Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Vote For Something Serious! (Score 1) 362

Surely making politics more interesting for the general public is a good thing?

It might get people interested in a subject that has a social taboo surrounding it, as well as being fairly intimidating at first; I know I'd like some sort of simplified breakdown of things half the time, which is why I try and catch Newsround if I can (if you're not British, it's a child's news show).

The problem being is that I can see it being terribly biased; maybe I'm spoilt a little bit from the fairly neutral BBC.

Comment Re:Momentum Conservation (Score 1) 392

Even though I have practically zero knowledge of the topic at hand, I can imagine the advantage is that this propulsion system means that you don't loose any mass while gaining acceleration.

This means you don't have to lug around huge amounts of material to throw out the back of your spaceship, it just means you need some way of producing energy (solar cells?) to power the drive.

Comment Re:So... (Score 2, Informative) 596

I'm sure the actual law has some more rigorous definitions (not necessarily any less ridiculous mind you) of what a conversation consists of.

Now what I'm wondering is, how can I know what age someone I'm talking to is?

Do they have to announce their age before I have to stop talking to them, or am I supposed to find other means?

Bearing in mind that just about any way of finding out someone's age would probably be a bit suspicious: asking for photo, asking for a webcam session, asking for a voice chat, or even just asking them their age in text.

I ask this because I know a lot of kids that sound more mature than a majority of the 'adults' I chat to online, although a few things give them away.

Privacy

Canada Supreme Court Broadens Internet "Luring" Offense 596

An anonymous reader points out this report that a Canadian Supreme Court has broadened its interpretation of an existing law designed to punish adults who attempt to meet children online for criminal purposes; under the court's interpretation, says the article, that would now "include anyone having an inappropriate conversation with a child — even if the chats aren't sexual in nature and the accused never intended to meet the alleged victim." The story quotes Mark Hecht, of the organization Beyond Borders, thus: "If you're an adult and if you're having conversations with a child on the Internet, be warned because even if your conversations aren't sexual and even if your conversations are not for the purpose of meeting a child and committing an offence against a child, what you're doing is potentially a crime."

Comment Re:How do they know? (Score 1) 280

Everyone seems to be presuming that his phone is at fault, but there are 2 parts to this equation, the phone and the music file.

Did your friend happen to encode his music in some god awful file format, that has DRM built in?

I can't imagine how a phone would label something as 'unlicensed' if it was in .MP3 format for example; there would be no difference between a licensed .MP3 and an unlicensed copy.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Look! There! Evil!.. pure and simple, total evil from the Eighth Dimension!" -- Buckaroo Banzai

Working...