Slashback: Porntrusion, Greenness, Rollercoaster 200
But what about the nude Russian girls who apparently need me? happyclam writes: "The text of the "hidden camera" bill has been posted at politechbot.com. Although we have already beat this one to death, I found the actual bill worth reading. One thing that had not been mentioned is that it allows for civil and criminal liability for spammers who email sexual advertisements without proper markings. Although I still prefer positive labeling (e.g. "kid-safe(tm)") to negative labeling (e.g. "socially questionable"), this bill does, I think, have a few good points to it. Read it."
DVDs want to be free. An Anonymous Coward writes: "According to this email and the latest news the mplayer source code is finally 100% GPL compliant. Maybe an official Debian package will finally be released as well instead of the marillat release. Work on integrating the open source Xvid MPEG4 codec is coming along nicely as well."
Gravity always wins, but likes to play. mzdial writes: "On March 14 you did a piece on this Southern Indiana's man love of roller coasters and how he created his own in his backyard! The Indianapolis Star has done a wonderful story with video and photos about this wonderful contraption. You can find the article here."
They're greedy for hits. ruvreve writes "A follow-up to the recent article about Google's release of an API. This article talks about the apparent success of releasing the API. It mentions that about 10,000 people have signed up and they have received 25 implementations in the first week. It goes on to talk about how Google needs to capitalize on the ability to provide a 'profitable' web service and maintain its position as the number-one search engine."
Chasing green, wet shadows. young-earth writes "In a disappointing followup to this story, an article on astronomy.com shows that what was thought to be chlorophyll on Mars found in the Pathfinder expedition was most probably artifacts of the processing model used. However future missions will profit from the work being done now: "...developing new methods to enable future rovers to select appropriate targets on the martian surface for further spectroscopic or close-up microscopic examination". So maybe in another mission..."
Why must we leap to conclusions? (Score:1, Insightful)
-- Note: I'm aware of all the flaws in my argument. Yes, I know that theories are constantly being disproven and that science has and always will be based upon assumptions. But please let me rant. It's all I have.
Re:Why must we leap to conclusions? (Score:2, Insightful)
Remember when they said the mile-wide asteriod had a 1% chance of hitting in 2021? That got everybody all worked up. When I watched the news, the media spun it that the asteriod was definitely going to hit, just to sensationalize it. Then a few weeks later, the astronomers admitted they fucked up.
I guess scientists get their research bucks by having stories like these, though.
Re:Why must we leap to conclusions? (Score:4, Insightful)
Scientists should stop realeasing info like that to the stupid press before their results are confirmed.
I know I shouldn't feed the trolls, but still. Suppose the research was suppressed due to lack of supporting evidence. The conspiracy theorists would have a field day with "the government" keeping news of "Martian chlorophyll" under wraps -- which means of course that there are secret Martian farms feeding an intelligent super-race, who built the Mars face, and so on. (Just imagine the Fox specials.) The point is that the scientists can't win, so they might as well disclose everything, even their screwups.
Re:Why must we leap to conclusions? (Score:3, Informative)
Money talks, meaning: That for scientists to get cash to keep investigating the asteroid and see if there is indeed a chance it will hit, they need to stir things up. If they'd said that they believe that there might be a million to one chance that an asteroid will pass earth in 20 years, who'd have funded continued research? But if they say that it is likely it will pose a serious threat, here, have another 50 million and some better equipment.
Now, a cynic might say that this kinda thing happens all the time after 9-11...Attack imminent, gimme money!
Re:Why must we leap to conclusions? (Score:3, Insightful)
That said, I see no reason (I'm a biologist, not an astronomer) why alien cells would have chlorophyll. If they did find chlorophyll, it woul be a sign that we'd contaminated Mars with terrestrial cells.
Even if a Martian cell where photosynthetic, I would not expect it to express chlorophyll! Chlorophyll is long, big and complicated. An independently evolved protein, from an alien organism, would never look much like chlorphyll - the odds against such a coincidence are astronomical. Assuming the alien life had membranes, photosynthetic aliens MIGHT use a membrane-bound light-dependent electron pump like the ones found in chloroplasts and their bacterial cousins; however, since there are many, many classes of both light reactive molecules and of redox proteins (electron pumps) in terrestrial organisms, many of these proteins are not-at-all similar to one another, so even if an alien organism "worked the same" as a terrestrial chlorplast (chloroplasts are the cellular organelles in plants that harvest light) it'd have independently evolved proteins with similar functions, they wouldn't be chlorophyll, and they wouldn't be similar to chlorphyll in terms of sequence or overall shape. The odds are incredibly small! Even the twenty amino acids we use are a result of the original molecular evolution of terrestrial life; an alien organism might not have the same twenty (assuming that it had amino acids at all; we don't know enough to make a definitive conclusion, but nucleic acids and amino acids may be the only molecules in existence that could make a biological organism.)
All musings aside, the original poster was correct. Chlorophyll on Mars was a stupid thing to expect.
Re:Why must we leap to conclusions? (Score:2)
IE: the 'metabolism of light' would most likely need iron, hence, chlorophyll?
Re:Why must we leap to conclusions? (Score:2)
That said, you could construct a photosynthetic organism around haemoglobin (which does contain Iron) instead of chlorophyll, and it would be a totally different color.
Re:Why must we leap to conclusions? (Score:1)
Regardless, in this particular case, they were not testing the protein composition itself, but rather the spectroscopic composition of the protein (which could very easily have similar absorbance frequencies).
Re:Why must we leap to conclusions? (Score:1)
Chlorophyll is not a protein, so that argument doesn't apply. It's constructed from a porphyrin ring, much like haemoglobin
Re:Why must we leap to conclusions? (Score:1)
What I meant to say was that Photosystem II is big and complicated; it contains 50 chlorophyll molecules. The properties of chlorophyll, that make it desirable as a primary light harvesting molecule, are heavily bound up in the properties of Photosystem II. The structure of photosystem II also changes the "color" of the Chlorophyll somewhat; but, of course, the robots would extract the chlorophyll into an organic solvent so that would not be an issue. Other photosystems here on Earth contain chromophores that are totally different in color - this is why red algae is red and brown algae is brown (instead of green.) All terrestrial plants happen to contain chlorophyll as well, but there's no reason to think that would be the case on Mars. In fact, there are two totally different classes of molecules that harvest energy from light here on earth (at least; I'm referring to the non-metal-ion carrying chemicals in our eyes and in the eyes of insects) which might form the basis for alien photosynthesis.
Re:Why must we leap to conclusions? (Score:2)
-- MarkusQ
P.S. I think I've cancled three subscriptions to Scientific American on this principle so far. They don't seem to have learned yet, but I've enjoyed writing the letters.
Re:Why must we leap to conclusions? (Score:1)
I think that a better idea may be to just stop reading media that sensationalizes information like that to such a radical degree. I'm not sure of the facts in this case, but if scientists told the reporter that they found elements with the apparent spectral signature of chlorophyll on Mars, and the reporter translated that to something like "Life on Mars" then the problem really lies in the reporter and the editors. It's really partly our fault. We eat this crap up, thus encouraging rags to print it. When we start getting more discriminating about our news sources, instead of using them as entertainment, this kind of thing will diminish.
The only problem with my idea is that we'd probably, at least in the short run, have a great deal of difficulty finding any news to read....
Re:Why must we leap to conclusions? (Score:3, Insightful)
Is real research really that hard up for media attention? Is science not "sellable" unless is about transporters and FTL devices?
That's my theory, which might also explain why charlatans such as John Edward and James von
Praagh receive such consistently high ratings...
The Gates Testimony - Why Microsoft Will Win [microsoft.com]
Obsession with terrorism. (Score:2)
Not to mention that *every* scientific discovery reported must fight bioterrorism. This is really starting to piss me off. Example: that mobile phone hack that uses the RF chip to detect a protein (IIRC). This has obvious medical applications, as well as tricorder-style remote sensing applications. But what does the media hype its use as? It can detect... anthrax!!! Yippee. How many people did the anthrax kill? Now, how many die from salmonella poisoning? This is something that this hack could help detect, assuming salmonella has at least one unique protein.
Note: I may be way off on it's detection abilities but you get the point. The media is obsessed with a high-profile, low-incidence disease. Hell, more people die from the flu.
Re:Obsession with terrorism. (Score:2)
The sad thing is with the current state of the USPTO you could probably patent your idea and have it granted. And have the media put you on a pedestal for helping the <stupid name>War on Terror<\stupid name>.
Always remember: if people like you don't innovate, the terrorists have won.
Nude Russian Girls (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Have you seen the average russian woman? (Score:2)
Stunningly beautiful eye candy everywhere. The babushka image is a bunch of media CRAP!
mars (Score:3, Funny)
Re:mars (Score:1)
Re:mars (Score:1, Funny)
So what was all that... (Score:2, Interesting)
I see they've changed [mplayerhq.hu] the layout of their site now, but previously there was an anti-GPL logo with a spiel about why the developers hated it so much.
I guess a change of heart, or perhaps a change of developers?
In either case: good on you MPlayer developers, for a truly excellent piece of software.
Re:So what was all that... (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm not sure what post-processing it employs in it's SDL output at least, but playing so-so quality AVI's in MPlayer yields a STAGGERINGLY better picture then the same file played under all recent versions of Windows Media Player.
They both seem to resolve the same level of detail, but there are little if any compression artifacts when viewed with MPlayer.
Re:So what was all that... (Score:1)
So true (Score:3, Interesting)
Mplayer needs to get popular on windows, it's not like it has much competition anyway.
Re:So what was all that... (Score:2)
But again I'll say a damn good core, best friggin asf/avi parser I've seen, MS's is crap compared to mplayers, of course, MS's parser is the worst of them all. I personally use PythonTheater because it integrates better with my enviornment, but if mplayer can get a good, consistent UI, I'll be first in line. Hell, I might write one for it when I get off my ass.
Re:So what was all that... (Score:2)
Re:So what was all that... (Score:2)
It is.
He's not quite an idiot, though - there are a few gui interfaces for it, though, some downloadable from that webpage. It sounds like he's describing the GTK one. None of them are really all that great, but they aren't all that developed. I always view everything fullscreen on one of my monitors, and the wheelmouse fast forwards and rewinds, so I've never had a reason for a gui interface. Someone is working on an aRts interface, so there will be dozens of playlist and player interfaces for it as soon as that is done.
--
Evan
Re:So what was all that... (Score:1)
Re:So what was all that... (Score:2)
Re:So what was all that... (Score:1)
Personally, while I build the gui whenever I build mplayer, I rarely use it. The command line is well suited for what I need, really. Plus the fact that it tries to mock xmms/winamp/etc. and doesn't use regular widgets - thus is way too small on a 17" monitor running 1600x1200.
Re:So what was all that... (Score:1)
Menus on Mandrake are totally hosed - for one thing, if you customize your menus with kmenuedit, and then install a Mandrake package (not sure exactly what the trigger is) your menus are replaced with the default set. So I've started just backing up the menus whenever I change 'em, so that I can always fall back on a known good set.
For this (and a couple other reasons) I probably wouldn't install Mandrake on a new machine, unless it's for a new Linux user who won't be doing their own configuration.
coaster video really good! (Score:3, Informative)
Re:coaster video really good! (Score:1, Informative)
Re:coaster video really good! (Score:2)
Re:coaster video really good! (Score:2)
Re:coaster video really good! (Score:2)
Real Player for *NIX (Score:2, Informative)
"hidden cameras" (Score:2)
Build your own....rice toilet? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Build your own....rice toilet? (Score:2)
Re:Build your own....rice toilet? (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Build your own....rice toilet? (Score:2)
And here is a clue, if you add 3 parts that advertise "adds 10 HP", you don't get 30 HP. Learn something about engines, and listen to those that know what they are talking about. Bolt-on parts rarely add any HP, and you can't just add them all up to get your total HP. In fact, some of them rob you of HP.
(I have a 1988 BMW M3, an out-of-the-box engineered race car)
oops! (Score:5, Funny)
There's a Freudian slip if there ever was one.
I love the language in Sec. 103 of the bill (Score:5, Insightful)
As written, this is laughably vague. Clearly, no company's primary business would be distributing harmful material to minors. For one thing, the lil' buggers don't have credit cards, so profits might be somewhat hard to come by at first. (Dang, there goes the IPO, Chester. Did you save the receipts on that new office furniture?) More appropriate would be to call it "material intended for adults but which may be judged to have a harmful effect on minors".
Here's something even more troubling. In the section where they attempt to define what's "harmful to minors", here's one of the acceptable standards:
Again, incredibly vague and open to abuse. Under this definition, material which does have scientific, etc. value for adults but doesn't for minors would be fair game, right?
Shit! Time to pull down that AARP website fellers!
Re:I love the language in Sec. 103 of the bill (Score:2, Insightful)
any operator of a commercial Internet web site or online service that has as its principal or primary business the making available of material that is harmful to minors
what this means is.. make a porn site for adults. that material is considered harmful to minors.
it's primary business therefore is making available said material... which is considered harmful to minors.
you're reading it as if it says the material is primarily marketed towards youngsters, which it does NOT imply in its wording
i might not have explained it well enough, but hopefully the point is understood.
Re:I love the language in Sec. 103 of the bill (Score:2)
Of course not. I'm suggesting the above language is ambiguous enough that it can be read any number of ways. And as we've seen time and time again, ambiguity in law is A Very Bad Thing(tm).
Let's use the same construction, different particulars. Hypothetical Bob runs a hunting shop. Its primary business is selling guns that kill people. Have any of Hypothetical Bob's guns ever been used to kill a person? Probably not. Does that change the validity of the sentence? Nope, since guns can still be used to kill people and Hypothetical Bob does sell the things. But, and here's the kicker, is it ambiguous and possibly misleading to characterize Bob's main business as selling items that kill people? Yes. Bob sells items. and the items may be put to certain ends, BUT those uses are intrinsic to the items themselves, not his sale of them.
Re:I love the language in Sec. 103 of the bill (Score:1)
A) Blunt objects
B) Lions
C) Seemingly-innocent handkerchiefs
Re:I love the language in Sec. 103 of the bill (Score:2, Insightful)
In addition to being laughably vague, it's also unenforceable. It's clear that they wanted to avoid the whole community standards issue by using the language "is harmful to minors". However, they've put prosecutors in the position of having to prove that any given material is harmful to minors.
On the one hand, this could make all sorts of "normal" speech illegal: tobacco ads, discriptions of drunken nights at bars, encouragement to drop out of school, you name it. On the other hand, it doesn't necessarily cover anything in particular, so even the most hardcore porn could argue that it isn't "harmful to minors." Since there's no objective description included in the law, it will be up to prosecutors and juries to decide what constitutes "harmful," and that will lead to an uneven application of the law, which in turn will make it subject to invalidation by the courts.
My guess is that the law was never intended to be enforced. It's just asking to be struck down by the courts, but the congresspeople who vote for it can wave their little "Morally upright" flag come the next election.
Cheers
-b
Re:I love the language in Sec. 103 of the bill (Score:2)
It's like they stuck "to minors" on the end of everything to make it "OK".
BTW- the way this bill is written, it looks like it condones sending sexual advertisement emails to minors, so long as they are properly marked.
Re:I love the language in Sec. 103 of the bill (Score:2)
What is "harmful to minors"? (Score:2)
I don't know about you, but I would have thought that selling, say, darkroom chemicals counts as making available material which is harmful to minors.
After going to such detail in explaining what they mean by porn later (and doesn't it make for fascinating reading), you'd think they'd be a bit more explicit here.
Re:What is "harmful to minors"? (Score:1)
Pun intended?
Re:I love the language in Sec. 103 of the bill (Score:2)
> Under this definition, material which does have scientific, etc. value for adults but doesn't for minors would be fair game, right?
Right. If it's _also_ appealing or pandering to purient interest _and_ depicts sex etc. in a patently offensive manner. The lacking value bit is necessary but not sufficient.
Whether any such material exists (or even could exist) is another question, but if there is material is is obscene when considered with respect to minors and has redeeming value _for adults only_, why should that adult value affect its status with respect to minors?
As an example of the sort of thing this might be aimed at, there's a website out there somewhere with close up comparison photos of natural labias with the constructed ones of post-operative transexuals. If it's being viewed in a school library, it's probably not for its scientific value to adults (which is not to say it should or will actually be covered by this bill).
Religious fervor (Score:2)
Does this mean that all religion and cult websites also have to register themselves under this domain? There is lots of evidence of the harmful effects of religious fervor, especially on impressionable children..(See 9/11, Jenin, etc.)
To protect our children, we must require that churches, too, must register under the new domain.
APIs sucessful? (Score:1)
Re:APIs sucessful? (Score:2)
One of the things it talks about in the article is how some users have incorporated the apis into new project already. It is kind of cool, you should check it out so you can see just how the API's and be successful.
SIRCML (Score:1, Redundant)
Southern Indiana has "man love" for roller coasters? mmmmmmmm, man love.
Re:SIRCML (Score:1)
Single Midwestern State seeks Territory with large panhandle & good looking borders.
Or maybe good ol' Indiana should just hook up with the russian gals.
-Peverbian
Google's future profitability (Score:1, Interesting)
Perltop [sourceforge.net] - GTK/Perl desktop environment.
gravity (Score:1)
There's no such thing as gravity... the Earth sucks!
Oh okay.. i admit it was funny at first.. but, oh nevermind..
Holy Shit! We're In The News! (Score:2, Redundant)
Yep, that was us, all right.
Re:Holy Shit! We're In The News! (Score:3, Funny)
Cry Havoc! And let loose the DoS of Slashdot!
Sexual advertisements without proper markings (Score:3, Interesting)
Yet it's hard to catch spam of a sexual nature because that sort of mail is often quite deceptive in use of the subject headings. Quite often I open a message with innocous the subject of "Hey there" only to discover it's either some girl who likes to 'ride' horses or wants to me pay her college fees via her private webcam.
Whether this bill comes into effect, and they actually manage to enforce is a whole other issue.
All In One (Score:1)
If Mars is really green, then that explains... (Score:2)
You'd sort-of think that it is weird that the aliens that visit us are green instead of some other colour if they come from Mars.
Re:If Mars is really green, then that explains... (Score:1)
Re:If Mars is really green, then that explains... (Score:1)
DVD support in distros? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:DVD support in distros? (Score:1)
Re:DVD support in distros? (Score:3, Interesting)
The question is, which distribution wants to take that kind of legal risk?
Of course, no one is going to go after you for downloading or building mplayer, giants aren't very good at swatting flies. So it's only distribution that might get you into trouble.
Why not in a Euro distro (Score:2)
Re:DVD support in distros? (Score:2)
Part of the reason is because they can't distribute binary packages. There are legal reasons, but at this stage of develpment it doesn't make sense for them to worry about bugs in binary distributions. Linux kernel developers will give you similar rhetoric about supporting binary drivers. It's technically doable, but it's so much more work than dealing with source that it's not worth their time.
There are also technical reasons (like a lack of runtime CPU detection, so you kinda have to compile it locally).
It also appears that they needed to use non-GPLed codecs in their earlier releases. I think they are either removing them in the
Read their website - it explains pretty much everything.
Re:DVD support in distros? (Score:2)
You know, if you're going to argue with someone, it helps if you don't refute your own points.
MPlayer alternative (Score:4, Informative)
The Xine [sourceforge.net] video player has a feature set similar to MPlayer, but also comes with courteous developers and a ton of RPMs [puc-rio.br] for easy installation on a variety of Linux distros. DEBs too.
nice but no cigar (Score:1)
As it doesn't support WMV files (Quicktime is already nice, though), its use is extremely limitted to me. Supporting de-facto standards like Windows Media Player simply cannot be avoided, like it or not.
Re:MPlayer alternative (Score:2, Interesting)
Really, considering the quality of the playback, etc., from mplayer, I didn't find the installation to be too complicated. They told you exactly what to download from where, what to type, etc. to get it working. For a guy who claims not to speak English very well, the setup instructions were easier to follow than some I've read that were written by native English speakers :) And it does work and work well, even on a K6-2/350, sans a couple quibbles I have with their GUI. And I'm even using an old version - time to upgrade tonight.
Frankly, I don't care how spikey they are to work with, because the product works great for multimedia on Linux.
New MPlayer seems really promising (Score:3, Informative)
This means that it can now be integrated in all distributions without packagers worrying of legal problems (which obviously includes Debian [debian.org]). A side effect (and equally important, in my opinion) is that this move makes this player available to a larger audience (exposing its remaining bugs and lack of portability to more people) and, of course, benefiting a larger part of the people that install Linux.
So, please, if you can download it, compile it and report bugs that you find (including people using different architectures). This way, we can all have a first-class, flexible, free movie player for many Operating Systems.
And contrary to popular belief, if you make a good bugreport [mplayerhq.hu], the mplayer team is very friendly fixing the bugs you find.
Of course, nobody would see a Doctor saying only "Hey, Doc, I am sick." and expecting a complete diagnostic. The same applies, evidently, to software development.
Forget the Roller Coaster (Score:1)
FROM WEDNESDAY'S STAR
Safety concerns prompt change for spur linking I-65 in Boone County to the Indianapolis bypass.
Now wait.... (Score:1)
On the topic of MPlayer... (Score:1)
Re:On the topic of MPlayer... (Score:1, Informative)
You can still build it for a specific x86 architecture, and/or link it to non-GPL code however, but the GPLed ffmpeg plugin, and runtime CPU detection make precompiled binaries a reality.
Re:Welcome to BankofAmerica_ATM (Score:1, Funny)
Re:Welcome to BankofAmerica_ATM (Score:2)
Re:Welcome to BankofAmerica_ATM (Score:1)
Re:Speed vs. APIs (Score:4, Interesting)
To finish my thought: Is Google really planning on opening themselves up to the perf hit of a potentially huge amount of traffic against its web service? I imagine the resources needed to balance the demand could grow pretty quickly (while maintaining their current, excellent perf). Even if they charge money to use the service, it opens up their perf analyses to various external agents, some of which they only have partial control of.
Re:Speed vs. APIs (Score:4, Insightful)
7. What happens if I go over my limit of 1,000 queries?
If you make more than 1,000 queries in a day, our server will respond with a SOAP Fault stating that you exceeded your daily query total. You might want to get some sleep and start querying again tomorrow.
* * *
My first reaction on hearing about these APIs, where that they might be an attempt on Google's part to cut down on automated searching without getting a lot of bad PR. They're providing limits in the guise of generosity.
The fact is, it was already pretty trivial to search Google using plain old HTML (via Perl or Java, or whatever).
But now, if Google starts prohibiting folks from using such search-bots (that use the HTML interface to Google), they can say "Look, we provided an API for this purpose!"
Re:Speed vs. APIs (Score:2)
How could Google tell it's a bot or a human performing the search via the HTML interface? Speed of interaction? That's mostly limited by the time it takes to perform the query and display the results. The net can be laggy at times, making checks for speed of interaction problematic. In any case, some sort of delays, even somewhat randomized, could be programmed in to make the bot appear to be a human.
Re:Speed vs. APIs (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Speed vs. APIs (Score:2)
Re:bah (Score:1)
"Someone that is willing to sacrifice thier freedom for security, even if for a short time, does not deserve that freedom to begin with."
Or something along those lines, I think it was Washington or Jefferson........ damn dead brain cells
Re:bah (Score:5, Interesting)
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-- Benjamin Franklin
Re:bah (Score:1)
Re:bah (Score:1)
Re:bah (Score:3, Funny)
Re:bah (Score:2)
Re:bah (Score:1)
Good to know I get noticed
Wooooo Hoooo!!!
That's not why the Supremes ruled... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:civil and criminal liability (Score:1)
Re:civil and criminal liability (Score:2)
(oops, forgot the sarchasm tag)
Remember folks, people who are busy fucking don't accidentally pick up a gun and shoot their neighbors in the process!
Concentrate on the violence. It's a real threat, as opposed to the boogeyman that we've made naked people having sex out to be. If parents don't want their kids to look at porn, they should monitor the kids. If parents don't monitor, then that means that they don't give a shit, and the government should either take the children away from unfit parents, or leave everyone alone.
Violence in the media is the problem (Score:1)
As PD points out, "people who are busy fucking don't accidentally pick up a gun and shoot their neighbors in the process!" The main problem with pr0n is the potential for social isolation and commodification of humans.