Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Chromebooks are MANDATED at my kid's school (Score 1) 182

It may shock you and your privileged kid, but no every kid is not being handed a Chromebook in the class.

Every child, in the class I referred to, is indeed being handed a chrome book. Don't let your lack of knowledge about a specific class make you think you know that there are exceptions in that specific class. I caveated my comment, you did not.

Comment Chromebooks are MANDATED at my kid's school (Score 2) 182

Who care about the cell phones when the school is the one handing every kid a Chromebook and then refusing to supervise their use when in classrooms. I hate when a teacher asks me to help keep my kid from being distracted on their Chromebook. I always just flatly say, take it away from them - I don't want them to have it in class anyways. This is 100% a problem of their making. Yes, they have net nannies, but their software doesn't adapt as quickly as these kids do.
joe.

Comment Re:Doxxing tech support (Score 1) 441

I am 100% with you on this. I disagree with doxxing as a principle - not because of who is right or left. I think the proper outcome (although I'm not sure I'd like it) would be for politicians to enact laws to curtail speech. Although honestly, I'm sure the Supreme Court has already ruled (at some point) that this kind of speech is not protected - it's just no law enforcement wants to get involved.
Joseph Elwell.

Comment Re:Doxxing tech support (Score 1) 441

You did not read the article closely enough. I'm not going to point out the obvious doxxing they did as then I will be participating.

Also, it's been years since I posted on Slashdot. Is this kind of gutter talk the dialogue I can expect here? Is "drinkypoo" a serious username and are their comments to be taken seriously if they're just swearing at people? wow.

Comment Re:Catch 22 (Score 1) 536

Currently we don't hold websites and social media responsible for the content posted by their users. That is legislative and subject to change.

If legislation changes it so that corporations like Twitter are responsible for content posted by their users there will be MORE bans not less. People inciting violence on Twitter will mean Twitter will be held responsible for that violence. Twitter isn't currently responsible for violence that Trump encourages people to do. They choose to censor just because they don't like it, not because they will get in trouble with the law. That will change if new legislation goes into affect.

It is not written into the constitution and the 'gay wedding cake' ruling by the SCOTUS does not mean what so many here are saying it means.

The First amendment is essentially written into the constitution. What a weird thing to say. I did not mention the gay wedding cake ruling. Not sure why you did nor how it would apply here since I didn't read that ruling.

I can see both sides of the aisle agreeing that it is problematic to continue to extend immunity for user content when the big tech companies are actively censoring users.

Yeah, so... If the legislation you mention goes into affect, they'll BAN a whole lot more people. Look at what happened to Pornhub recently. Only verified uploads. Facebook and Twitter won't be any different if they are held to the standard that Mastercard and Visa recently chose to hold Pornhub to.

I can see both sides of the aisle agreeing that it is problematic to continue to extend immunity for user content when the big tech companies are actively censoring users.

I don't see both sides of the aisle agreeing to extend immunity for content even if they are actively censoring users. Why? Because bots, that's why. No one wants Facebook and Twitter to be as saturated with garbage as email is. Maybe there is a middle ground in there somewhere, but these platforms need to have the ability to ban users indiscriminately. Facebook doesn't (currently) allow porn. If we write legislation taking away Facebooks' immunity if they are censoring their users then Facebook is going to become the new Pornhub. Because they won't be able to remove content without giving up immunity. And they can't censor fast enough to ensure that they don't need immunity. If you read Facebook's report, they've had more authenticated child pornography on their site than Pornhub... Facebook NEEDS that immunity.

Comment Notably no First Amendment in Germany (Score 0, Troll) 536

Merkel: "can be interfered with, but by law and within the framework defined by the legislature -- not according to a corporate decision."

Yeah, in GERMANY, you can infringe on people's speech using law and legislative power. But not in the United States. Someone needs a refresher in the American Constitution before trying to push their legal system onto America.

Is it any surprise that a government that uses laws to reign in free speech doesn't want competition with corporations? Of course Germany doesn't want corporations to be in control of speech - they want a monopoly on that control. But, it doesn't work this way in the United States of America. Here private individuals can reign in speech and the government is supposed to stay out of the way.

Comment A dig at Jailbreakers hidden in there (Score 2) 59

"Avoid jailbreaking or rooting any of your devices."
Ah yes, don't jailbreak your phone because it's clearly so secure that thieves will be unable to jailbreak it themselves. Little does the author know that if you do NOT jailbreak your phone, all you're doing is leaving it open for someone else to be able to jail break it. The next bullet point is telling:
"Ensure all system updates and app updates take place on time."
Ah yes, you didn't jailbreak your phone? So your phone is insecure by design? Well, make sure to grab that next OS update before the hackers have a chance to jailbreak it for you.
If you think jailbreaking my phone so I can load a custom firewall application makes me MORE at risk for bank theft, then you're a fan of security through obscurity. Unfortunately thieves like these ones see right through your obscurity. SMS network anyone? The only reason it's considered "secure" is because it's a federal crime to snoop even though it's pretty trivial.

Slashdot Top Deals

I wish you humans would leave me alone.

Working...