Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×

Submission + - Google is not aways right.

Submitted by GarryFre
GarryFre writes: Search of the terms king snake pictures in google yields the first link showing four pictures of what is supposed to be king snakes but one of them is a deadly coral snake...

Imagine you our your child caught a snake and you want to identify it.

You search in google for the three words king snake pictures brings up four pictures. The pictures are presented as harmless king snakes except the third which is a coral snake, a venomous neurotoxic snake that can kill you if you are bitten and not treated.

You can tell a coral snake by the phrase "Red touches black, venom lack red touches yellow you're a dead fellow"

Here is a link from firefox but I've confirmed that the same search in IE shows the same four pictures. It is a stretch but I could imagine someone making this mistake and maybe trying to file a lawsuit, and who knows they might win on the argument that such misinformation should have been better screened out.

http://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&channel=s&hl=en&source=hp&q=king+snake+pictures

PS: If you click on the third picture you find that the file is named coral.jpg
Image

Holy See Declares a "Unique Copyright" On the Pope 447

Posted by kdawson from the vatican-rag dept.
An anonymous reader sends in news of what must be some kind of record in overreaching intellectual property claims: the Vatican has declared that the name, image, and any symbols of the Pope are for exclusive use of the Holy See. They may have a point if, as the declaration hints, some have used "ecclesiastical or pontifical symbols and logos to attribute credibility and authority to initiatives" unrelated to the Vatican. But how much room will they allow for fair use? Will high school newspapers have to remove the Papal Coat of Arms from their Vatican news columns? The royalty schedule was not released, so it's not clear how much Slashdot will have to pay to run this story (or if there will be a penalty for the accompanying pagan idol).
Firefox

Firefox 3.5 Now the Most Popular Browser Worldwide 422

Posted by kdawson from the press-the-advantage dept.
gQuigs notes a graph up at StatCounter Global Statistics, which shows that in the last few days Firefox 3.5 became the most used browser version worldwide, edging ahead of IE7. IE8 is rising fast (along with Windows 7), but over the last few months the slope of Firefox's worldwide curve has been steeper. (In the US, IE8 has always been ahead of Firefox 3.5; in Europe Firefox has led since late summer.) The submitter suggests using the time when Firefox rules the roost, globally speaking, to put the final nail in the coffin of IE6, which still has a 14% global share (5%-7% in the US and EU; China and Korea are holding up IE6's numbers).
Patents

Submission + - Microsoft Trying to Patent Parallel Processing 2

Submitted by
theodp
theodp writes: "Microsoft may have been a Johnny-come-lately when it comes to parallel programming, but that's not stopping the software giant from trying to patent it. This week, the USPTO revealed that Microsoft has three additional parallel-processing patents pending — 1. Partitioning and Repartitioning for Data Parallel Operations, 2. Data Parallel Searching, and 3. Data Parallel Production and Consumption. Informing the USPTO that 'Software programs have been written to run sequentially since the beginning days of software development,' Microsoft adds there's been a '[recent] shift away from sequential execution toward parallel execution.' Before they grant the patents, let's hope the USPTO gets a second opinion on the novelty of Microsoft's parallel-processing patent claims."
Censorship

Submission + - Microsoft Censoring the Search Term "Sex" 4

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes: One more reason not to use the new Microsoft search engine bing — apparently Microsoft is censoring search results for bing in India and other countries. If you try to search for the term "sex," along with lots of variations, from India using Microsoft's new search engine, an error message is returned that says, "the search sex may return sexually explicit content. To get results, change your search terms." There's no preference setting or toggle on or off choice, you simply cannot search for the term "sex" in India if you are using bing. While a user still can change their country and try the non-Indian version of bing, this seems like an unnecessary step and unnecessary censorship on the part of Microsoft. Apparently Google has no problem with Indians searching for the term "sex." http://thomashawk.com/2009/06/microsoft-doesnt-think-people-in-india-should-be-allowed-to-search-for-the-term-sex.html

Slashdot Top Deals

I have hardly ever known a mathematician who was capable of reasoning. -- Plato

Close