Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Courts

Blizzard Sues Starcraft II Cheat Creators 252

qubezz writes: "TorrentFreak reports that on Monday, Blizzard filed a lawsuit in US District court in California against the programmers behind the popular Starcraft II cheat 'ValiantChaos MapHack.' The complaint seeks relief from 'direct copyright infringement,' 'contributory copyright infringement,' 'vicarious copyright infringement,' 'trafficking in circumvention devices,' etc. The suit seeks the identity of the cheat's programmers, as it fishes for names of John Does 1-10, in addition to an injunction against the software (which remains on sale) and punitive damages. Blizzard claims losses from diminished user experiences, and also that 'when users of the Hacks download, install, and use the Hacks, they directly infringe Blizzard's copyright in StarCraft II, including by creating unauthorized derivative works"."
Power

Thorium: The Wonder Fuel That Wasn't 204

Lasrick (2629253) writes "Bob Alvarez has a terrific article on the history and realities of thorium as an energy fuel: For 50 years the US has tried to develop thorium as an energy source for nuclear reactors, and that effort has mostly failed. Besides the extraordinary costs involved, In the process of pursuing thorium-based reactors a fair amount of uranium 233 has been created, and 96 kilograms of the stuff (enough to fuel 12 nuclear weapons) is now missing from the US national inventory. On top of that, the federal government is attempting to force Nevada into accepting a bunch of the uranium 233, as is, for disposal in a landfill (the Nevada Nuclear Security Site). 'Because such disposal would violate the agency's formal safeguards and radioactive waste disposal requirements, the Energy Department changed those rules, which it can do without public notification or comment. Never before has the agency or its predecessors taken steps to deliberately dump a large amount of highly concentrated fissile material in a landfill, an action that violates international standards and norms.'"

Comment Re:The bigger picture (Score 4, Informative) 765

> Please cite a source for that

Hard to find a non-biased source for this, most of my searches pulled up anti-gun advocacy pages whose figures wouldn't stand up to scrutiny, but I did find this article from 2009 that cites a CDC report stating that around 100 children annually, on average, died from accidental shootings between 2000 and 2005.

Comment Re:If they programmed it correctly (Score 4, Insightful) 329

> If they programmed it correctly

As a server admin, if this is your standard for correct server side programming, I've never seen a correctly programmed application in my entire 30 year career.

In my experience, server application migrations rarely function flawlessly across OS versions. Most of the time, major application modifications need to be made.

I agree with you on the server code, however. If they're going to abandon it, they might as well open source it.

Comment Re:What an idea (Score 5, Informative) 348

>My question is what purpose it would solve. By the time the route is finished, there won't be any way for the US to import anything from China. Food exports from USA to China, perhaps, as an attempt to pay the interest on what is owed?

Your post displays a lack of knowledge of how the trade deficit works.

In a nutshell, we don't borrow money from China. We buy goods and services from China, and we use US Dollars for the transaction.

China can then spend those US dollars in the American economy - perhaps to buy American goods in exchange - but they choose instead to put those greenbacks into US treasuries, which is the single safest investment in the world. Other countries would sell those greenbacks on the currency markets to obtain their native currencies, causing currency prices to fluctuate accordingly, but China has decided to keep their exchange rates at artificial levels that advantage them and disadvantage the rest of the world, especially the United States. But I digress.

The US treasuries that China owns can't be all called in at once. They can be sold on the open market, which technically could cause US treasury rates to rise, making borrowing more expensive for the United States, but in all likelihood they would not impact those rates by very much. The important thing here is that China can't roll up to the US Treasury with a briefcase (well, okay - trucks) full of bonds that haven't matured yet and expect to cash in. It doesn't work that way. While the US does pay interest on those treasuries, the interest rates are quite low right now.

There's a lot more to this - but suffice to say, macroeconomics is not microeconomics - things you need to take care of at a household level often don't mesh with what governments have to do in order to keep the books balanced. It's a common misconception that the US national debt is necessarily a bad thing.

Comment Re:Radiation! (Score 1) 420

You know as well as I do that it's not the radiation, it's the radiotoxicity of the Strontium, Caesium, and other nuclear byproducts that's spewing out of that place.

Of course, you also know as well as I do that all those nasties will be filtered out by the reverse osmosis membranes at the desalination plant.

Slashdot Top Deals

WARNING TO ALL PERSONNEL: Firings will continue until morale improves.

Working...