Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:When the cat's absent, the mice rejoice (Score 5, Insightful) 286

Well, I'd be with you if the government was poking around on the users' computers, but they weren't. The users were hosting the files on a public peer-to-peer network where you essentially advertise to the world you've downloaded the file and are making it available to the world. Since both those acts are illegal, you don't really have an expectation of privacy once you've told *everyone* you've done it. While the broadcasting of the file's availability doesn't prove you have criminal intent, it's certainly probable cause for further investigation.

These guys got off on a narrow technicality. Of course technicalities do matter; a government that isn't restrained by laws is inherently despotic. The agents simply misunderstood the law; they weren't violating anyone's privacy.

Comment Re:Crude? (Score 2) 99

Compare that to some of the ST:TNG props that I've seen that look fine on screen, but when examined closely look like someone gave a 5-year old a couple of shots of vodka and turned them loose with a paintbrush.

There's a certain wonder to that too.

I had the same reaction when I saw the ST:TNG props in person. You wouldn't buy a toy that looked that cheesy. The wonder of it is that the prop makers knew this piece of crap would look great onscreen. That's professional skill at work. Amateurs lavish loving care on stuff and overbuild them. Pros make them good enough, and put the extra effort into stuff that matters more.

Comment Re: Great one more fail (Score 1) 600

These kinds of responses are conditioned on certain assumptions that may not hold for all users.

For example, let's assume that you have no need whatsoever to prevent other users from using your gun. Then any complication you add to the firearm will necessarily make it less suitable, no matter how reliable that addition is. An example of someone on this end of the spectrum might be a big game hunter who carries a backup handgun.

On the other hand suppose you have need of a firearm, but there is so much concern that someone else might use it without authorization that you reasonably decide to do without. In that opposite situation you might well tolerate quite a high failure rate in such a device because it makes it possible to carry a gun. An example of someone on this end of the spectrum might be a prison guard -- prison guards do not carry handguns because of precisely this concern.

This isn't rocket science. It's all subject to a straightforward probabilistic analysis *of a particular scenario*. People who say that guns *always* must have a such a device are only considering one set of scenarios. People who say that guns must *never* have such a device are only considering a different set of scenarios. It's entirely possible that for such a device there are some where it is useful and others where it is not.

Comment Re:Scrap all the rules (Score 1) 104

Except that if you hurt yourself you are not breaking the law.
There are lots of safety rules. You have to obey the regulations.

I am not just talking about Amature radio but FCC licensing. That includes TV, Radio, Public service bands, HAM, and even wifi. The power regulations and frequency regulations are mostly in place to keep you from stomping on everyone else. AARL has a special relationship with the FCC that allows them to do testing and have a large voice in setting the rules for HAMs. But HAMs are a small section of licensed users.
Frankly AARL works on the notion that someone that makes the effort to study and pass the tests will not do anything hyper stupid like highjacking a TV stations band. Frankly much like the EAA the AARL seems to do a good job with keeping the dangerous idiots out.
But what I said stands. The licensing is about interference. If you hurt yourself you will not get a visit from FCC but if you interfere with someone else you could get a visit from the FCC

Comment Re:I just want the new Nexus. (Score 1) 222

Microsoft has a shot if they do not destroy Nokia. I flat out think that Nokia makes the best looking phone. LG, Samsung, and Apple all use great displays, Android has the best feature set, Nokia the best camera,Motorola has the Motovoice feature that I really want, and Apple has great stability and battery life.
Windows Phone 8.1 actually looks pretty good now.
For me the perfect phone would be a Nokia with the screen from the G3 running Android with Motovoice.
Others would have a different prefect phone.

Comment Re:Nice Try Mr. Google Employee (Score 0) 222

Funny but I have actually written an IOS app and it is in the app store. I have a mac and I love it. This rev of the iphone has bigger screens... Like Android phones. NFC like Android phones. As to the rest of the statement... You do know that the Apple app store was the original home of the fart app...

IOS is fine for people that like it. I find it too restrictive and dull for my tastes but it is good OS and the phones are good hardware. They are just not worth the worship that heaped on them.

Why is Google better than Apple?
Simple, Compare an IOS phone with all the Google apps removed to an Android phone without any Apple apps.

Comment Re:I just want the new Nexus. (Score 1, Insightful) 222

NFC is cool and boy did people think it was neat when I paid for something at the 7-11 with my Galaxy Nexus a few years ago. You are right that it might finally take off in the US now that Apple is doing it. They are even following the standards so they can use the existing NFC machines at Walgreens, 7-11, and McDonald's. It is really not innovative but an example of the clout that Apple has with the carriers.

Slashdot Top Deals

Work without a vision is slavery, Vision without work is a pipe dream, But vision with work is the hope of the world.

Working...