the unofficial Slashdot digest for 2018-May-15 today archive


  1. Justice Department, FBI Are Investigating Cambridge Analytica
  2. Tesla Unveils New Large Powerpack Project For Grid Balancing In Europe
  3. Uber Drops Arbitration Requirement For Sexual Assault Victims
  4. YouTube Might Finally Get An Incognito Mode
  5. In a Poll, 43% of Millennials in 36 Countries Say They Plan To Leave Their Jobs Within Two Years
  6. Comcast Charges $90 Install Fee At Homes That Already Have Comcast Installed
  7. Hackers Steal Millions From Mexican Banks In Transfer Heist
  8. A Quarter of Americans Spend All Day Inside, Survey Finds
  9. Suspect Identified In CIA 'Vault 7' Leak
  10. Smarter People Don't Have Better Passwords, Study Finds
  11. Facebook Deleted 583 Million Fake Accounts in the First Three Months of 2018
  12. Homeland Security Unveils New Cyber Security Strategy Amid Threats
  13. Moon of Jupiter Prime Candidate For Alien Life After Water Blast Found
  14. FedEx Sees Blockchain as 'Next Frontier' For Logistics
  15. US Cell Carriers Are Selling Access To Your Real-Time Phone Location Data
  16. Surface Hub 2 Coming in 2019, Looks Amazing
  17. The Rise of Free Urban Internet
  18. Canonical Addresses Ubuntu Linux Snap Store's 'Security Failure'
  19. Apple CEO Says He Has Urged Trump To Address Legal Status of Immigrants; Also Told Him That Tariffs Are Wrong Approach To China
  20. Kaspersky Lab Moving Core Infrastructure To Switzerland
  21. Should the FTC Investigate Google's Location Data Collection?
  22. Facebook Faulted By Judge For 'Troubling Theme' In Privacy Case
  23. Intel's First 10nm Cannon Lake CPU Sees the Light of Day

Alterslash picks the best 5 comments from each of the day’s Slashdot stories, and presents them on a single page for easy reading.

Justice Department, FBI Are Investigating Cambridge Analytica

Posted by BeauHDView on SlashDotShareable Link
An anonymous reader quotes a report from CBS News: The Justice Department and FBI are investigating Cambridge Analytica, the now-shuttered political data firm that was once used by the Trump campaign and came under scrutiny for harvesting data of millions of users, The New York Times reported on Tuesday. The Times, citing a U.S. official and people familiar with the inquiry, reported federal investigators have looked to question former employees and banks connected to the firm.

The Times reports prosecutors have informed potential witnesses there is an open investigation into the firm, whose profiles of voters were intended to help with elections. One source tells CBS News correspondent Paula Reid prosecutors are investigating the firm for possible financial crimes. A company that has that much regulatory scrutiny is almost guaranteed to have federal prosecutors interested, Reid was told. Christopher Wylie, a former Cambridge Analytica employee who spoke out about the data sharing practices, told the Times federal investigators had contacted him. The American official told the Times investigators have also contacted Facebook as a part of the probe.

The deep state doesn't exist

By poity • Score: 3, Interesting • Thread

But unelected people will chase any wild goose to try to get Trump on a technicality. The collusion investigation that was supposed to find communication between Trump and Putin now has, as it's MOST damning evidence, a guy who left the election campaign early on and whose indicted crime was having dodged taxes years before the campaign even began. Now a violation of privacy by a British firm is being argued as the next piece of evidence for the supposed Trump-Putin collusion. That is pure non sequitur if ever there was any. Not to mention that if Trump were indeed colluding with Putin, it would have been easier to have gotten the FSB to hack Facebook and give Trump's campaign access to all the data.

Re:The deep state doesn't exist

By fafalone • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread
While I too doubt there was personal contact between Trump and Putin (but never heard anything to suggest that's what Mueller was specifically looking for, but rather operatives of his campaign working with operatives representing Russia, of which he might have approved or had knowledge of), the fact is we have no idea what evidence the investigation has/will turn up. All you Trumpsters have this preordained conclusion where despite all the smoke, you insist since we can't see the fire, the absolutely is none and the investigation into the matter should just be shut down before it looks. Further, there's other components of the investigation, like obstruction. The underlying crime doesn't even need to have occurred, and busting people for that alone is routine criminal procedure, not some loophole they just made up specifically to nail Trump.
And yet another angle is that Trump and his sons have explicitly stated they've borrowed large amounts from Russian banks, which could potentially give them significant leverage over our President on one end, and probably involves laundering on the other. These are critical to investigate.

Not that any of this will matter to you, no matter what is presented when Mueller actually reveals his findings, you'll still think he's innocent, it's a witch hunt, Trump Did No Wrong, it's all a partisan hit job, and on and on to protect your boy.

Probably will result in BS technicality charges

By swb • Score: 3, Interesting • Thread

These never seem to go anywhere. There's never enough evidence to convict any significant decision maker of a crime, especially when they have enough resources for counsel that is able to obfuscate sufficiently.

At best you see some kind of vague conspiracy charge -- which really, anyone could be charged with -- or real bullshit stuff, like mid-level flunkies who get convicted of something like "lying to the FBI", which seems to make a serious felony out of either honest people's inadvertent "lies by omission" or the natural reaction people have to the intimidation of being questioned by a serious law enforcement organization.

So a handful of people might wind up scapegoats on technicality charges since prosecutors don't like failure publicity. No film at 11, you can find this story buried on the back of the sports section.

Re:CA Are Not The Problem. The Problem is FB

By argStyopa • Score: 4, Insightful • Thread

"It's amazing to think that people are getting worked up about this relatively small data set obtained by this relatively tiny company"

Not really. We've had a 2 year multimillion dollar investigation into a president based on no actual evidence, just supposition and speculation by people who ardently were opposed to him.

Support Trump, you'll be punished beyond the full extent of the law for being on the "wrong side". It's almost like religion.

Evidence to the contrary

By Okian Warrior • Score: 4, Insightful • Thread

Not that any of this will matter to you, no matter what is presented when Mueller actually reveals his findings, you'll still think he's innocent, it's a witch hunt, Trump Did No Wrong, it's all a partisan hit job, and on and on to protect your boy.

I'm actually good with believing he's innocent, until there's evidence.

I absolutely *hate* it when some police force make a flashy claim about someone - all the guns confiscated during the search, all the electronic devices taken from the home, nebulous "tip from an informant" - everything is being tried in the court of public opinion nowadays. None of that is evidence of a crime.

Let's not forget that after 9/11 someone was sending anthrax letters to people (remember those?) and Mueller - the lead investigator - ignored a tip about Bruce Edwards Ivins (the perpetrator, from one of Ivins' colleagues) and focused on Steven Hatfill. Mueller went before congress and swore under oath that Steven Hatfill was the person responsible, when in fact there was no evidence implicating Steven Hatfill whatsoever. Among other items, Steven Hatfill had no access to anthrax. The FBI didn't bother to explain this fact, and didn't seem to care.

Steven Hatfill went through several years of hell, having his life turned upside down, condemned in the media, death threats... and was eventually exonerated and sued the government for (IIRC) 5 million dollars.

That's the history of your "unimpeachable, honorable" Mueller.

Remember the indictments of 13 Russian nationals and 3 corporations recently released? It turns out one of the corporations didn't exist at the time of the purported crimes. Mueller indicted the proverbial "ham sandwich".

I like to think everyone is innocent, until proven guilty. and this thing about the court of public opinion is bollocks. Show us the evidence.

I sometimes ask a *question* about how someone appears to have broken the law. For example, Trump is widely believed to be obstructing justice for firing Comey, despite having a memo in-hand recommending it, but the Oakland mayor can warn illegal immigrants of an upcoming ICE raid... and that's not?

Or how Michael Flynn can be charged under the Hatch act for meeting with a Russian diplomat (as a member of the incoming administration, opening dialog and not specifically making claims or policy) while Kerry can negotiate with Iran and European countries to save the Iran agreement... and that's not?

I like to think everyone is innocent, until proven guilty.

Show me the evidence. What you have so far is nothing.

Tesla Unveils New Large Powerpack Project For Grid Balancing In Europe

Posted by BeauHDView on SlashDotShareable Link
Tesla has unveiled a new large Powerpack energy storage project to be used as a virtual power plant for grid balancing in Europe. It consists of 140 Powerpacks and several Tesla inverters for a total power output of 18.2 MW. Electrek reports: Tesla partnered with Restore, a demand response aggregator, to build the system and offer balancing services to European transmission system operators. Instead of using gas generators and steam turbines kicking to compensate for losses of power on the grid, Tesla's batteries are charged when there's excess power and then discharge when there's a need for more power.

Restore UK Vice President Louis Burford told The Energyst that they are bundling their assets like batteries as a "synthetic pool": "By creating synthetic pools or portfolios, you reduce the technical requirements on individual assets that otherwise would not be able to participate [in certain balancing services]. By doing so you create value where it does not ordinarily exist. That is only achievable through synthetic portfolios."
For those interested, Tesla has released promo video on YouTube about the project.

Real goal of Tesla?

By icejai • Score: 5, Interesting • Thread

I have a hunch this is Tesla's true end game. I don't think Musk honestly believes he'll reach $650B market cap in 10 years by selling cars. I think he believes he'll reach $650B market cap by selling these. By turning his gigafactory into a "product" that can be mass-produced, he'll be able to scale up and deploy at a rate and cost that nobody else can match.

Leaving the gigafactory off as collateral in Tesla's last bond issue is pretty interesting as well.

Maybe making electric cars, and giving away patents, was the excuse he created in order to justify the creation of the gigafactory in the first place? It's like giving away lanterns to sell kerosene.

If this is the case, Tesla intends to be this century's Standard Oil -- a company that makes stored energy more accessible.

Hey may never have intended automobile production to be profitable. Maybe he just wants the world to demand his batteries.

Re:Real goal of Tesla?

By haruchai • Score: 5, Interesting • Thread

"I have a hunch this is Tesla's true end game"

Tesla CTO JB Straubel in 2014 - "“We are an energy innovation company as much as a car company.....“Tesla wasn’t founded to make cars. We have enough cars. We have *too many* cars. Tesla was founded to change the game in energy.....I really love batteries, I might love batteries more than cars"

Re:If I owned Nat Gas Turbines....

By Anonymous Coward • Score: 4, Insightful • Thread

If the grid did this well already, then Tesla's batteries wouldn't be having such a massive impact on the cost of balancing.

Re:If I owned Nat Gas Turbines....

By ravenshrike • Score: 5, Interesting • Thread

In terms of responsiveness, coal and oil plants are like 7200 rpm 3Gbps SATA HDDs, Nuke plants are like 5400 rpm IDE HDDs in RAID 0. Gas plants are like SSDs. Batteries are like L3 cache. Solar and wind are network connections, the former giving a relatively fixed amount of data over the day which changes by the hour, and the latter shoving random amounts of data down the pipe.

Re:If I owned Nat Gas Turbines....

By thegarbz • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread

Secondly, storage is generally most valuable close to demand, and not close to generation.

That depends on the purpose of the storage. Storage designated for grid stability (e.g. batteries rapidly compensating a shift in frequency while peakers come online) is most valuable close to the generation. The lights stay on if the generators don't trip on load/frequency deviations.

Storage for the purpose of dispensing energy continuously at regular intervals (e.g. batteries compensating for the peak demand after sunset) however is most valuable close to demand as there are less system losses.

Uber Drops Arbitration Requirement For Sexual Assault Victims

Posted by BeauHDView on SlashDotShareable Link
Previously, Uber required complaints to be resolved in mandatory arbitration -- out of court and behind closed doors. Today, the company announced it is "changing its policies to allow customers, employees and drivers who are sexually harassed or assaulted to take their complaints to court and to speak publicly about their experiences," reports NPR. From the report: Last month, Katherine and Lauren were among 14 female victims who sent an open letter to Uber's board, pointing to the company's own sexual harassment problems and the #MeToo movement. "Silencing our stories deprives customers and potential investors from the knowledge that our horrific experiences are part of a widespread problem at Uber," they wrote. The women's demand -- and Uber's response -- highlight the significance of mandatory arbitration agreements, which are increasingly common. The provisions are usually in the fine print -- and most people who sign the agreements don't know they have signed away their right to sue.

Re:I'll take the karma hit

By thesupraman • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread

What debate?
Unless you commit 100% you are a white male sexist rapist.
Or so you think there is another allowable position?
After all, trial by pitchfork wielding social media crowds is the new justice, isn't it? Facts and evidence are so last year!

Suing the company for not doing bg check, etc

By raymorris • Score: 5, Interesting • Thread

The arbitration clause wouldn't affect a criminal case.
A passenger who felt they were mistreated (rightly or wrongly) could sue Uber for not preventing it somehow, such as by having a more thorough background check of drivers or whatever.

I say "felt they were mistreated" because in many cases people have different viewpoints. There are instances where a clearly a crime was committed, obviously. This new policy also applies to alleged sexual harassment, though. That's a) not a crime (it is a reason to sue) and b) very, very subjective. The definition of sexual harassment is "unwelcome ...", so while one person might think they are both having fun laughing at a joke, the other person might internally feel the joke is unwelcome, and therefore potentially sexual harassment. The EOEC commission definition of sexual harassment also includes things like "offensive comments about women in general". I think most of us have seen a possibly innocent comment construed as "offensive about women in general", because someone heard something different than what the speaker intended or whatever. So there can be instances where everyone agrees no crime was committed, but one person feels a comment was offensive, and therefore sexual harassment.

Re:How the fuck was that ever legal?

By fafalone • Score: 4, Insightful • Thread
Arbitrators are hired by the company. They're allegedly neutral, but do you honestly think one who rules against the company too often will continue to be called? As bad a regular courts are, mandatory arbitration isn't reasonable. I hope you were complaining about court costs for the customer and not the corporation, to which I'd say give them the option... allow the customer to choose arbitration if they so wish, but do not make it mandatory.

Re:I'll take the karma hit

By fafalone • Score: 4, Insightful • Thread
The judge in that case, who's married to vocal MeToo activist but thinks that's not a conflict, was incredibly biased and made rulings that are almost certainly going to get the case overturned on appeal. The parade of women not a party to the case, an "expert witness" telling the jury that inconsistencies and inaccuracies in a womans story are proof she's telling the truth (it's also proof if there are none of those), her waiting to bring the claim is proof she's telling the truth (doesn't matter if it's right away or decades later, it's always evidence of credibility), if she stays friends with him after it's proof, if she doesn't it's proof, and on and on about why everything that seems to impugn credibility actually bolsters it, all based on ridiculous "research" by gender studies professors with no grounding in objective fact. Admitting that as expert was a mockery of Daubert. At the peak of the MeToo movement the jury had 'ignore the facts, believe the victim' drilled into them with the full blessing of the judge; there's a reason the last jury deadlocked and this one didn't.

Look, I think Cosby was guilty, did similar to lots of other women, and is generally a bad person. But that doesn't justify denying him due process. And the precedents are going to be used in the future against people who are likely not guilty.

Click to read the actual policy statement. Battery

By raymorris • Score: 4, Interesting • Thread

> TFA says that it affects sexual assault cases.

As I recall, TFA links to another article, which in turn links to the actual policy statement. The actual policy covers sexual harassment, which unfortunately has a very subjective definition. Apparently it's very hard to define in a way that everyone is satisfied with.

> Assault is physical.

If there is actual touching, that's battery. Assault by itself is an attempt . That's why you typically only hear battery mentioned as "assault and battery" - because if they DID touch, then they first attempted to touch. So you pretty much can't have battery by itself without assault. You hear assault mentioned separately because someone can make an attempt without actually doing it. A problem with assault is one must deduce what was in the person's mind, what they were trying to do. Sometimes that's obvious, sometimes it's not.

The above are the classical definitions of just "assault" and "battery", without adding "sexual". Battery is touch that intentionally or knowingly causes injury, assault is an attempt to do so.

Once you get into "sexual assault", the terms used depend on the state. There is no such crime as "sexual assault" in California. It's sexual battery. Sexual assault *would* mean "tried to touch my boobs", but that's not in California law. California (and some other states) have a crime of "sexual battery" - non-consensual touching of sexual body parts for sexual pleasure. Texas is an example of a state which uses the term "sexual assault" for what would more accurately be called sexual battery, or rape.

YouTube Might Finally Get An Incognito Mode

Posted by BeauHDView on SlashDotShareable Link
Currently, you can head to the "History and Privacy" settings in YouTube and toggle on the options to pause watch and search history if you don't want the site to track your searches and watched videos, but that can be a bit complicated each time you want to search for something weird. According to Android Police, "YouTube will make it a little easier to go into incognito without digging into many settings and without having to disable it later." A new "Incognito Mode" will appear when you tap your account avatar in the top right of the app. From the report: With "Incognito Mode" on, all your activity from the current session is not saved and subscriptions are hidden too. It's as if you were signed out without being so, and there's a neat incognito icon replacing your avatar. If you turn off Incognito or become inactive on YouTube, you'll be back to using your own account.

Re:Uh, why not use the browser's private mode

By jetkust • Score: 4, Informative • Thread
They are talking about adding this to the YouTube Android App, not the website. If using the website, you still have to pause your history the old way I'm guessing. But even then your history would still be saved by your browser. So realistically you'd have to go into Incognito mode, AND pause your history too.

In a Poll, 43% of Millennials in 36 Countries Say They Plan To Leave Their Jobs Within Two Years

Posted by msmashView on SlashDotShareable Link
A poll by Deloitte with more than 10,000 millennials across 36 countries found that 43% of them are planning to leave their jobs within two years, while only 28% are looking to stay beyond five years.

Re:Job duration...

By ShanghaiBill • Score: 4, Insightful • Thread

America lacks proper laws, since the American employment system is a race to the bottom as far as vaca time and working hours.

But not pay. Americans earn more than any country in Europe except Norway (offshore oil) and Luxembourg (tax haven). They also keep more of what they earn.

This is "proper" since most Americans would rather earn more than have more time off.

If you want more time off, then ask your employer. But don't try to force your preferences on me.

That is patently incorrect

By rsilvergun • Score: 5, Informative • Thread
The New Deal was funded with large tax increases on the wealthy. Following it and up until the 70s the marginal tax rate was 90% (e.g. you paid 90% of your income after around $22 million/year when adjusted for inflation). Wages weren't paid as stock dividends yet and offshore tax shelters weren't a thing so the tax was actually paid. It was the largest sustained period of growth in the middle class in American history. These are all facts, and you can verify them with a few minutes/hours on google.

Then Nixon & Regan came along, convinced everybody that Government was the Problem and Not the solution (lovely slogan that) and real wages and the middle class have been in decline ever since. This is also a fact you can verify on Google.

Face it, right wing economics don't work. We tried my way and it worked. We tried your way and it didn't. The logical thing is to go back to my way. Stop _feeling_ and start _thinking_. That's the only way out of this mess.

Re:Job duration...

By AmiMoJo • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread

Americans earn more on average, but spend much more of it on healthcare and are at constant risk of bankruptcy from illness. Also, inequality between workers is way higher.

It's proper that society seeks to create the most collective happiness and good, while respecting fundamental rights. US society is just someone else's boot using your face as a step up.

Re:Job duration...

By serviscope_minor • Score: 4, Insightful • Thread

I suppose I could have a slightly higher salary if I jumped around more, but I don't know if I would be as happy.

Unless your company is unusual, probably substantially higher but what you say is still correct. Moving up the career ladder beyond a certain point involves getting more responsibilities which means more pay, more hours and more stress. It definitely becomes a career you do as part of your life rather than a job, and it will eat more into your other time as a result. You certainly get less time to enjoy the more money you earn.

Re:Fire anyone who unionizes immediately

By stealth_finger • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread

The commie unions are mini-dictatorships. Freedom means RIGHT TO WORK, but commie union bosses want to force everyone to pay their fees and submit to their control.

As a manager in a right to work state, I will always fire anyone who threatens to unionize immediately.

Thankfully, this is no longer the early 20th century and support for right to work is growing. The commie unions are losing their power.

As a manager you use your power to keep the workers down knowing that there's a long line. Fucks like you are why unions are needed, not as a way for people to get dues. You can't treat your workers like shit if they'll all take the hit and up and out on you. Without the guy doing the actual work you've got fuck all yet most of the time the people doing the work get the smallest piece of pie. Fuck you.

Comcast Charges $90 Install Fee At Homes That Already Have Comcast Installed

Posted by BeauHDView on SlashDotShareable Link
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Based on our tests, signing up for standalone Internet or TV service on often requires payment of a $59.99 or $89.99 installation fee, depending on where you live. (The fee was $60 in two Massachusetts suburbs and $90 at homes in Houston, Texas, and Seattle, Washington.) In cases where the $60 or $90 fee is charged, the fee is required whether you purchase your own modem or rent one from Comcast for another $11 a month.

The installation fee might be charged even if the home you're buying service at has existing Comcast service, and even if you order Internet speeds lower than those purchased by the current occupant. That means the fee is charged even when Comcast doesn't have to make any upgrades at the house or apartment you're moving into. Internet speed makes no difference, as the fee may be charged whether you purchase 15Mbps downloads or gigabit service. You can avoid the installation fee by purchasing certain bundles that include both TV and Internet, but the fee is often mandatory if you buy only TV service or broadband individually. The $60 or $90 fee is also charged when you buy phone service only or a "double-play" package of phone service and broadband.

Same experience, different vendor

By tempo36 • Score: 4, Informative • Thread

Last time we upgraded service with Qwest the billing/support folks insisted that we needed a new modem and that a technician HAD TO come out to our house.

When the tech arrived he had our same exact modem and looked at us like we were crazy for having him there. We stood there while he called up the office and told them to cancel the charge for the visit and to, essentially, "push the button" to change our service as we'd requested. We thanked him for his time and we didn't get charged.

Had we not had a great tech or if we hadn't been paying attention, you absolutely better believe Qwest would have charged us for the "visit."

This isn't unique to Verizon, it's shitty telecom/internet behavior all around.

Same here

By RubberDogBone • Score: 3 • Thread

Just moved into a new apartment and we have Comcast preinstalled in the place. There's a couple of outlets. Because I am not stupid, I own my own cable modem and SHOULD be cable to connect up, agree to pay them, and off I go.

Haha not so fast. The cable isn't hot. They've disconnected it in the wiring closet downstairs, so a tech HAS to come out to do nothing more than plug in the line. All of about 30 seconds of work.

There is no reason for this. There is no analog signal on the line any more. You have to have Comcast cable box or a cable modem they recognize by MAC to get service. Or probably a cable card device. But it has to be a device they on record. You get nothing plugging in a regular TV.

So there is no functional reason to disconnect the lines like this Except. They make $60 off the installer visit that doesn't need to happen.

Why? Because they can. Because they know the only other 'option' is AT&T DSL which tops out at the BLAZING speed of 768kbits Yes. The fastest DSL I can get is 768. And AT&T has the audacity to offer DirecTV over IPTV on that POS line AND wants a lot of money for it too.

Comcast's speeds and rates are much better. But that installer has to show up. For nothing.

I am currently using an LTE hotspot in what is a very bad cell signal area. But what I can get this way is unlimited, faster than AT&T and cheaper. I'll cope.

Literally dealt with that today

By gman003 • Score: 3 • Thread

Signing up for Comcast at a new apartment. Selected "use my own modem", because I still have the DOCSIS 3.0 modem I used the last time I had Comcast service. It let me skip the modem rental fee, but the website didn't allow me to not schedule an appointment to have a "professional" install it, nor skip the $90 fee that would entail. I picked up the phone and got it sorted out - apparently the previous tenant didn't schedule to disconnect their service, so the system insisted someone needed to go out and uninstall whatever was there. The service rep was able to sort it out for me, but I imagine a lot of people wouldn't bother picking up the phone and waiting on hold listening to badly-bandlimited Vivaldi for five minutes.

Came here to say that

By sootzuit • Score: 4, Interesting • Thread
Verizon did the exact same thing to me. I had a fiber ONT in my room from the previous tenant, and I told them I already had fiber installed, and I already had my own wifi access point, and all I needed was a single CAT5 cable or really any connection type for just one internet device. Just give me the FIOS modem and I will plug it in. They still charged me a $90 "installation fee", which was separate from the "sign-up fee". They also tried to get me to verbally authorize a recurring $140 monthly payment for TV, internet and phone service which I explicitly told them earlier I did not want, that I only wanted basic internet. I was also told that after the 12 months of my initial contract, the price will automatically go up after that, by $20-$30 per month, and there is nothing I can do about it unless I cancel my service. So, while Comcast sucks ass, the competition (Verizon) were really sleazy and definitely charge unnecessary fees.

Re:They do this because....

By Solandri • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread
And they can only because your local government granted them a monopoly. The cable companies aren't natural monopolies. Your local government gave them the power they enjoy to screw you over.

When I lived in the outskirts of Boston, my city voted to allow a second cable company to provide service. The day before the competing service became available to customers, the original cable company dropped the prices for all their Internet plans by $10/mo, implemented a 50% speed increase across the board at no charge, eliminated all installation and service change fees, and switched from requiring a multi-year subscription to month-to-month after just 6 months.

You don't need to wait for net neutrality legislation or court decisions, which could take decades, if it ever happens at all. All you need is to convince your local city council to vote to introduce competition, by allowing a second (or even third) cable company to provide service. They created this mess, they can fix it.

Hackers Steal Millions From Mexican Banks In Transfer Heist

Posted by BeauHDView on SlashDotShareable Link
happyfeet2000 shares a report from Reuters: Thieves siphoned hundreds of millions of pesos out of Mexican banks, including No. 2 Banorte, by creating phantom orders that wired funds to bogus accounts and promptly withdrew the money, two sources close to the government's investigation said. Hackers sent hundreds of false orders to move amounts ranging from tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of pesos from banks including Banorte, to fake accounts in other banks, the sources said, and accomplices then emptied the accounts in cash withdrawals in dozens of branch offices. The total amount is estimated to be as much as $20 million (~400 million pesos).

Gotta build the wall somehow, right?

By Anonymous Coward • Score: 5, Funny • Thread

Trump did say Mexico would pay for it...

It's good work I guess...

By bobbied • Score: 5, Interesting • Thread

It's good work, if you can get it.

So.. They didn't have withdraw controls on newly minted accounts that just got funded electronically? They didn't require ID's either? What about verifying you know who's creating these electronic transactions? No?

Shesh, this is lax security. I'm not saying the banks deserved to be fleeced, but if you cannot be bothered with the minimum of security practices, I'm going to find it hard to shed many tears about your bad luck. Then there is the whole, you don't know who's initiating this transactions electronically so you cannot hold them responsible?

All I can say is.. I don't want to be a bank...

Re:Actually, about $200MM USD if 400MM pesos.....

By ClickOnThis • Score: 4, Informative • Thread

You missed a decimal point. The current exchange on a Mexican peso is USD$0.05080.

A Quarter of Americans Spend All Day Inside, Survey Finds

Posted by BeauHDView on SlashDotShareable Link
Zorro shares a report from The Washington Times: A quarter of Americans spend almost an entire 24 hours without going outside and downplay the negative health effects of only breathing indoor air, according to a new survey claiming a new "indoor generation." It's unclear how dangerous indoor air is in the modern era -- reports by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency evaluating indoor air quality are from 1987 and 1989, which found that it is two to five times more polluted than outside.

The "Indoor Generation Report" surveyed 16,000 people from 14 countries in Europe and North America about their knowledge and perceptions of indoor vs outdoor air quality and the amount of time spent inside. Of the results for Americans, a quarter said they spend between 21 and 24 hours inside; 20 percent said they spend 19 to 20 hours a day inside and 21 percent say they spend between 15 and 18 hours inside. Thirty-four percent said they spend between zero and 14 hours inside. Great Britain and Canada had similar results to the U.S., with 23 and 26 percent of its respondents saying they spend between 21 and 24 hours inside. The countries with the highest percentage of people who spend the lowest amount of time inside were Italy (57 percent), the Czech Republic (57 percent) and the Netherlands (51 percent). This group said they only spend between zero and 14 hours indoors.

Re: As opposed to outdoor air?

By Octorian • Score: 4, Interesting • Thread

Given the age of the study, I wonder how heavily skewed it is from how buildings were constructed in the 1950's-1970's. You know, before all of our modern regulations and standards, and back when a lot more people smoked. I recall "indoors" having a very different feel back then, especially in places where older people lived.

Franklin Took Airbaths, Tesla Squished His Toes

By dryriver • Score: 4, Funny • Thread
How would one take naked airbaths like Benjamin Franklin AND squish ones toes like Nicola Tesla, all in the noble pursuit of becoming a genius, when one is outside where fellow citizens can see what one is doing AND vital equipment that has no business being paraded around outdoors? So the case FOR staying indoor at all times, always, and never going outside ever is rock-solid. It is the only surefire way to become a true genius. I believe the Japanese call staying indoors constantly "Cocooning". THAT is why the Japanese are so smart! (Takes his PS4 and puts it in the microwave)

Vitamin D deficiency rampant throughout USA

By Paul Fernhout • Score: 4, Informative • Thread


And for decades the recommended supplementation level has been too low.

Does that include time sleeping?

By Chrisq • Score: 3 • Thread
Does that include time sleeping? If not I'm surprised at 57% of Czechs and Dutch spending 0 to 14 hours outside. If it is included then 21 percent of Americans spending between 15 and 18 hours inside sounds pretty high, unless you work outside that's essentially all your non working and non sleeping time.


By lessthan • Score: 3 • Thread

One of my favorite sci-fi futures is where all of humanity lives in archologies and nature is allowed to go rampant outside them. (The idea being that the population remains similar to what it is today, but the people are concentrated geographically.) One of the objections to the idea of archologies is that humanity wouldn't do well cooped up inside all day. It looks like we might be moving that way anyway.

Suspect Identified In CIA 'Vault 7' Leak

Posted by BeauHDView on SlashDotShareable Link
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The New York Times: In weekly online posts last year, WikiLeaks released a stolen archive of secret documents about the Central Intelligence Agency's hacking operations, including software exploits designed to take over iPhones and turn smart television sets into surveillance devices. It was the largest loss of classified documents in the agency's history and a huge embarrassment for C.I.A. officials. Now, The New York Times has learned the identity of the prime suspect in the breach (Warning: source may be paywalled; alternative source): a 29-year-old former C.I.A. software engineer who had designed malware used to break into the computers of terrorism suspects and other targets.

F.B.I. agents searched the Manhattan apartment of the suspect, Joshua A. Schulte, one week after WikiLeaks released the first of the C.I.A. documents in March last year, and then stopped him from flying to Mexico on vacation, taking his passport, according to court records and family members. The search warrant application said Mr. Schulte was suspected of "distribution of national defense information," and agents told the court they had retrieved "N.S.A. and C.I.A. paperwork" in addition to a computer, tablet, phone and other electronics. But instead of charging Mr. Schulte in the breach, referred to as the Vault 7 leak, prosecutors charged him last August with possessing child pornography, saying agents had found the material on a server he created as a business in 2009 while he was a student at the University of Texas.

Wrong order...

By b0s0z0ku • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread
He did things in the wrong order. You go to a non-extradition country, and THEN you leak what you need to leak. Assuming he leaked anything and isn't just a fall guy for piss-poor security at the CIA.

Re:Oh crap

By b0s0z0ku • Score: 4, Insightful • Thread
Personally, I wouldn't avoid jury duty. I actively WANT a chance to practice jury nullification and throw (a small amount of) sand in the gears of the sorry excuse of a justice system that exists in the US.

Re:Wrong order...

By evanh • Score: 4, Interesting • Thread

My guess is the CIA had a short list of likely suspects and when the documents were revelled those individuals were all given a poke. Anyone of that group that appeared to run would be arrested.

The charges will, of course, be fabricated because there isn't any evidence for who leaked the documents.

This is so bogus

By Ropati • Score: 3 • Thread

What do the Feds have?

This kid at 20 while a CS student at UT of A sets up a web server in college and give unmonitored access. Some assholes post encrypted (how was that decrypted) porn on the server. That is what the feds are holding him on. They don't have shit. It wasn't his porn and they know it. Add another $10k to his student loans to teach him a lesson.

What happened?
CIA was hacked and spectacularly. Got it. I would think it would take a team to accomplish this. How could you get this stuff out the door. One kid walks out with even code snippets after Snowden !? That is really hard to believe. I would have thought the doors were shut. Instead I would have expected a North Korean team pierced the security. They can't brag, so they post.

CIA investigators need to show progress, they find a kid who left CIA employment (with animosity for poor management, [imagine that]). They raid his place search all his stuff and find nothing. He was locked up and release on bail with instructions not to touch a computer. Give me a break. How can a millennial who makes a living on a computer, live without one. Busted for touching a computer and back in jail. His family is broke trying to defend their son.

Nothings moving so they sell him to the media as their prime suspect.

The Feds have nothing, so they are going to ruin another human being to protect their jobs. We wait another 45 days for charges and I bet you there will be no charges. They don't have squat and this kid rots.

I don't know the the guy, I have no connection to federal cyberspace, but if the entire weight of the federal prosecution system can't find anything but someone else's kiddy porn after holding him for a year, then the entire case is chick shit and Joshua Schulte is going to be burned at the stake by public opinion. My American Citizenship feels stained.

If anyone puts up a legit website to defend this kid and linked to his parents, they can have my $50.


By MrKaos • Score: 3 • Thread

Literally right out of 1984.

Smarter People Don't Have Better Passwords, Study Finds

Posted by msmashView on SlashDotShareable Link
An anonymous reader shares a report: A study carried out at a college in the Philippines shows that students with better grades use bad passwords in the same proportion as students with bad ones. The study's focused around a new rule added to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) guideline for choosing secure passwords -- added in its 2017 edition. The NIST recommendation was that websites check if a user's supplied password was compromised before by verifying if the password is also listed in previous public breaches. If the password is included in previous breaches, the website is to consider the password insecure because all of these exposed passwords have most likely been added to even the most basic password-guessing brute-forcing tools.

They didn't look at intelligence...

By Jon.Burgin • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread
they looked at grades, which is a dubious measurement of intelligence at best.

Verifying breach status

By omnichad • Score: 3 • Thread

verifying if the password is also listed in previous public breaches

So does NIST recommend maintaining an offline archive of every breach ever or are they recommending you transmit the password in cleartext to a 3rd party?

Smart people are different

By swell • Score: 3 • Thread

... than the 'other' people. Smart people tend to think for themselves, to ignore common beliefs and behaviors. Smart people are like cats who are difficult to herd. If the gospel among computer users is to have an obscure password, smart people will question that and may do so only for special accounts.

The 'other' people, OTOH, tend to do as they are told, to follow the rules, to behave themselves. If they are told to use safe passwords, and they can remember that rule, they will make some effort to do so. Those 'other' people are like dogs- they will do as told if they understand and remember the rules. We all like dogs, but not everyone likes those smartass cats.

You might need to read about rainbow tables

By raymorris • Score: 4, Informative • Thread

> Read about rainbow tables

Good advice. You should take that advice. Maybe even try using one.

Let's look at your claim regarding the length of the password. Back in the early 1990s, MD5 was the recommended algorithm. It had a short 128-bit hash. That's roughly the same entropy as an 18-20 character password. As long as two passwords were both at least 20 characters, a longer password wasn't better because they'd both get reduced to a 128-bit hash anyway. By the late 1990s weaknesses had been found in MD5 and we started recommending SHA-1 instead. I personally distributed sample code showing how to convert your MD5 password hashes to SHA1, something that sounds impossible at first.

Then about 15 years ago MD5 was completely broken. Anyone with a clue moved to SHA1 or, later, SHA2. IF your web application is using an algorithm that has been broken for 15 years, AND your pass is at least 20 characters, longer than 20 isn't much more secure.

You might be thinking "there is a four character password with the same hash". No, there isn't, in all likelihood. There are very few 4-character passwords, and very many possible 128-bit hashes. For any given long password, there probably is no short password with the same hash.

SHA-1 is a 160-bit hash. It's even less likely that a short password of say 36 bits entropy is going to have the same 160-bit hash as a longer password. ALL possible 36-bit passwords combined only cover 1/2^124 of the outputs. In other words, the odds against getting a match, even trying ALL of the short passwords, are far less than the odds that you will win the lottery without even playing, by finding a winning ticket.

SHA-2 came out in 2001. There are no rainbow tables for SHA2, because the key space is too large. So if your application has been *properly* updated in the last 10-15 years, rainbow tables simply do not apply.

Not news. Richard Feynman mentioned it.

By 140Mandak262Jamuna • Score: 3 • Thread
Richard Feynman, in his book Surely you are joking, Mr Feynman mentioned how he cracked the safe of a famous scientist.

He was working in the Manhatten project making the first atom bomb. Place was teeming with top physicists absent minded professors and was run by the Army that had safes allocated to all top scientists. After a long and interesting story about how he got into safe cracking, he mentioned: He was challenged to crack the safe of Niel Bohr or Oppenheimer. He did it in less than two minutes. Asked how, he replied, "Physicists always use 3141, 1414, 1783, or 2245 as the code". They are PI, sqrt(2), sqrt(3), sqrt(5)

Facebook Deleted 583 Million Fake Accounts in the First Three Months of 2018

Posted by msmashView on SlashDotShareable Link
Facebook said Tuesday that it had removed more than half a billion fake accounts and millions of pieces of other violent, hateful or obscene content over the first three months of 2018. From a report: In a blog post on Facebook, Guy Rosen, Facebook's vice president of product management, said the social network disabled about 583 million fake accounts during the first three months of this year -- the majority of which, it said, were blocked within minutes of registration. That's an average of over 6.5 million attempts to create a fake account every day from Jan. 1 to March 31. Facebook boasts 2.2 billion monthly active users, and if Facebook's AI tools didn't catch these fake accounts flooding the social network, its population would have swelled immensely in just 89 days.

They're getting there!

By Notabadguy • Score: 3 • Thread

Now if Facebook would just disable the other 2.2 billion accounts, we'd be getting somewhere.

Re:Delete all the real accounts too

By Locke2005 • Score: 5, Funny • Thread
What do you call 583 million deleted Facebook accounts? A good start!

God I hate CNET

By FrankOVD • Score: 4, Insightful • Thread
Thanks for the news, but I gotta say I hate CNet's habit of throwing you an auto play video every time you click on a link. I'm on a slow wi-fi network and just closing the floating window doesn't stop the audio, which you can't pause until the embedded video is loaded and you find it. I wonder why they keep being this annoying. I was a fan of their website before that but then I turned my back to them because I felt like they didn't care about User Experience at all. Feels good speaking about it.

"I'll be back" said the sock puppet!

By shanen • Score: 3 • Thread

I also considered "NOT a real penalty" as the Subject.

So let's start with the question of "Why?"

Because a fresh fake identity is extremely valuable. It starts out with the polite respect most of us accord to any stranger. The sock puppet loses nothing by getting nuked, but polite and civil discourse was destroyed first.

Solution approach: Use EPR (Earned Public Reputation) to make fake identities less valuable. Actually, the default visibility setting can be calibrated against the number of fake identities that are being created (among other factors). If visibility has to be earned by sustained niceness and if bad behaviors are remembered and suitably penalized (with reduced visibility), then the social environment would be greatly improved.

Yes, even on Slashdot. One way to think of EPR is as enhanced karma with teeth attached.

ADSAuPR, atAJG, but even better if you have a better solution or solution approach to discuss. The typical responses on Slashdot these years are just bits of shallow snark, sometimes followed by a trickle of ideas worth thinking about...

(I increasingly feel that's yet another time-related problem, mostly caused by the uniform cycle time of the top page. One solution there would be variable descent speeds, with more significant stories falling more slowly--but that presumes Slashdot had an economic model that actually supported sustained improvement. ( in Japanese.))

double facepalm

By epine • Score: 3 • Thread

Facebook boasts 2.2 billion monthly active users, and if Facebook's AI tools didn't catch these fake accounts flooding the social network, its population would have swelled immensely in just 89 days.

This assumes that account creation rate is independent of the account deletion rate, with no justification and for no particular reason, other than to cap the submission summary text with a de rigueur derf derf.

Homeland Security Unveils New Cyber Security Strategy Amid Threats

Posted by msmashView on SlashDotShareable Link
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security on Tuesday unveiled a new national strategy for addressing the growing number of cyber security risks as it works to assess them and reduce vulnerabilities. From a report: "The cyber threat landscape is shifting in real-time, and we have reached a historic turning point," DHS chief Kirstjen Nielsen said in a statement. "It is clear that our cyber adversaries can now threaten the very fabric of our republic itself." The announcement comes amid concerns about the security of the 2018 U.S. midterm congressional elections and numerous high-profile hacking of U.S. companies.

New strategy?

By smooth wombat • Score: 5, Informative • Thread
This new strategy must be why the con artist eliminated the top cyber adviser post.

After all, what better way to counter cybersecurity threats than eliminating the person in charge of overall cybersecurity.

Re:Kirstjen Nielsen

By HarrySquatter • Score: 4, Insightful • Thread

I’m sure Michelle Obama is real worried about what an alt-right incel thinks about her.

Moon of Jupiter Prime Candidate For Alien Life After Water Blast Found

Posted by msmashView on SlashDotShareable Link
A NASA probe that explored Jupiter's moon Europa flew through a giant plume of water vapour that erupted from the icy surface and reached a hundred miles high, according to a fresh analysis of the spacecraft's data. An anonymous reader shares a The Guardian report: The discovery has cemented the view among some scientists that the Jovian moon, one of four first spotted by the Italian astronomer Galileo Galilei in 1610, is the most promising place in the solar system to hunt for alien life. If such geysers are common on Europa, NASA and European Space Agency (ESA) missions that are already in the pipeline could fly through and look for signs of life in the brine, which comes from a vast subsurface ocean containing twice as much water as all the oceans on Earth.

NASA's Galileo spacecraft spent eight years in orbit around Jupiter and made its closest pass over Europa, a moon about the size of our own, on 16 December 1997. As the probe dropped beneath an altitude of 250 miles, its sensors twitched with unexpected signals that scientists were unable to explain at the time. Now, in a new study, the researchers describe how they went back to the Galileo data after grainy images beamed home from the Hubble space telescope in 2016 showed what appeared to be plumes of water blasting from Europa's surface.

Re:How Quickly They Forget ...

By Goose In Orbit • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread

Get a life... a sense of humour... and a username...

Re:So of course, they just ASSUME it is a water pl

By mark-t • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread
Pictures don't have to be based on visible light. My main point is that they did not directly detect any plume of water... they detected some phenomena that could be plausibly explained by flying through such a plume, but they did not actually detect any plume of water that the craft flew through.


By HeckRuler • Score: 4, Interesting • Thread

I understand the concern. That we'll lose vital information about a real-world real-time test environment lasting billions of years and the origins of life and abiogenesis are hella interesting and we want to study pristine environments prior to fucking shit up and making a mess.

But once a place is established as being sterile, can we please make an effort to establish an ecosystem off-world? We're one crazy motherfucker away from a civilization ending event, possibly a human-extinction event, and we might not get another chance to spread life across the solar system. And we ARE currently in another mass extinction event. We, collectively, as in all known life-forms. It's like banking a backup. Roaches on Earth might one day evolve another race that can launch rockets, but if there's TWO or more sets of roaches, the odds of building up a civilization are that much better. How about a dead man's switch? Send up a sealed box of dormant extreamophiles wrapped in thermite. If we don't send a signal or recover it in 100 years, it opens up.

And what is it going to take to convince people that a planet is sterile? There's no lush jungles around the canals on Mars and there's no moon-men eating cheese. At what point is it fair game to try and seed planets?

People rarely think about the long-term goals.

What if life on Earth originated on Europa?

By Rick Schumann • Score: 4, Interesting • Thread
Imagine this: plume of water vapor erupts from deep within Europa, hundreds of miles high. Most of that never leaves the vicinity of Jupiter, but a little of it manages to escape, freezes, and floats around the solar system for a while.. eventually coming into the gravitational influence of a young Earth. It makes it through the atmosphere, eventually finding it's way into Earths' oceans, carrying the seeds of primitive life..

I must be the only person who read this headline..

By Rei • Score: 3 • Thread

As though it were talkinh about a moon of "Jupiter Prime".

Come to think of it, I guess it is. You could stick "Prime" after almost any proper noun in the news, and it'll mean the same thing, only it'll sound like it's happening in a sci-fi multiverse.

FedEx Sees Blockchain as 'Next Frontier' For Logistics

Posted by msmashView on SlashDotShareable Link
Convinced that blockchain is on the brink of transforming the package-delivery business, FedEx is testing the technology to track large, higher-value cargo. From a report: "We're quite confident that it has big, big implications in supply chain, transportation and logistics," Chief Executive Officer Fred Smith said at a blockchain conference in New York. "It's the next frontier that's going to completely change worldwide supply chains." Blockchain uses computer code to record every step of a transaction and delivery in a permanent digital ledger, providing transparency. The ledger can't be changed unless all involved agree, reducing common disputes over issues like time stamps, payments and damages. FedEx's interest in blockchain and the Internet of Things are part of the company's strategy to improve customer service and fend off competition, Smith said.

This is not about the "crypto currency"

By stikves • Score: 3 • Thread

This is about having a valid chain of trust. If all parties agree on a public ledger of transactions on the package logistics then the issues on disputes / lost items etc will go down.

The blockchains brought us bitcoin and similar "currencies", however they also brought a way to have a public eye on transactions. Like financial markets, package logistics is a complex business and having all parties agree upon terms and actions might really be useful.

(btw i think I might have some fedex stock, so a disclosure here is probably necessary).

Which blockchain?

By jdavidb • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread

Blockchain uses computer code to record every step of a transaction and delivery in a permanent digital ledger, providing transparency

Strange - I've been familiar with how blockchain technology works since 2012, and that doesn't sound like blockchain technology to me. Maybe they mean that they have developed some sort of custom enhancement? Couldn't they just record all this in their own database? Being light on specifics it's hard to see how blockchain technology is helping them at all here, unless it's to raise their stock price by throwing around the latest technology buzzwords without knowing what they mean.

Re:The only thing this helps...

By llamalad • Score: 5, Interesting • Thread

Ah, trust problems and FedEx....

A few years ago I sold a car part online. Shipped it off and a couple weeks later I got an stressed-out email from the buyer asking where his purchase was.

Checked tracking... it had gotten to a FedEx facility in Ohio and within a few days of my shipping it and was never seen or heard from again.

FedEx made me wait (what seemed like forever to the buyer) so they could investigate before they'd pay the insurance claim on a lost package.

Waited, waited, waited. Finally they got back to me saying it had been delivered in July. Trouble is, I shipped my package in August (and the date I generated the label and all the tracking before it disappeared indicated this).

It was a shockingly long and tedious argument with their agent saying it was delivered and me trying to figure out whether they used a souped up Delorean or a Tardis or what to deliver it a month before I shipped it.

In the end they finally paid out the insurance claim on the lost package, but they made the experience so completely terrible that I've never shipped with FedEx since.

Blah, blah, blockchain

By jdavidb • Score: 3 • Thread

Re:So... let's use the entire electircal output...

By Joce640k • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread

Will blockchain stop them from lying about "We went to your house and you weren't there" whenever they can't meet their 48-hour delivery garantee?

If not then what does this actually help? Are they going to make their ledger public domain and pay tens of thousands of non-Fedex miners to work 24/7 on the signatures to make sure there's too much external computing power for a Fedex employee to be able to falsify any information.

Because if not ... "blockchain" is just another buzzword that a manager is using to get himself a new office.

US Cell Carriers Are Selling Access To Your Real-Time Phone Location Data

Posted by msmashView on SlashDotShareable Link
Four of the largest cell giants in the US are selling your real-time location data to a company that you've probably never heard about before. ZDNet: In case you missed it, a senator last week sent a letter demanding the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) investigate why Securus, a prison technology company, can track any phone "within seconds" by using data obtained from the country's largest cell giants, including AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile, and Sprint, through an intermediary, LocationSmart. The story blew up because a former police sheriff snooped on phone location data without a warrant, according The New York Times. The sheriff has pleaded not guilty to charges of unlawful surveillance.

Yet little is known about how LocationSmart obtained the real-time location data on millions of Americans, how the required consent from cell user owners was obtained, and who else has access to the data. Kevin Bankston, director of New America's Open Technology Institute, explained in a phone call that the Electronic Communications Privacy Act only restricts telecom companies from disclosing data to the government. It doesn't restrict disclosure to other companies, who then may disclose that same data to the government. He called that loophole "one of the biggest gaps in US privacy law. The issue doesn't appear to have been directly litigated before, but because of the way that the law only restricts disclosures by these types of companies to government, my fear is that they would argue that they can do a pass-through arrangement like this," he said.
Further reading: The Tech Used To Monitor Inmate Calls Is Able To Track Civilians Too.


By GrumpySteen • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread

You say you don't care about your privacy, yet you post as anonymous coward. Interesting.

Re: Whoop-di-do

By saloomy • Score: 4, Interesting • Thread

More like: we have reason to believe you were involved in a crime that happened adjacent to your work/home route. Your cell phone was the closest phone in proximity to the theft, and an eye witness says she can identify the culprit. Please stem this way to the window line up so our witness can identify or exonerate you.

Have fun getting your ass ponded because "the government has no reason to want to hurt me".

Personal info = threat to self determination.

By dweller_below • Score: 5, Interesting • Thread

We already have limits on how US government can use personal information. The Carpenter Vs US lawsuit will continue to define those limits. We created these protections because we realized that government can use personal information to predict, manipulate, and control us. The combination of powerful government and enabling personal information is a threat to self-determination and rule by consent of the governed.

We have seen many recent examples where powerful modern entities used technology and personal information to predict, manipulate, and control us. FaceBook can predict, control and manipulate us. So can Google, Amazon, Political Action Committees, The Russian Government, advertising agencies, and so on. We need to take further action to protect our unalienable right of self determination. If we fail to act, our society and government continue to transform into "Rule by Manufactured Consent of the Manipulated".

Manipulation is a threat to ourselves and our society. Manipulation advances the goals of the manipulator. Manipulation has no fundamental respect for reality. Past manipulation divorced the victims from reality. Manipulation weakens both individuals and society. Present day manipulation must not be assumed to be legitimate, just because it is cheaper, more effective, more powerful, or wielded by new entities.

Once personal information is collected, it is almost impossible to destroy. It will be monetized. It will leak. It will spread. The cell-phone companies will sell or breech. An Intelligence agency will seize and leak. A well-meaning judge will issue a General Warrant.

For NOW, when you need privacy, you must DITCH THE PHONE.

One path forward is to realize that any personal information that is effective at predicting, controlling or manipulating us IS our identity. As long as this information is effective, and valuable, it is a part of us. We must establish that owning your own personal information is an unalienable right. The right of owning your personal information can not be stolen, seized, legislated or contracted away.

Re:Violation of EU GPDR and Canada/US data treatie

By zlives • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread

hence... treaties... which extend/grant rights to citizens of other constituencies based upon mutual agreement!!


By markdavis • Score: 3 • Thread

Any information that is collected can and probably will be abused at some point. It doesn't matter what laws are enacted. This is why any "privacy" methods that don't prevent the collection in the first place are fairly doomed.

With our current technology, cell operators HAVE to know where a phone is so calls can be routed to them. However, there is no reason they should be SAVING that information, much less giving it or selling it to ANYONE.

So, OS and settings and GPS aside, just having your phone "on" the cell network means you ARE being tracked.

Surface Hub 2 Coming in 2019, Looks Amazing

Posted by msmashView on SlashDotShareable Link
Microsoft gave an early look at its next-generation Surface Hub 2 today. It will go on sale next year, with certain selected customers testing it this year. From a report: Microsoft's Surface Hub, its conference room computer, was something of a surprise hit. The system has been in short supply since its launch about three years ago, especially in its 84-inch version: its combination of video conferencing and whiteboarding makes it a collaborative tool with few direct competitors. The central feature of the new system is that it's a 50.5-inch 4K display with a rotating mount. Instead of the traditional 16:9 aspect ratio, the Surface Hub 2 has the same 3:2 ratio of Microsoft's other Surface systems.

Frist post!

By WallyL • Score: 4, Insightful • Thread

I realize every couple of years somebody markets something like this, that never quite lives up to its hype. But, every time, it gets us a little bit closer to Star Trek!

Has anyone used one of these?

By UnknowingFool • Score: 4, Informative • Thread
I have yet to see one much less use one since the launch 3 years ago so I don't know how common they are. I don't doubt that they might be in short supply but the last sales figures I got were 2 years ago: 2000 units That's hardly record shattering.

"Looks amazing" is *not* a valid headline

By TheDarkener • Score: 4, Funny • Thread

Slashdot editors need to remember journalism class. Next we'll see, "NVidia releases new drivers, and you won't guess what Linus did next!"

Terrible headline, great product

By turp182 • Score: 5, Informative • Thread

We have a Surface Hub 1. We use it everyday. It's nice to be able to switch from whiteboard (which has cool features like auto-tables and auto-shapes) to our intranet/internet, maybe fire up Excel.

The people we collaborate with don't have one, so we are missing out on some of the best features (other regional office).

It's nice that anyone at the Hub can just walk up and interact with others using it.

It's not perfect (horrible external keyboard/touch pad, we could use different hardware I imagine) but we've really enjoyed it. It's the first "collaborative" hardware that I've found effective. People have commented that it's nice to be able to see us as well.

Re:Best product in its category.

By jellomizer • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread

A conference room system features:
A Video Camera: Which most people want turned off because seeing people talking on the screen isn't helpful, plus you want to mute and turn off video on yourself and your team so they can discuss issues privately. Also the Video gets in the way of a screen shot or a presentation.

Some Sort of Smart Board features: Either a stylus or touch interface. All seems good, until you realize most of the presenters don't know how to use it, save the data or in order to have it seen by everyone in the meeting it is high up so it is difficult to reach.

These things are a wast of money.

Just get a good size TV (Get a 4K if you feel like it, but most of the time you will lower the resolution to 1k or below so people can see the text) Have cords to plug in your VGA, DVI and HDMI to it. So you can plug in your laptop. Finally get a separate good quality Conference room phone. Loud and crisp enough to hear from, and able to pick up with what you are saying clearly.

These things look cool, but rarely ever utilized.

The Rise of Free Urban Internet

Posted by msmashView on SlashDotShareable Link
Intersection, the Alphabet-backed smart cities startup known for creating free internet kiosks for cities, is pushing to make free internet accessible in as many major cities as possible across the globe. From a report: As more aspects of our daily lives -- from healthcare to communication to travel -- become dependent on internet-connected devices, the concept of providing internet as a public good is becoming more widespread. Intersection is best known for its successful transformation of NYC's 7,500 pay-phones into free internet kiosks that act as hot-spots and advertising space. It's also spreading its programs to cities like Philadelphia, Chicago, and even London. The program is entirely funded by advertising that the company sells on LinkNYC internet kiosks, so less densely-populated cities may be a tougher sell.

“The Public Good”

By 93 Escort Wagon • Score: 3 • Thread

Sure, and the information flowing through these “free” access points isn’t going to be collected and monetized... right?

Give me a break. At least be honest about your motivation.

An interesting experiement...

By TheZeitgeist • Score: 3 • Thread
...for a truly 'open-source' internet would be packet travel over wi-fi without ever hitting telco infrastructure. For instance, how far could one relay a packet from their own wi-fi router just bouncing from wifi network to wifi network? Starting in NYC as an example, how far could one daisy-chain WAN jumping? To New Jersey? Florida? California (lol)? Infrastructure is just about deployed enough that a slow, strange, ad-hoc hack-job internet could be built without any telcos or government whatsoever.

Re:“The Public Good”

By gnick • Score: 5, Interesting • Thread

the information flowing through these “free” access points isn’t going to be collected and monetized

Trust your VPN, not your ISP.

Canonical Addresses Ubuntu Linux Snap Store's 'Security Failure'

Posted by msmashView on SlashDotShareable Link
Last week, an app on the Ubuntu Snap Store caused a stir when it was found to be riddled with a script that is programmed to mine cryptocurrency, a phenomenon whose traces has been found in several popular application stores in the recent months. Canonical promptly pulled the app from the store, but offered little explanation at the time. On Tuesday, Ubuntu-maker addressed the matter in detail. From a report: The big question is whether or not this is really malware. Canonical also pondered this and says the following. "The first question worth asking, in this case, is whether the publisher was in fact doing anything wrong, considering that mining cryptocurrency is not illegal or unethical by itself. That perspective was indeed taken by the publisher in question here, who informed us that the goal was to monetize software published under licenses that allow it, unaware of the social or technical consequences," the company wrote in a blog post.

"The publisher offered to stop doing that once contacted. Of course, it is misleading if there is no indication of the secondary purpose of the application. That's in fact why the application was taken down in the store. There are no rules against mining cryptocurrencies, but misleading users is a problem," it added.

Unfortunately, Canonical concedes that it simply doesn't have the resources to review all code submitted to the Snap Store. Instead, it puts the onus on the user to do their due diligence by investigating the developer before deciding to trust them.

It's easier to beg forgiveness that ask permission

By fuzznutz • Score: 4, Interesting • Thread

"The publisher offered to stop doing that once contacted.

Now explain to me why Canonical wouldn't permanently ban the publisher for damaging Canonical's reputation and business?

Re:Pay canonical or other trusted institution

By Desler • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread

Why would they ever want to take on such liability especially for only “a small amount of money.” No one is gonna up themselves up to potential legal liability like that.

Re:App stores are crap stores

By jellomizer • Score: 4, Informative • Thread

Dependency Hell.
Doing a make configure && make && make install (or whatever version you prefer) will often fail after a long time realizing that there is one stupid library is missing.
RPM you can get the problem of recursive dependencies. Where Package A need Package B need Package C which needs Package A. And it is up to you to know witch one for force.
Static Binaries, can get big, and also make doing a security patch near impossible.
Install scripts are often not well configured to your distribution.
App Repositories, where the Apps are configured and load in all the Dependencies in the right order, As well perform all the necessary distribution particular configuration. Has greatly simpleminded the process.

Although this particular occurrence had some bad code, when spotted and removed it was fixed, vs downloading it from the source, where the bad code was there to stay.

Re:Current Miners Are Shit

By blackomegax • Score: 5, Funny • Thread
Make the proof of work = number of pings. Call it DDOScoin and aim it to a small handful of bank IP's.

Apple CEO Says He Has Urged Trump To Address Legal Status of Immigrants; Also Told Him That Tariffs Are Wrong Approach To China

Posted by msmashView on SlashDotShareable Link
Apple chief executive Tim Cook told Bloomberg Television that he has criticized Donald Trump's approach to trade with China in a recent White House meeting, while also urging the president to address the legal status of immigrants known as Dreamers. From the interview: Cook said his message to Trump focused on the importance of trade and how cooperation between two countries can boost the economy more than nations acting alone. Cook met with Trump in the Oval Office in late April amid a brewing trade war between the U.S. and China. The Trump administration instituted 25 percent tariffs on at least $50 billion worth of products from China, sparking retaliation. In the interview on "The David Rubenstein Show: Peer-to-Peer Conversations," Cook acknowledged that previous trade policies were flawed but said Trump's move is also problematic. "It's true, undoubtedly true, that not everyone has been advantaged from that -- in either country -- and we've got to work on that," Cook said. "But I felt that tariffs were not the right approach there, and I showed him some more analytical kinds of things to demonstrate why."


By ArchieBunker • Score: 4, Interesting • Thread

Steve Jobs himself said they were 90 days from bankruptcy.

As if they needed an excuse?

By mpercy • Score: 4, Informative • Thread

It seems to me that an awful lot of folks in the Middle East just want to keep killing each other and will use any excuse to justify it. Trumps move (which actually is a negative move, in that he simply chose to not renew a waiver to the 1995 law requiring the US embassy to be in Jerusalem, thereby letting the law and its consequences play out) is just today's excuse. ISIS making Genghis Khan seem tame...Sunnis and Shias are trading suicide bombings in mosques...Taliban lashing out all over...

"Militants from the Pakistani Taliban have attacked an army-run school in Peshawar, killing 141 people, 132 of them children, the military say.

"In Kabul, a suicide bomber killed at least 39 people and injured 45 more when he detonated his explosives among some 100 worshippers in a Shia mosque in the western part of the capital, according to the interior ministry. Some of the victims were reportedly shot after the blast on Friday evening.

"In central Ghor province, a suicide bomber killed 33 worshippers in a Sunni mosque, purportedly targeting a local commander from the anti-Taliban Jamiat party, said police spokesman Mohammad Iqbal Nizami.

"The most horrific incident was over the weekend in Baghdad where an ISIS suicide car bomb targeted the Karrada shopping area, killing over 175 people including numerous children. One moment Muslim families were shopping and socializing after breaking the Ramadan fast at sundown. The next, entire families were gone in a blink of an ISIS bomb. The blast targeted a primarily, but not exclusively, Shia neighborhood. But if you think ISIS hesitates at slaughtering Sunni Muslims, you simply don’t know what ISIS has been up to the past few years. The group has brutally murdered countless Sunni Muslims, including three women who reportedly refused to treat ISIS fighters and others who refused to pledge allegiance to ISIS. ISIS even reportedly killed three imams “for failing to praise ISIL in their sermons.”

"Four suicide bombers hit a pair of crowded mosques in Yemen's capital of Sanaa on Friday, killing at least 137 people and injuring more than 300 others, officials told NBC News. The ISIS affiliate in war-torn Yemen claimed responsibility for the attacks, according to Flashpoint Intelligence, a global security firm and NBC News consultant. It was the first large-scale attack claimed by the Sunni militants in Yemen, which has been in a state of chaos since Shiite Houthi rebels launched a violent power grab.

Re: Did Cook forget Trump is Republican?

By losfromla • Score: 4, Insightful • Thread

Except for accelerating destruction of environmental protections, rolling back consumer protections, increasing corporate welfare (and thereby wealth disparity) in the form of the repugnican tax scam, breaking of promises (Iran nuclear agreement) to our allies and others, etc. Yeah, things are going same as always... Really though?

Immigrants? Or illegal aliens?

By Chas • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread

There's a distinct difference.


By HornWumpus • Score: 4, Funny • Thread

I'm not concerned about the last _100_years_ of proven Russian interference in our political process.

Because Russia is, economically, about as big as New York City.

I might be concerned if we had a president who took his wife to Lenin's tomb for their honeymoon. But that was Sanders, so no worries.

Kaspersky Lab Moving Core Infrastructure To Switzerland

Posted by msmashView on SlashDotShareable Link
wiredmikey writes: As part of its Global Transparency Initiative, Russia-based Kaspersky Lab today announced that it will adjust its infrastructure to move a number of "core processes" from Russia to Switzerland. The security firm has faced challenges after several governments have banned Kaspersky software over security concerns, despite no hard evidence that Kaspersky has ever colluded with the Russian government. As an extension to its transparency initiative, announced in October 2017, the firm is now going further by making plans for its processes and source code to be independently supervised by a qualified third-party. To this end, it is supporting the creation of a new, non-profit "Transparency Center" able to assume this responsibility not just for itself, but for other partners and members who wish to join. Noticeably, Kaspersky Lab does not link the move specifically to the effects of the U.S. ban, but sees wider issues of global trust emerging.


By Locke2005 • Score: 3 • Thread
So, what you are saying is there is more evidence that Trump has colluded with the Russian government than there is evidence that Kapersky has colluded with the Russian government? What a world we live in!

How will moving location change anything?

By jellomizer • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread

Kaspersky is being accused of aiding the Russian government in its espionage. Being that the company makes security software which by definition needs to be run these systems normally with elevated privileges.
Despite if the claims are true or not, people are not choosing Kaspersky software due to its connection with Russia, and the Russian government does have a trend of getting involved in its companies. Companies with sensitive information are not using the software.

Moving to Switzerland doesn't seem to really fix anything, because all it will take is a request for the CEO to send or "Backup" their data to a Russian Data center, or to an 3rd party data-center that Russia may have access too.

The only way I think they would be considered safe, is if they provide the source to all the countries they are trying to sell too, have them review it, and compile it with their own tools and redistribute it to its citizens. Any data collection would need to be done by 3rd party resellers who have no direct connection to the actual company.

Not sure that'll help

By Artem Tashkinov • Score: 5, Informative • Thread
Eugene Kaspersky still lives in Moscow and he's still an ex-KGB agent. These two facts alone make look Kaspersky highly untrustworthy considering that the Kremlin is waging e-war with the rest of the world.

Re:Not sure that'll help

By BlueStrat • Score: 5, Interesting • Thread

Eugene Kaspersky still lives in Moscow and he's still an ex-KGB agent. These two facts alone make look Kaspersky highly untrustworthy considering that the Kremlin is waging e-war with the rest of the world.

No, even if true Kaspersky A/V is still the far more trustworthy choice as I'd trust Putin over the US government as far as their interest in and ability to screw with me as an individual.

You have to understand that any A/V made by companies in "Five Eyes" nations or their allies is intentionally and deliberately broken out of the box. Kaspersky A/V will happily identify/remove US/Western LEA/TLA spyware, etc. That's really what this is about.

If the US government forces me to be spied on then whenever possible I'll choose to be spied on by the US's enemies over allowing the US to do so.


Should the FTC Investigate Google's Location Data Collection?

Posted by BeauHDView on SlashDotShareable Link
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Engadget: In December of 2017, the office of U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal sent Google's CEO a letter asking for a detailed explanation of the company's privacy practices around location services. Based on a report at Quartz, the senator's letter had 12 specific questions about how Google deals with location data. In January, Google responded to all of the issues in a lengthy letter signed by Google's VP of public policy, Susan Molinari. Now, apparently unsatisfied with the response, Senators Blumenthal and Edward J. Markey have sent a written request to the FTC to investigate Google's location services, along with "any deceptive acts and practices associated with the product."

While Google's initial response refuted many of the claims made by Quartz, and explained again and again how Google and Android handles sensitive location data, the letter to the FTC again uses the report as its main basis. The crux of the new letter appears to be this: "Google has an intimate understanding or personal lives as they watch their users seek the support of reproductive health services, engage in civic activities or attend places of religious worship," wrote the senators. All it takes to expose users to data collection, say the letter's authors, is to allow an "ambiguously described feature" once and then it is silently enabled across all signed-in devices without an expiration date.

This needs to happen NOW

By SkyLeach • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread

As a long-time supporter of FOSS, EFF, Copyleft and essentially open access this has gone beyond mere 'best practices' and humanitarianism

Nobody, not a government or a private enterprise, can be trusted with private proprietorship of this much data at this level of detail.

The problem is neural networks, turning subjectivity into objectivity, and the unreliability of the source data. Whoever controls the data can use it for any purpose, and there is such a massive capability and potential for misuse, especially of human trust networks, that there simply is no acceptable level of trust.

All human governments and economic systems rely on trust. Before social media, social trust networks were the foundation of all government. Who do you know? Who knows you? When the answer is whoever has the data plus a few (maybe a couple of dozen) close family and associates, then the system is broken.

Most people can't possibly cover anywhere near the number of social connections that a single-process home computer can cover. My lab can millions of processes with petabytes of data and more than a TB of network pipe. That's a fairly good lab, but there are far better out there. With the right kinds of data, I can manipulate society like it's my own personal sandbox.

Without protections on the data, there is no way to detect, verify or validate who is doing what with it. One good person might be fine, but what happens when they die and someone else gets it? There just isn't any reliable assurance that it won't be misused, while history teaches us that it invariably will be misused by someone given opportunity.

Some kind of national infrastructure and protection must be placed around this level of power. It's not like nukes, you can't guarantee it won't fall into the wrong hands with traditional protection measures. Security has limitations... There is no other choice.

Wait till autonomous cars

By e3m4n • Score: 5, Interesting • Thread

My biggest concerns over companies like Facebook, Google, and Apple developing autonomous cars is not whether they can make them safe. Eventually I know that they will be safe. One concern is that these people will collect data non-stop about where I am going and how long I stay. I considered this picking up my daughter from school to take her to her pediatrician, specifically that its really none of their damn business that I did such a thing. That led me to my second concern for these 3 companies developing autonomous vehicles. Imagine every damn time you drive past a BugerKing or Wendy's having to suffer a damn commercial or have the car offer to stop because a Whopper is only $3 this week. Non-stop, never-ending barrage of advertisements. Think back to the scene in Minority Report when Tom Cruise's character had eye replacement surgery, replacing his eyes with a japanese businessman. It was more noticeable the second he walked near any store, how every single ad started addressing him by his stolen identity. The two technologies that ad-based companies should be forbidden from developing based on privacy concerns should be

1) any location based technology that requires knowing where you are to function (maps, gps, autonomous cars, etc)
2) any technology that specializes in identification (facial recognition, biometrics, retina identity, etc.)

Re:This needs to happen NOW

By e3m4n • Score: 4, Interesting • Thread

maybe society needs to spawn a anarchist hacking group. Instead of taking down these places, as they always have backups for their backups, maybe it should pollute it with so much false data that the entire data itself is no longer considered reliable. Make it appear you were in 3 places at once and take trips 50x more per day than you actually do. Make the data so unreliable and untrustworthy that advertisers stop spending money on what they perceive as 'snake oil' once word spreads on how unreliable it is. Why pay for a targeted ad when your likely to be sending some 80yr old man an advertisement on tampons when its cheaper and easier to just blast the tampon commercial to everyone and hope someone who needs them is watching.


By kelemvor4 • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread
Investgate != regulate. An investigation will allow the FTC to determine if there is a problem and if so then they can regulate. If there is no problem then no harm was done. Other than the cost of the investigation, it seems like a no brainier. Investigate away and make a decision. Maybe investigate again later if something changes. It's simple, and should be common enough that it doesn't register as news.

What if WANT Google to have my location?

By itsme1234 • Score: 3 • Thread

I am aware of all (or at least countless) risks involved. Even if I don't and didn't have anything to hide I've been sending PGP encrypted emails since more than 20 years. And I stopped doing so for more than 20 years. I lived for half my life in a dictatorship where you could "go away" and never been heard of for less than 5 words said to the wrong person. I am in no way naive or uninformed, I've been following up on security (not only computing security), privacy, heavy handed governments and so on; this is not something you can turn off.

BUT I'm happy with Google having my location. All the time, the more precise the better (well, preferably without killing my battery). I tried to do it myself and keep a GPS log since 2006 or so. I was having a GPS with me with multiple batteries that I would replace over the day but of course I couldn't do it very often, it had to be only on special occasions.
It was very painful to melt tons and tons of files (I still have them) and in the end rather pointless. I managed (barely) to find a perl script that would at least tag my pictures with their location but there is no good software to manage the pics (if you have a lot of them, not only a small folder), even if they have proper GPS tags. Google Photos (yes, I give them my pictures too) finds places where I've been instantly. It even finds them if the pics are coming from non-GPS cameras, by correlating the location from the phone (the same thing I've been doing very painfully back in 2006-2007). Google Timeline (including the decent mobile version from Google Maps) helped me find again places I didn't know in advance I had to bookmark and once even answered the question "I know what you did last night" - because I DIDN'T (no joke, years ago I remember an article, most likely on slashdot too, that was half-jokingly saying google can tell where you've been last night if you can't remember - and that came in hand this Christmas...).

Funny thing is EU used to (for more than one decade if I remember correctly) force mobile providers to keep your metadata (including the location, albeit not as precise as Google does it now, but those were other times) for at least 6-24 months (at least, without any obligation to age it off). And make it available to the state when needed of course. Everything at your expense of course (as part of your mobile contract). And -here's the kicker- YOU COULDN'T GET THIS DATA. Even if you went to Vodafone and said: ok, I pay you already to store all my shit for at least 24 months, what about letting me have it too? I can pay extra for your trouble, how about that? Nope, no option. At least with Google you can download it via Takeout and use it how you like it and you can use it in the built-in Google Maps/Timeline and Photos too.

YES, I wouldn't give my mother or my significant other access to my timeline. But I'm happy with Google having it. Yes, I understand the risks and I understand there are meta-risks I can't even imagine now. But this is a risk I'm willing to take. And I'll be really, really pissed if the government comes and says I can't just tick a box and agree that Google tracks me, as much and as accurately as technically feasible.

Facebook Faulted By Judge For 'Troubling Theme' In Privacy Case

Posted by BeauHDView on SlashDotShareable Link
schwit1 quotes a report from Bloomberg: A judge scolded Facebook for misconstruing his own rulings as he ordered the company to face a high-stakes trial accusing it of violating user privacy. The social media giant has misinterpreted prior court orders by continuing to assert the "faulty proposition" that users can't win their lawsuit under an Illinois biometric privacy law without proving an "actual injury," U.S. District Judge James Donato said in a ruling Monday. Likewise, the company's argument that it's immune from having to pay a minimum of $1,000, and as much as $5,000, for each violation of the law is "not a sound proposition," he said. Under the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act, the damages in play at a jury trial set for July 9 in San Francisco could easily reach into the billions of dollars for the millions of users whose photos were allegedly scanned without consent. Apart from his concerns about the "troubling theme" in Facebook's legal arguments, Donato ruled a trial must go forward because there are multiple factual issues in dispute, including a sharp disagreement over how the company's photo-tagging software processes human faces.

Did I get that right?

By Opportunist • Score: 4, Insightful • Thread

Did Facebook essentially say "we don't want this law to apply to us, so fuck off"?

Only about FB users?

By Teun • Score: 5, Interesting • Thread
We non-FB addicts are also scanned when some dupe posts a tagged picture of the innocent.
Which in my view is much more serious, the poster should also be charged.

Intel's First 10nm Cannon Lake CPU Sees the Light of Day

Posted by BeauHDView on SlashDotShareable Link
Artem Tashkinov writes: A Chinese retailer has started selling a laptop featuring Intel's first 10nm CPU the Intel Core i3 8121U. Intel promised to start producing 10nm CPUs in 2016 but the rollout has been postponed almost until the second half of 2018. It's worth noting that this CPU does not have integrated graphics enabled and features only two cores.

AnandTech opines: "This machine listed online means that we can confirm that Intel is indeed shipping 10nm components into the consumer market. Shipping a low-end dual core processor with disabled graphics doesn't inspire confidence, especially as it is labelled under the 8th gen designation, and not something new and shiny under the 9th gen -- although Intel did state in a recent earnings call that serious 10nm volume and revenue is now a 2019 target. These parts are, for better or worse, helping Intel generate some systems with the new technology. We've never before seen Intel commercially use low-end processors to introduce a new manufacturing process, although this might be the norm from now on."

Re:Not everyone needs $1900 Core i9

By divide overflow • Score: 4, Informative • Thread
Perhaps it is apocryphal, but...from

QI has located the earliest instance of a close match to the saying specified by the questioner. This is the version that is often attributed to Gates today. It appeared in InfoWorld magazine in January 1990 in an article that presented a timeline for the development of the PC industry in the 1980s. The remark ascribed to Gates was placed in quotation marks [BGSF]:

IBM introduces the PC and, with Microsoft, releases DOS (“640K ought to be enough for anyone” — Bill Gates)


By Artem Tashkinov • Score: 5, Interesting • Thread

Most likely by mistake last Sunday Intel released Z390 chipset information. The page has since been pulled down because this chipset was rumored to be accompanied with octa-core Coffee Lake CPUs which are yet to be announced.

Next time I'm gonna web-archive their mistakes ;-)

Re:I always get the feeling

By Artem Tashkinov • Score: 4, Interesting • Thread

Have you seen their R&D expenditures?

Designing a 14nm tech process in the 70's/80's was impossible because it has taken billions of dollars of investments and new technologies (some of which weren't invented at Intel) to get there. Also, considering that they've rehashed their 14nm tech process twice and their first 10nm part is a castrated 2core CPU minus iGPU, it surely looks like 10nm is extremely difficult/costly to get right.

Re:I always get the feeling

By TeknoHog • Score: 4, Funny • Thread

Have you seen their R&D expenditures?

Designing a 14nm tech process in the 70's/80's was impossible because it has taken billions of dollars of investments and new technologies (some of which weren't invented at Intel) to get there. Also, considering that they've rehashed their 14nm tech process twice and their first 10nm part is a castrated 2core CPU minus iGPU, it surely looks like 10nm is extremely difficult/costly to get right.

Well, that's exactly what they want you to believe. When they say "R&D expedinture", they really mean "R&R expedinture".

Did Intel confirm it?

By Opportunist • Score: 4, Funny • Thread

We have a Chinese retailer claiming to sell a 10nm CPU that has the features (and probably speed) of a 5 year old low budget processor. And since Chinese companies have a spotless track record of never trying to sell counterfeited products, we should readily believe that this seemingly ancient CPU is bleeding edge.

I ... erh... well... how do you put it nicely...