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!
Eyewitnesses reported that during Monday night’s 9:15pm Real3D screening of Gravity, a lone man (later identified as retired ISS Commander Chris Hadfield) began muttering under his breath and chuckling to himself. By the 30-minute mark, Hadfield reportedly made numerous rude comments such as, “Nice Soyuz procedure, Hollywood!” and “Oh yeah, because that’s what hypoxia as caused by rapid cabin decompression looks like you idiots!.”
The judge found, among other things, that "The media attention following this case was due in large part because Oracle crafted broad, and ultimately overreaching, claims of copyright infringement.", and that "A close follower of this case will know that Oracle did not place great importance on its copyright claims until after its asserted patents started disappearing upon PTO reexamination..."." top
Rush Limbaugh demands free porn cams in dorm rooms.
darkonc writes "While Dharun Ravi goes on trial for watching on his room-mate's sexual encounters on a web cam, Rush Limbaugh is demanding that they be placed in the dorm rooms, across the country. Limbaugh wants them in the rooms of students who get birth control paid for by medical plans. Limbaugh's stated intent is to watch them have sex. . Limbaugh's indecent proposal is part of a fight over whether birth control coverage should be included in the new health care bill. It was part of a response to the testimony of a Georgetown University student who testified in favour of the rule. Both Obama (who supports the proposal) and and the president of Georgetown University (who opposes it) considered Limbaugh's demands for free porn a bit over the top." Link to Original Source top
Previously, on Monday, the government had expanded the evacuation zone around the plant to include at least 6 cities up to 60KM away from the plant. These cities, outside of the current 20-30KM evacuation area, are now expected to exceed the 20 millisieverts/year limit on residual radiation established by International Commission on Radiological Protection and the International Atomic Energy Agency in the case of an emergency." Link to Original Source top
darkonc writes "While US scientists issued a figure of 35,000-60,000 barrels (1.5-2.5 million gallons) per day on 15 June, a recent BBC article says that "The company plans to be able to handle 80,000 barrels of escaped oil per day by mid-July. " Does this mean that the official upper bound on the size of the spill is, yet again, increasing? Inquiring minds would really like to know..." Link to Original Source top
darkonc writes "Laptop Magazine has an interview with ASUS CEO Jerry Shen where he talks about the past and future of the EEE PC. Included in that interview is a question about the infamous claim that Linux netbooks have a higher return rate than Windows netbooks. Shen claims that Linux and Windows EEE PCs have similar return rates." Link to Original Source top
darkonc writes "A Kuro5hin article has a pointer to a proposed version of the $700B financial buyout legislation (backup copy here). It's pretty short and to the point — The secretary can do pretty much whatever (s)he sees fit with the money with no judicial or administrative oversight.
darkonc writes "According to a CNN Money article, Carl Icahn (who is currently in a dogfight with Yahoo's board over their decision to rebuff Microsoft's $32B offer as 'too low') said Tuesday that Microsoft Corp. "can't compete" over the next 5 years unless it acquires Yahoo. Under that premise, it would seem probable that Yahoo is worth far more to Microsoft than the $32B that they offered — and that the board is right.
Icahn also refused to answer an audience member question about whether or not he's in communication with Microsoft." Link to Original Source top
darkonc writes "Groklaw points to an article about Microsoft losing their appeal on a $142M patent award. Ironically, Microsoft was found guilty of infringing a patent on piracy prevention.
Also of interest is that, at about 3% of their last quarterly profit, this award may not reportable to the SEC as 'a significant event'." top
darkonc writes "Currently highlighted on Groklaw's newsbytes is an article on linux.com about a woman who bought a Compaq laptop and loaded Ubuntu on it. When, some time later, the keyboard started acting up she called the Compaq for warranty repairs..
"Sorry, we do not honor our hardware warranty when you run Linux." she was told. Even an HP PR rep was unable to "do the right thing" when given a couple of weeks to work on it. It looks like HP could be an especially bad vendor for people hoping to avoid Microsoft's Monopoly Tax on arbitrary machines." top
darkonc writes "It appears that the NFS doesn't want their fans praying for their teams, but they've got nothing against driving home drunk afterwards.
CNN/Sports Illustrated has the story of the NFL pouring cold water on churchs' plans for 'dry' Superbowl parties . When NFL officials saw the announcement for one such party, they told the church involved where to go with the idea. When the church turned the other cheek and resolved the initial issues (charging for the party and using the 'Superbowl' trademark), the NFL responded with more complaints ("Your TV is too big"). The Church then gave up. The NFL explained that, while it plans to treat all churches in this manner, they didn't plan to take action against bars engaging in similar activities." top
darkonc writes "Some people testing Microsoft's Windows Vista got an unexpected holiday surprise: their TVs stopped working.... Microsoft blames this on the fact that they only licensed the MPEG2 CODED for RC1 until the end of 2006 (Beta users were told that the software was good until April), but even people with third party decoders can't access their content (both live and stored). This is how "Trusted Computing" is supposed to work. If somebody in Redmond (or elsewhere) decides that you can't use certain content, nothing that you try to do should allow you access — Owning the content, or obtaining the rights by some other path, is no defense.
5 million people downloaded RC1, and some have access to Vista Final or RC2 (100K copies downloaded). The rest will have to wait until the end of January to access their suddenly banned content." top
darkonc writes "InformationWeek has a story on how Windows 2000 users are being squeezed by Microsoft as Vista and Office 2007 are being released. While some new software is legitimately unable to run on Windows 2000, other software (like MS' anti-spyware product) will install and run flawlessly — but only if you remove an explicit check for Windows 2000 in the installer.
(( Free software advocates will happily note how their legacy support issues are not necessarily beholden to their original distributor))" top
darkonc writes "Groklaw has an article asking What Happens *After* the 5 Years, when the Microsoft/Novel deal expires? In trying to answer that question, however, she noticed something that may be even more disturbing for CIOs. The deal has what might be called an escape clause — or a trap-door clause, depending on which side of the subsequent lawsuit your company ends up on.
"Microsoft reserves the right to update (including discontinue) the foregoing covenant....", or as PJ put it, "... one must assume that the covenant not to sue is actually a covenant not to sue unless Microsoft wants to sue. It's up to you whether you find such language reassuring." (emphasis mine)." top
darkonc writes "Bev Harris, in a recent slashdot posting has announced that an acknowledgement of the legitimacy of the files has been posted as a front-page article on blackboxvoting.org. — This should satisfy those of us who (justifiably) questioned a third-party posting about binary files on a recently registered website."
darkonc writes | more than 10 years ago
I'd be inclined to go with the later (although I was extremely sceptical when I went in -- I was actually going on the presumption that they were a cult (due to a key misunderstanding on my part), I was trying to get enough information to get my mom 'out'. Needless to say, I've changed my mind -- bigtime.
That was more than 10 years ago. I still think it's great, and would encourage people to take it (at the very least, go to an intro session. They're 3 hours, free, and most people get value out of them...
One of cousin kept going to the intro sessions but he never signed up. One time I invited him to another intro session, and he was "yeah... I think it's time to go to another one". I was like "hunh??". Turns out he was getting enough value out of the intro sessions, that he didn't see the need to actually sign up. I suggested that, if he was getting that much out of 3 hours, how much would he get out of the whole weekend?
On the sunday of the course, he was like: "How come you didn't make me sign up sooner?"
The vast majority of people who actually take (and complete) the course find it very worthwhile. About the worst review I'v gotten was "It's the best thing I've ever done in my life, but I'm not going to do it again". Since the crux of the course is in the last few hours, people who leave in the middle, may be a bit wierded out about the purpose of the whole thing.
Bottom line, I'd say 'do it'. If you haven't been to an intro, at least go to one, then decide for yourself. If you have any more questions, I'm thinking a private email might be a bit better (( bcgreen.com!spamuel , if you understand the old usenet email protocol )), but either location's fine with me.
Now there's this Journal entry where we can chat 'in private', so to speak.
darkonc writes | about 12 years ago
... there will still be some 25 year old flunky sitting in his parents basement who would just love to send you patches to the firmware running on your fuel injection microprocessor.
That's more likely to be a description of closed source support, except that he'd be siting in his parent company's basement. The difference with Open source is that it might be (substantially) the same flunky, but with the addition of anybody with enough interest to download a copy of the source code
-- most likely people with a good deal of training in the area.
Would you rather get that patch from some 25 year old who couldn't get asigned anyththing better than 'supporting' a piece of 10-year-old dead-end software, or a PhD in real-time systems who just haappens to have the same fuel injector?
Open source doesn't automatically mean good support, but it does mean that nobody can absolutely deny you support. You always have the resources and option to do the support yourself. With closed source, the EULA often seems to make it illegal for you to create your own patches for a program -- if you can even figure out where to patch without source.
When Iceland (I think it was Iceland) offered to pay Microsoft to translate Windows for them, and Microsoft refused the request, all that whole country could do was fume about the snub -- until someone suggested moving to Linux for their standard OS.
Windows for Workgroups (WFW) 3.1 is barely 10 years old now. How much would it take to get MS to do a s simple bugfix for that software? I think you'd have an easier time running end-to-end through Baghdad wearing nothing but a US flag and a 'Bomb Iraq" button.
darkonc writes | more than 12 years ago
This is a possible solution to the AudioGalaxy dilema:
Positive Song identification.
Before submitting a song to AudioGalaxy, a user has to 'appropriately identify' themselves. Once a user is identified, they can submit songs to the AudioGalaxy universe to be authenticated for distribution.
When an identified user submits a song for use, the song is fingerprinted, and identified as 'good'. A properly identified song is the responsibility of it's submitter. AudioGalaxy is simply a tranmission medium. If a copyright holder feels that their song is improperly submitted, then they can go to the person responsible for the song for the 'publishing' of it. If a user is identified as consistently submitting unauthorized copyright material, then their entire set of authentications can be revoked.
Users can be authenticated by any of a set of means -- eg:
A credit card authorization (should appear on credit card summaries as something obvious like "ID verification audogalaxy-id.com" with the domain (and www.domain) pointing to a page that precisely describs what the ID was for and about and what the associated person would be responsible for [[in case the ID was the result of a credit card theft]]).
Thawte (www.thawte.com) allows all sorts of ways to authenticate the identify a person -- including their 'web of trust' system which is free, and various paid methods.
Persons who don't have access to (or don't want to use) other methods, could mail in a notarized copy of personal ID,
Pick your favorite other method of verification.
Once a user is verified, they would be issued an SSL certificate that would allow them to submit songs (automatedly) for authentication.
SSL certificates allow for repudiation, so if someone's ID was used inappropriately, they would be able to issue repudiation.. It should be
possible to issue repudiation starting from a specific date (when the
certificate was compromised), generally (e.g. if the identity was issued
improperly), or even for specific songs (if a publishing authorization turns out to have been mistaken, or the publisher has second thoughts.).
Sharing would then be checked for authentication of a song, rather than a record company claim (after the fact) of copyright infringement. If a record company claims copyright on a song, they would identify it by fingerprint (or a fingerprint summary) then DMCA procedures for notifying the 'owner' of the impugned song would follow.
darkonc writes | more than 12 years ago
Looking at the history of MS, I'm thinking that one way around the whole mess would be to allow MS to put anything they want on the desktop, or in their office suite. There would, however, be one caveat:
they must document and freely license everything -- including APIs, communication protocols and file formats.
If it's added to windows, then we need to be able to see how it's put in there, and there has to be a way to pull it out, and replace it with something else. Microsoft needs to provide to documentation to do so.
The intent here is to provide competitors with the ability to produce competing software that has the ability to co-operate with Wintendos.
MS is allowed to innovate as they wish, but they would have two choices: