Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!



Supreme Court To Decide Whether Rap Lyric Threats Are Free Speech

TaoPhoenix Re:why just 5 mod points aren't going to cut it (436 comments)

"And this is why just 5 mod points aren't going to cut it."

Weird - this story?!

And there are over 130 of those spam posts... that's far more than I've seen in a *long* time!

They need to downmod those at the admin level with a script so you can save your legit mod points for good things!

about two weeks ago

Mozilla Launches Browser Built For Developers

TaoPhoenix Re:another pointless UI facelift (74 comments)

Actually, they hid Aurora and went back to one of the older square layouts!

I had to use Classic Theme Restorer to add back a couple of minor buttons and colors though.

about a month ago

Stanford Promises Not To Use Google Money For Privacy Research

TaoPhoenix Re:General Fund (54 comments)

" If all money goes into a general fund, there's no distinguishing "whose" money it is..."

Sounds to me like an easy accounting exercise.

So don't put it in a general fund. Make a Restricted Account for privacy research. Then when you do privacy research, just make sure it comes from there and only there. Also make sure none of Google's money gets in there. Standard GAAP should handle that like a snap.

"Money" sounds "fungible", but it's not. In many ways, "money" = "$ combined with the source and destination". Or you can do it in reverse, and make Google's money a Restricted Account, and run it backwards in that general fund money can fund anything, but pulling Google's money needs a senior management review that it is "not reasonably construed" as privacy research.

And yes, get Legal on this. Because for example you can tweak a footnote of almost anything to "improve privacy" even if the original research was "Study of Seattle's laws penalizing food wastes in trash."


The world is just becoming messy because those old fluid "neutral zones" are closing up and Flannery O'Connor was right, "everything that rises must converge".

about 3 months ago

Biofeedback Games and The Placebo Effect

TaoPhoenix Re:could be used therapeutically (57 comments)

The Placebo Effect is just our poor bodies reaching some limits vs more and more clever scientific studies.

As I understood it, it was self healing abilities only triggered by "someone gives a damn about me" that we don't easily access every day to fix other problems.

So having computer programs just goes more towards the whole "look, it's now on a computer" we've seen in darker scenarios. I'll stay positive on this note.

If you just stick 300 fortune cookies into a computer program, a few of them will strike home and then you get "therapeutic benefit". (I know, because I have a file of over a hundred of them, from asking my Chinese restaurant to give me a bunch each time. A few of them are really pretty good.)

Studies keep trying to go super narrow to carefully limit "complexity" but I am beginning to think the "Scientific Method" is on the verge of missing "Emergent Results" when they risk small details but leave behind controlling micro-scenarios.

Sideways from the Slashdot tradition, I didn't read the article because one look at the summary says it's too narrow, and it's become the Press's job to "expand them". Some journalists try hard, a few are hacks.

Much more broadly, I have smashed together a few projects I know have helped me.

about 5 months ago

Selectively Reusing Bad Passwords Is Not a Bad Idea, Researchers Say

TaoPhoenix Re: Real Name (280 comments)

"What sort of moron uses their real name on an internet forum?"

Welcome to Facebook and Google's push!

Reversing 20 years of your type of common sense!

I know, I grew up with too, then it changed about 2007.

about 5 months ago

Selectively Reusing Bad Passwords Is Not a Bad Idea, Researchers Say

TaoPhoenix Re:8 character min (280 comments)

Again a guess, but I bet this is about "how much it costs us to upgrade our system".

Underscore I can see, but Space used to be a character that messed up a lot of systems. And I frankly don't have any 20 character passwords, so maybe people lowered it so that users would have any hope of ever remembering their password, however bad it may be.

about 5 months ago

Selectively Reusing Bad Passwords Is Not a Bad Idea, Researchers Say

TaoPhoenix Re: 11 characters (280 comments)

Quick uninformed guess, sounds like someone's sloppy programming problem.

I'll defer to my betters here but it sounds like when someone slammed out the system they just picked some number like 11 for the password length and then someone else did the best they could by making it require lots of stuff.

about 5 months ago

Selectively Reusing Bad Passwords Is Not a Bad Idea, Researchers Say

TaoPhoenix Re:Losing an email account (280 comments)

Years ago in a weak variant of this whole thread, I designed a system of using some nine passwords for the entire net, and for whatever reasons I am to senile to recall, one email account got a weird password that changed a couple of times until I couldn't get in. (Including one suspicious moment but that's another post.)

But fortunately I made my "security questions" sufficiently strange yet unforgettable that after two hours on hold, I got into Yahoo Customer service and fixed it. (For now.)

But you have a point that, that was a "backup account". If the primary ones ever got hacked, people would have access to tons of stuff.

I'm def of the school of "use your passwords every time so you know them" and haven't looked into password managers that sorta bother me. It's one reason why last quarter's Heartbleed story made me grumpy - is every site in existence gonna make me flip my password system now? I don't have a new one yet.

about 5 months ago

Selectively Reusing Bad Passwords Is Not a Bad Idea, Researchers Say

TaoPhoenix Re:Govt vs Corporate (280 comments)

"True. I should have said major corporate standards when I said government. But because of the way the payment card industry works, if FEELS like government. Complete with not following its own rules and having rules for the sake of rules."

Sorry, but I find this a bit of a big error to make.

I'm really torn on who I dislike more, but to *confuse* corporate policies and govt policies feels like a big step backwards!

(Your choice of which) one punches me in the gut and one holds me by the throat, but to *confuse* them doesn't feel right!

about 5 months ago

Selectively Reusing Bad Passwords Is Not a Bad Idea, Researchers Say

TaoPhoenix Re:Banking (280 comments)

I'm old school here.

What is all this "banking info"!? I only do about five things with my bank, and 3.8 of them I can do on my phone just *dialing the automated number*.

Check my balance, pay something to my credit card, look to see if a check has been cashed that shouldn't have been (I've hired a bit of house help), and a couple other things.

When it gets a little weird I hit 0 or say "Representative" to do a couple of fancy things.

What I spend is in my head, I don't need a huge online report to tell me. My five bills are on my desk (including last month's late one!)

I have resisted BOA's attempt to get me to go all online-automated. I theoretically set up a couple of accounts to be online to save money, but not because I need a fancy account. When you wanna know what you can spend, you make a 1.7 min phone call - what else do you need to do?

about 5 months ago

Selectively Reusing Bad Passwords Is Not a Bad Idea, Researchers Say

TaoPhoenix Re:5 characters (280 comments)

"requiring passwords to be at max 5 characters. MY BANK!!!"

I hope not. Even the worst services I have seen want 8 characters. I'll leave it to my betters how fast a cracker program can bust 5!

about 5 months ago

Google's Project Zero Aims To Find Exploits Before Attackers Do

TaoPhoenix Re:They aren't stupid (62 comments)

I'll reply to you, as you're the closest to the angle I was going for.

Cross-posted from another site, with two more sentences here.

Okay, picking my words a little and hoping I get my tone right...

I get that Google (and Facebook and all kinds of other gangs) are *selling info*. It's sleazy, but to me that's "grey hat". It's "we're psychologically manipulating you to make money, but you knew that but we made the services nice and fun/useful so you don't care". I've been reading a huge Star Trek DS9 Re-Watch overview, and that feels so like a Quark move - he's devious but eventually even he draws his lines.

Secret silent software bugs that only X number of governments even know exist is a whole other level of Black Hat. (Really, somewhere in the combo of Heartbleed and the True-Crypt mess I got grumpier than I have been in a while.)

So Google isn't some poor 12 man op with a lonely tech who was beaten by big guys - behind the sales guys there's a *lot* of tech crunching firepower there. So *maybe* the Agencies have a bit of a lead on them, but I'd bet not as big as those Agencies thought.

It's a fascinating twist - Govt can beat up "little guys" a few at a time in a Divide and Conquer strategy, but what if this story catches on, and then Microsoft and Facebook and Apple and Samsung and your choice of others jump in?

(I put Samsung in there because software bugs know no boundaries, so it's specifically a test of geographic negotiations beyond the US level.)

Short Selling jokes aside, can the US even manage to indict the CEO's of all of US tech? Their dealmaking might just be on the verge of coming to bite them. (There was a TV series about all that, corps, totally owning govt openly and outright.)

When we're not busy snarking in the Basement or the Living Room, having a gaping security flaw in software isn't good for any of these companies. So maybe (making up a name) Gennady Li Chandarovskiyij-Maharujshi is the greatest programmer alive at one of the Agencies, but can he really stand up to a world wide team that's now pissed off??

Going all story fiction for a moment, imagine it:
All these companies, led by the big dogs with little guys lending a spare hour;
CEO's around the world getting royally pissed and saying "our products are dominant enough and we have time to put away our micro-jockeying. Let's spend an entire year and 700 billion dollars/whatever to clean this mess up. Grab anyone who has any legit idea whatsoever about software security and let them do whatever they want (jokes aside), no questions asked including extra perks like the 90's like croissant sandwiches in the break room."

US Govt is slowly winning the PR war against "Anonymous", but what if the Big Tech companies with tips from millions of freelancers all unite and say "Thanks for all the fish, yummy, now watch what you made! We have a worldwide "team" of over a *thousand* software people (and four space aliens, only three of which you know about.) Do you *really* wanna keep doing this? Or can we just get back to selling people's info for money?"

At least in my imagination I wanna believe we're on the verge of Tech calling Govt's bluff that they've been going "Divide and Subdue" too long, and the beautiful part is all the bribery is (mostly) illegal - how can they even pretend to shout about 770 companies and 12,345,845 freelancers all spending an entire year on software security?

So that's my message of daydream hope!

about 5 months ago

Goldman Sachs Demands Google Unsend One of Its E-mails

TaoPhoenix Re:precedent in many future law cases. (346 comments)

You're almost the only one addressing the legal-theory side.

Stepping aside from the technics, what becomes the theory for this?

"Material that is believed to be owned by the recipient but is in fact leased or rented may be removed by the lessor/provider if it causes reputational damage from the sender (and maybe to other parties?)"

Lawyers have a fun job. (Things to do with a 170 IQ). Take can take one word and use it to create billions of client dollars. There was that one other article in Rolling Stone about how Goldman Sachs borrowed one paragraph from their federal government bailout, jammed it into a 15 year old finance bill, and now they get to run oil pipelines while bidding on oil futures and stuff.

Or the one from earlier today where that review board authorized the NSA to keep spying by abusing the words "adequate" and "reasonable".

about 5 months ago

Privacy Oversight Board Gives NSA Surveillance a Pass

TaoPhoenix Re: 191 page report (170 comments)

The report is a bit more clever than that, and *parts* of it are actually good. It's certainly more info than I ever knew before, and than they would have ever released before.

The way these "Devils in Details" landmined reports work is that 95% of it is legit, and builds a legit case towards ... what you think it should. Then at the very capstone when it comes time to produce the conclusion, they flip a key paragraph as the landmine. In a perfect world, let's say we ever magically elect a both incredibly powerful party majority and an incredibly honest one, they can take this report, reverse the landmine paragraphs, and end up with the correct result.

Try looking near pages 98-99.

This is the paragraph that echoes this entire thread:
"On the other side of the coin, the acquisition of private communications intrudes on Fourth Amendment interests. Even though U.S. persons and persons located in the United States are subject to having their telephone conversations collected only when they communicate with a targeted foreigner located abroad, the program nevertheless gains access to numerous personal conversations of U.S. persons that were carried on under an expectation of privacy. Email communications to and from U.S. persons, which the FISA court has said are akin to âoepapersâ protected under the Fourth Amendment,426 are also subject to collection in a variety of circumstances."

At this point everyone is clamoring for the followup to be "Unconstitutional so get rid of it." As they say, "always put one concession to your opponent's position in an argument", so here I say, "it is not possible under any form of intelligence work to have *zero* US-US information showing up, such as because any email to that sketchy girlfriend with a CC to your US buddy on it, drags him along along for the ride." Of course that's a minimal data point, but this thread has been about the issue of Non-Zero data collection.

*However*, then they threw their landmine in.

Over on page 99:

"The government has acknowledged that the Fourth Amendment rights of U.S. persons are affected when their communications are acquired under Section 702 incidentally or otherwise, and it has echoed the FISA courtâ(TM)s observation that the implementation of adequate minimization procedures is part of what makes the collection reasonable. (See footnote 433)"

So before everyone jumps on the word "reasonable", *that's* their landmine. You get Schrodinger's Cat scenarios with that email because as soon as they even see whose names are on it, one to Osama Bin Laden's hot neice's Iranian cousin staying in the Netherlands, and one to your radical US buddy, they *already have* metadata! So they decide to open it, whereupon it contains some nice NSFW Rule34/Rule35 pictures, and a PS memo on the bottom of it with a piece of info that actually qualifies as intelligence. Great. Now you have an email that pisses off at least four countries. What do you do with that?! (After you finish grinning lewdly and more to the pictures!)

So the *actual* word to mess with is "Adequate". After you finish laughing at my scenario, is that an *adequate* acquisition of US citizen data? I don't know. So saying "Aha! A right was violated, abolish the entire agency!!" is not the answer. The only one I can think of is a percentage one of some kind, such as "less than X% of US communications were collected, as verified by an auditor that you actually believe." Then we can all start over deciding what that percentage is.

about 5 months ago

Following EU Ruling, BBC Article Excluded From Google Searches

TaoPhoenix Re: Not Voluntarily (239 comments)

In general I applaud the EU ruling *if* it really gets implemented fairly. But there's all sorts of wiggles to mess around with.

We've been focusing on "that one guy" but look at this note way at the bottom of the article:

"It is only a few days since the ruling has been implemented - and Google tells me that since then it has received a staggering 50,000 requests for articles to be removed from European searches."

And that's 50K requests in a few days.

Google can afford to hire "the army of paralegals", but does the ruling extend to smaller services? You can delist-bomb a small site out of existence when someone manages a "DDOS Distributed De-List of Service" attack on every article in their entire catalog. Then you get games where people try to de-list each other's materials.

Not that I am a fan of Google, but I can bet a senior lawyer at Google is saying "well hell, besides the cost, if we have taken down seventeen million articles on all kinds of topics, there goes our ten year competitive advantage of useful searches."

about 5 months ago

Mass. Supreme Court Says Defendant Can Be Compelled To Decrypt Data

TaoPhoenix Re: known data isn't there (560 comments)

All this is making me start to think of some kind of more clever "panic mode" encryption.

You'd have to make it really fast, such that it's reg proto-encrypted two ways, one normal, and the panic mode. So say something really fast like shift-control-alt-F11 instantly flips the "panic bit".

We as geeks could put all kinds of awesome stuff into it, smashed into a kind of digital Klein Bottle with milk for Schrodinger's cat.

"Do you know how to decrypt it?"
"Why not?"
"Because it's time-locked with a code that cannot be found until next September."
"Do you know what documents are on there?"
"The ones you are looking for are not there because they were broken into component parts that only the computer knows, tied to a code that September code. Meanwhile other documents you did not know were there, are there, because they were created by algorithms the moment I hit the Panic Button and not a moment before. And the base of the September key is an English phrase which may or may not admit a crime. You don't know."
"So what if the case is dismissed?"
"I can do other work until September. What's important is that it cannot be broken right now."

about 6 months ago

HUGO Winning Author Daniel Keyes Has Died

TaoPhoenix Re: far from first (66 comments)

"Hey may have hit it best, but he was far from first. Poul Anderson's Brain Wave [wikipedia.org], for example, came out in 1953-54. I think there were a lot of even earlier examples, but I don't have them at my fingertips."

Okay, fair. I might have slipped up on my wording.

It's been decades since my old days as a young'un reading all the old Pre/Gold/Silver age stuff. I certainly know who Poul Anderson is, but that exact story is the kind of thing that used to be really tough to find. It's still a little tricky, maybe six web links in Amazon can do it, but back even in the 80's trying to find a then-thirty-year-old story was really tough and I wouldn't have known it even existed to hunt it down.

D. K. and Flowers showed up because it was aggressively highlighted in some school class's curriculum. To be sure, it was worth the exposure, but that's different from trying to make a quick post and hold it to "researcher standards". At 1958 it is reasonably close to the top of the chain and I bet the writers of my examples had at least a phone call advising them "You know you're re-making Flowers for Algernon, right?"

But then there's your note, and if you moved the theme just a little, you might even get some slightly different earlier but not unrelated takes on the theme.

about 6 months ago

The Game Theory of Life

TaoPhoenix Re:Unicode (85 comments)

Drifting off topic, but did the infamous Beta in fact get Unicode support?

I mean, look at this tortuous new Beta, did they even bother to put in the Unicode support that people have been screaming for for ten+ years?

Damn we need a mole at Dice. What do they even do at management meetings?

"Let's make a whole new design with 55 changes."
"What about Unicode Support?"
"That's a big word. That's too hard for me. Let's put more videos up instead."

about 6 months ago

The Game Theory of Life

TaoPhoenix Re:Two things (85 comments)

"are mathematics (of which algorythms are a small part) discovered or created ? No one has a clear answer to that question."

I thought it was pretty clear that stuff is discovered. To me this kind of question reads like "Well, does it stop being right at any time once it is discovered?" and the answer is generally no. (A, you sometimes get stuff that was discovered and not properly reported, at which point the original discovery is not at fault and it is just a reporting problem, or B, you get stuff that was *insufficiently* discovered and *over-reported*, causing someone else to re-do parts of the work and end up with something else. But then it's still discovered, at whatever level that year's understanding entails.)

In a way it's a bit silly, you can't just "make up" (create) knowledge, so it has to be there. It can just be ferociously difficult to "correctly" discover, and we might end up with three or thirty versions of the knowledge as we discover it. But once something is really nailed, hard, I can't think of any cases where people said stuff like "Oh, sorry, that law stopped existing in 1932". Every time, when a mistake shows up, it's "Oh, sorry, we didn't discover it right."

about 6 months ago



Sopa-II : H.R. 1981 "Protecting Children From Internet Pornographers Act"

TaoPhoenix TaoPhoenix writes  |  more than 2 years ago

TaoPhoenix writes "Here we go! As many of you predicted, SOPA would be rebuilt worse than ever by switching the Copyright flavor to a "Protect the Kiddies" flavor. You were right. H.R. 1981, entitled "Protecting Children From Internet Pornographers Act", has just been sponsored by Lamar Smith, the same lead proponent of SOPA. That was fast! Unfortunately it has a built in cheapo argument ready as a talking point. It also has some nasty and costly data retention clauses that weren't even in SOPA. Are we ready to do another Blackout Day? I don't think we have too many of those left before the fragile Internet coalition becomes exhausted. So, two questions: How do we stop this bill, and how do we win a victory permanent enough that we don't have to do this every single month?
Business Insider version: http://www.businessinsider.com/anonymous-and-internet-advocates-wheres-your-hr-1981-outrage-2012-2
David Seaman's Youtube videocast http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PBVqm2W56c8"

Link to Original Source

How do users download their Slashdot posts?

TaoPhoenix TaoPhoenix writes  |  more than 3 years ago

TaoPhoenix writes "With the passing of the CmdrTaco era, mant of the old regulars are looking to sum up their posting careers at Slashdot. I'm sure I have a couple thousand posts and I don't even qualify for a lawn. Yet as of recently, there was no clear method in place for a user to receive all the posts in a nice text file. For a site that does detailed observations about the evils of data lockins, have other users developed a method to retrieve their posts in an efficient manner without too much difficulty?"

New Angle on the War on Terror

TaoPhoenix TaoPhoenix writes  |  more than 3 years ago

TaoPhoenix (980487) writes "The celebrations are slowing down. But Yahoo cautiously introduces an entirely new direction for the official discourse — "Frenemies". The rumblings for years "there's no way Bin Laden lasted this long without serious help" are true. The article asks the key question: "Why can't the United States just declare Pakistan a hostile enemy?" Then it treads lightly on the answer: "...(they have) the fastest growing nuclear arsenal in the world and a bitter ongoing fixation on the ambitions of neighboring rival India."

However, Bin Laden was the figurehead of the US decade long theme of "The Post 9-11 World". Are the reasons given enough to justify the costs, open and hidden, of that colossally expensive "War on Terror" campaign?


Link to Original Source

YROffline - SnowZilla condemned

TaoPhoenix TaoPhoenix writes  |  more than 5 years ago

TaoPhoenix writes "Apparently generating tourist traffic to your town is less important than living on a road quiet enough to hear nature. Historic cultural landmarks deemed unsafe should be torn down rather than structurally supported. Thus local officials decide in Airport Heights, in Alaska.

Billy Powers, whose yard was SnowZilla's home, urged officials to Think Of The Children. 'The kids had spent hours and hours of work on it,' Billy Powers said on Sunday. No luck — and if he tries to rebuild it, he could be arrested."

Link to Original Source

TaoPhoenix TaoPhoenix writes  |  more than 8 years ago

TaoPhoenix (980487) writes "The first time it happened, I shrugged it off. Now it's confirmed. My search results from Yahoo are being redirected to other sites. Can anyone else confirm this, or is it a local problem indicating it's time for me to scrub my machine?

A. Exactly two false results appear. The third time the correct site arrives, and stays stable.

B. Google has no such trouble. AltaVista, which appears to use a less tuned, older copy of Yahoo's database, also correctly delivers the link.

C. This effect is now at 100% frequency."



Aphelion SciFi Fantasy Horror Poetry Webzine in 2013!

TaoPhoenix TaoPhoenix writes  |  about a year and a half ago

Okay, here we go!

I shall post a promotional piece for the Science Fiction - Fantasy - Horror - Poetry webzine Aphelion.

It's been around since 1997. However we gradually lost the "regular" posters through attrition and we haven't undertaken much marketing at all. This post is "semi-unauthorized" aka ad-hoc.

This campaign:
You're one of two crews I would like to encourage to join and post a note about at least a couple of stories! They do have a focus on newer and developing writers, so go REAL EASY on the comments - if you see something that a writer could have improved, PLEASE work REAL HARD to soft-ball it!

As part of a bit of backstory that we don't need to visit here, in this somewhat fragile year it's important to get a couple of really nice newcomers, because there is a potential bit of culture clash. They do not have the Anonymous Coward theme with all that entails, nor are they in tune with our top 10 "inside jokes" such as Frosty Ps0t, You Insensitive Clod, In Soviet Russia, and many types of posts that dance around the Funny-Flamebait line here. Also be very careful with the FTFY and Grammar posts. It's true Mechanics do have a place in writing, but the usage tone culture here of those posts is generally too aggressive for Aphelion.

But y'all have modded me up a bunch of times, so I must have been interesting a few times at least, so let's really get all you geniuses to go give them the best ya got, 'cause you're all smarter than me!

This is the only High Volume promo web post I am doing right now, because it's one of only a few sites I have followed for all these years (somewhere about 8!), so I don't feel it's much to ask one Journal post to grab some of you who have been feeding me Chocolate Donut +1 upmods all these years.

I would love to get _____ number of really enthused new visitors who plan to stay for at least a few months. For a site the size of Slashdot, we'll get a decent few at a minimum, and if we have the cure for the Woes when y'all don't like This Hour's Story, we might get a lot! Let's go all KickStarter-y with some fun milestones.
17 - Just because I like the number 17, and the lowest non-insulting goal.
25 - Round Number
32 - How could we not include this one!?
50 - Round Number
64 - Another obvious one
75 - Round Number
But then it gets a bit scarce, until ...
100 - Round Number
128 - The Comp Numbers will get a bit thin in a min
200 - Round Number
256 - QuarterFinal Compy number
500 - Stretch Goal Round Number
512 - Stretch Goal Compy
1000 - Last Round Number
1024 - Last Compy number

I have no right to expect more than that so I'll start to reign all this in soon!

For you login-metrics fans, they put in an aggressive anti-spam measure in this year, but please don't go all Gamey on me and try to break it! It's meant for 4th rate twerps who went all CopyPasta at the Ragu Factory. Just play nice. But do holler to me if it causes any of you actual trouble getting in, and I'll give you a Secret Decoder ByteCoin. Signed by the Retired Lieutenant Taco Vendor from down the street. Or something.

The Lead intro page:
http://www.aphelion-webzine.com/ - typically a graphic that changes for each issue
They do a "Flip" where the current month issue is on a "hardlocked" set of links by story/item category such as Short Stories. So if you get busy, and want to go back next month, they'll be gone (temporarily!) and replaced by the new issue. There's a big topic in Archives, but that's another day.

The intro Editorial by the senior editor:

Short Stories:


"Features:" - most usually an instructional article on writing but a few other things sometimes

I would appreciate it if interested people would drop a note here too, just to close the loop so I both know who is headed over there, but also for the data check of that signup-test.

On the first two posts over there (because any single one might vanish from visibility because I am turbo posting this week!) to mention that me, Tao sent you from Slashdot. Plus it's an excuse to Cross Brand and all those other fun business terms! Go Slashdot! (Hi Dice!)

Watch the horde of smart people show up and impress the hell out of them!


Obligatory disclosures etc.
I am the Archives Editor over there, a position which involves fluidly evolving things generally oriented around fiddling with info about the magazine issues, rather than actually writing stories for them.

I apologize for the "soft links" because I don't know how to make them Clickable. But then I told ya y'all were smarter than I am!

Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?