By default your profile is visible to your friends only. There is an option to extend this to "friends of friends" but there is no "show to everyone" privacy option. This is why I don't understand this claim that recruiters can check out your Facebook page, unless they happen to be on your friends list, in which case they probably know you anyway, so won't be needing this info in the first place.
If you're not friends [of friends] with someone, then all you can see is their profile picture, their name and their list of friends. So unless your profile pic is particularly embarassing / unprofessional then you have little to worry about with respect to what you're making available to random people, such as recruiters.
How were you able to see a potential employee's Facebook profile without already being friends with them?
I agree with you in pricipal, but in practise you are overlooking one thing - Facebook does what it does so much better than any site before it. Compare it to MySpace and it is not difficult to see why it is now the defacto site as MySpace slides into its inevitable decline.
While it is possible that another site could implement these same features, or more, and perhaps even better, the traction that Facebook now has with its (well deserved) incumbency means that IMO the likelihood of its demise is small.
It's a sad state of affairs that an act such as the Read the Bills act is even necessary.
But when they came for the porn, the people cried out with one voice united?
On Facebook you control who can view your profile by (in theory) allowing only people you trust to have access. By default, the most you can see about someone you are not friends with is their main profile picure, their network, and their list of friends (though this can also be disabled through your provacy options of you so wish).
Furthermore, every time someone tags a photo of you, you receive a notification telling you so, and you are free to (permanently) remove this tag if you so wish.
So as far as I see it, a college should have very little chance of obtaining information on you through your Facebook profile unless you specifically grant them this privilege.
So that's how he explains the chair throwing incident?
Millions of Brits, Canadians and Cubans would disagree with you.
(e) Hire CowboyNeil as their next attorney.
> Beside I know heeps of kids that have high frequency ring tones so that their teachers cannot hear their mobiles ringing in class
Er.. vibrating alert anyone?
> The reason that universities don't do this is that they want logs for their own purposes, for example to track down infected machines, or people posting rude messages about the vice-chancellor.
Or that crusty old dean!
I am one of these web "masters" of which you speak and am genuinely interested in (but unfortunately ignorant of) what you say. Would you have the good grace to explain to someone who knows a lot about programming (web and otherwise), but is still yet to grasp the intricacies of encryption, why MySQL / SSL is inappropriate for distributing large popular files?
Thanks.
>> And the government has bailed them out with over £1,000 for each man, woman and child in the whole United Kingdom - an utterly colossal sum of money. Is that good value for your taxes? It certainly doesn't look like good value for money for mine.
> That depends on whether there's a good chance of getting it back, doesn't it?
> Certainly the government takes a lot of my money and does things I don't approve of with it. But in this case, if it really is effectively just a loan and it avoids a financial melt-down, it's probably a loan I'd rather make.
And where do you suppose this money came from? Does the UK government have billions of pounds lying around spare like this? I certainly hope not, or we're paying (even) more taxes than we should. This bail out loan is most likely itself a loan from the Bank of England, which it would have created out of nothing (which is a whole different controversy). This means there are now more pounds in the economy with the same amount of goods, which can only lead to inflation. So not only is the taxpayer underwriting this loan, we will be paying for it twice through the devaluation of the currency that it, and the inevitable future bailouts, will create.
At some point in an economic model built on nothing (or "trust" as you like to call it), something has to give, and tax payer bail outs are only a short term solution.
...isn't the real story here that you will be able to construct your shopping list at home and, through the power of the pipes, have it appear on your shopping trolley? The fact it's going to have ads is pretty much a given as it is a free service. What's all the fuss about? If you don't like it then don't use it FFS.
I'd do Ron Paul!
> Yes, it sounds like NWO-Alex-Jones mumbo-jumbo Your entire post is spot on until this. If Alex Jones simply reports on what Bush Senior / Kissinger / David Rokerfeller and other influential characters have continually espoused, it automatically becomes conspiracy mumbo jumbo? Do some research FFS.
> Doesn't the guy have better things to do with his time
> than to send takedown notices for 29-second video clips?
Smells to me like it's the record label doing this to MAKE PRINCE LOOK BAD. He pissed a lot of people in the industry off when he released his last album for free in a UK newspaper.
> And see, that is the thing... youtube makes money off the site,
> because of the videos people put up to draw traffic to it.
A solution would be for YouTube to not show ads with videos such as this.
> You meant: US Democrats "Accidentally" Publish Whistleblowers' Email
> Addresses (Note the scare quotes) Now *that*'s a Slashdot headline.
No, that's a BBC News headline.
Mod parent up, he's the only poster so far that actually seems to get it.
> Windows NT, Windows 98 with better networking abilities
Wrong. Windows NT/2000/XP/Vista is a completely different OS from the DOS/3.x/95/98/ME family.
> Windows XP - While easily the best OS they've released so far, that's not really saying much.
You missed out Windows 2000, which many agree is their "best" OS so far. It's XP without a lot of the crap, and therefore less security holes.
Up his sleavies.