Naw, we're still pretty squarely in the "laugh" stage. It's amusing to watch y'all rediscover the joys of bank panics.

We'll be at the fight stage once the Bitcoin folks start seriously introducing independent regulatory bodies; governments will likely not be on board with that.

Of course, being as the very soul of the Bitcoin movement is rooted in distrust of and independence from central regulation and oversight, I don't see that happening anytime soon.

"Guys, I know we've been punching you in the face for 20+ years but we've *stopped* now !
Why don't you love us ?"

As someone who works very well with Microsoft these days and has many friends there, the lack of self-awareness in the posts on the article is staggering :-).

You have to do more than stopping being bad. Being *good* is required. :-).

I know you can do it ! Stop being a patent troll for starters.

You do know that that wasn't the only other alternative, right? Looking back, might it not have been better to post a message *before* you started redirecting a sizable section of the traffic that said, "we appreciate the feedback we've been getting on the beta site, and we're working on implementing many of the changes that have been requested. We know that that there are still issues with several components of the site, but in order to get feedback from a larger sample size, we're going to redirect 20% of the users to the beta site as a trial for the next N weeks. After that trial is over, we'll go back to classic Slashdot while we continue improving our new design." It's called managing expectations, and would have had the added benefit of giving people a place to put the Beta protests.

Also, you keep saying that the comment system is being worked on, but your "Beta News" section doesn't list it under "what is not in Beta yet" as one of the "key areas being worked on." So, it's perhaps natural for people to assume that you're not currently as concerned about its problems.

I would agree that this improves what is currently--and will likely still be--middling accessibility support from Google as a whole. Getting accessibility right is challenging and expensive, and impacts a comparatively small user base. When your strategy is a core strategy, accessibility is not one of your leading concerns.

Of course it is, and I did not state otherwise.

My point is that Google is actively pursuing a core user strategy, and there are clear winners and clear losers as a result. I have my own personal biases on this topic, and I'll argue that leaving edge cases behind in an effort to solidify the core is not the best path to take.

My being critical of their decision, however, does not indicate that I think they shouldn't be allowed to make it.

Google is aiming more and more for the core, at the edge's expense.

They provide middling accessibility support, because it isn't something most people need. They dropped MathML support, because it isn't something that most people need. Now, they're dropping CSS Regions, because it isn't something that most people need.

It increasingly appears that you can have your Google product in any color, so long as it's red, green, blue, and yellow. One size fits most, and tough for you if it doesn't.

Yes, yes, but more importantly: how good of news is this for Bitcoin?

I once got asked a question which I found hurtful and offensive, and felt tempted to 'blow up' the interview at that point. Fortunately, I resisted the temptation. As it turns out, the question was his way of introducing the next thing, which was telling me that he was offering me the job.

The thing you have to understand is that this isn't a technical problem.

All of these things are well understood, and there are Free Software libraries that will do all of these things (indeed the proprietary commercial solutions are often built with these very self-same libraries).

No, this is a *legal* problem, with patents on software destroying the opportunity to create many wonderful things that consumers would love to buy, if the legal framework allowed it, which it doesn't.

It's almost unimaginable how much damage one simple thing (allowing patents on software) has done to the industry.

This looks like what you wanted:

http://hsti.com/products/wirelessmediastick

disclaimer, I haven't tried this at all...

Jeremy.

Choose the right tool for the job. The right tool for this job is not Slashdot.

Go see a doctor. A good GP will be able to point you to a specialist who may be able to better pinpoint exactly why you're having these issues and help you sort them out.

Do your research, by all means--you'll need to be your own advocate--but there are people who dedicate their lives to figuring this sort of thing out. Talk to them, not us.

Here's my report on the actual ruling which is being reviewed: 2nd Circuit affirms denial of plaintiffs' preliminary injunction motion in WNET v Aereo

I guess it would take a litigator to notice this, but it's quite unusual that a preliminary injunction denial would be getting this kind of appellate attention.

In the first place, it was unusual for an interlocutory appeal to be granted from the denial of the preliminary injunction motion. In federal court usually you can only appeal from a final judgment.

Similarly, apart from the fact that it's always rare for a certiorari petition to be granted, it's especially tough where the appeal is not from a final judgment, but just from a preliminary injunction denial which does not dispose of the whole case.