Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Submission + - Unmasking a Reddit Supertroll (gawker.com)

Raenex writes: From the article: "If you are capable of being offended, Brutsch has almost certainly done something that would offend you, then did his best to rub your face in it. His speciality is distributing images of scantily-clad underage girls, but as Violentacrez he also issued an unending fountain of racism, porn, gore, misogyny, incest, and exotic abominations yet unnamed, all on the sprawling online community Reddit. [..] But Michael Brutsch is more than a monster. Online, Violentacrez has been one of Reddit's most reviled characters but also one of its most beloved users. The self-described "creepy uncle of Reddit" has played a little-known but crucial role in Reddit's development into the online juggernaut it is today."

This is the same Reddit user/moderator behind the now banned "jailbait" subreddit.

Patents

Submission + - It could become illegal to resell your iPhone 4, car or family antiques (blogspot.com)

quantr writes: ""Tucked into the U.S. Supreme Court’s agenda this fall is a little-known case that could upend your ability to resell everything from your grandmother’s antique furniture to your iPhone 4.
At issue in Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons is the first-sale doctrine in copyright law, which allows you to buy and then sell things like electronics, books, artwork and furniture, as well as CDs and DVDs, without getting permission from the copyright holder of those products.
Under the doctrine, which the Supreme Court has recognized since 1908, you can resell your stuff without worry because the copyright holder only had control over the first sale.

Put simply, though Apple Inc. (US:AAPL) has the copyright on the iPhone and Mark Owen has it on the book “No Easy Day,” you can still sell your copies to whomever you please whenever you want without retribution.
That’s being challenged now for products that are made abroad, and if the Supreme Court upholds an appellate court ruling, it would mean that the copyright holders of anything you own that has been made in China, Japan or Europe, for example, would have to give you permission to sell it.""

Comment Re:Perhaps appeasement for business & China wa (Score 1) 227

The Korean War was a mini-world war. China picked the wrong side.

China chose to side with North Korea's communist forces given a common ideology and a desire to avoid a US friendly ally on their border. I'd say that history shows they made a choice that was far from wrong, given those goals. The only downside to this choice was that North Korea's style of international politics requires the US to station more troops in the region, thereby impacting China's present and future ability to influence its neighbours.

Comment Re:dude (Score 3, Informative) 181

Going the DIY route for a complete software stack isn't a magic solution to hackers. It's damn hard to write secure software and expecting any organised group to rewrite all its own software from the ground up without introducing its own set of new security holes is ridiculous. Reinventing the wheel is wasteful and likely to produce an inferior wheel. Iran deciding to roll its own software from scratch would be a massive boon for the American and Israeli hackers.

Even if Iran were to choose to go down this path, its unlikely that they have enough qualified manpower to do the job. What you're suggesting is that Iran essentially creates something similar in scope to a Linux distro and a complete network infrastructure, except building the entire thing from scratch or known good components. Now imagine trying to do this with less manpower and no help from hardware manufacturers. It would take years to produce anything that is halfway usable and they'd still be introducing the same sorts of beginner's errors that the current designers have already made and fixed in their products.

Comment Re:Slacker (Score 1) 286

If the podcasts are licensed under a Creative Commons licensed that allows modification and sale, then Slacker's service would be legal. Given that most of the podcasts likely aren't licensed in this way, they're probably infringing. Given that most podcasters run on donations or at a loss, Slacker can keep doing what they do until they happen to rip off someone with money or stubborn enough to hire a lawyer and sue.

Comment Re:Dodgy dealings (Score 2) 292

It's much more likely that there's no conspiracy and it's just fuck ups all the way down. The FBI doesn't regularly (compared to other crimes) investigate foreign cases of copyright infringement, hence the lack of internally well-known procedures, which leads to mistakes. When the policing of infringement cases have become routine, then there'll be a well understood protocol and these mistakes won't happen. The MPAA probably have used their influence to push the case, but given their incompetence at running legal cases in their own country, it's not surprising that they've managed to fuck this case up too.

Slashdot Top Deals

Genetics explains why you look like your father, and if you don't, why you should.

Working...