Comment Re:The time will come... (Score 1) 793
I wish I could mod you higher. I love that movie.
Comment Re:What's in a name? (Score 1) 213
Its Tiberious. Please turn in your geek card on your way out.
Comment Re:Don't Be a Weasel (Score 1) 672
I'm absolutely positive that the LHC won't destroy the planet.
If it does, I give you permission to beat me senseless.
LHC Forces Bookmaker To Lower Odds On the Existence of God 457
A UK bookmaker has lowered the odds on proving that god exists to just 4-1 to coincide with the switching on of the Large Hadron Collider. The chance that physicists might discover the elusive sub-atomic object called the "God particle" has forced the odds lower. Initially the odds that proof would be found of God's existence were 20-1, and they lengthened to 33-1 when the multi-billion pound atom smasher was shut down temporarily because of a magnetic failure. A spokesman for Paddy Power said, "The atheists' planned advertising campaign seems to have renewed the debate in pubs and around office water-coolers as to whether there is a God and we've seen some of that being transferred into bets. However we advise anyone still not sure of God's existence to maybe hedge their bets for now, just in case." He added that confirmation of God's existence would have to be verified by scientists and given by an independent authority before any payouts were made. Everyone getting a payout is encouraged to tithe at least ten percent.
Fifth Cable Cut To Middle East 676
You may have noticed a number of stories recently about undersea cables getting cut around the world. Apparently the total is now up to 5, but the scariest part of this is that Iran is now offline. You can also read Schneier's comments on this coincidence. Update: 02/06 17:42 GMT by Z : As a commenter notes, though the country of Iran is obviously experiencing some networking difficulties, it is not offline.
Submission + - Bioengineers target cancer with electric pulses (www.cbc.ca)
Raver32 writes: "U.S. biomedical engineers expect clinical trails to start within a year on what they called a "minimally invasive method" of treating cancer using electric pulses, beginning with men who have prostate cancer.
Using a process called "irreversible electroporation" (IRE), the engineers successfully removed tissue from the livers of male rats, the researchers said in a release issued Thursday.
"We did not use any drugs, the cells were destroyed, and the vessel architecture was preserved," said Rafael Davalos, from the Virginia Tech-Wake Forest University School of Biomedical Engineering and Science.
He is working with his former PhD adviser and published IRE researcher Boris Rubinsky, a bioengineering professor at the University of California, Berkeley."
Submission + - Forwarding private email illegal?
GovCheese writes: CNN Money reports that University of Arkansa prof Ned Snow says that forwarding a private email is illegal, a violation of privacy, and can put you in legal jeopardy. Snow gives the example of "Let's say I send an email to you that says I hate my boss and you send it to my boss." There's a good chance the person who you ratted on can take legal action, continues the article on CNN Money. Same goes for publishing private email exchanges on your blog. Seems sensible. But digital services have changed the notion of privacy. What exactly does private mean?
http://thebrowser.blogs.fortune.com/2007/05/02/law -professor-forwarding-emails-can-be-illegal/#comme nts?section=money_technology
http://thebrowser.blogs.fortune.com/2007/05/02/la
Video Racing Games May Spur Risky Driving 428
kiwimate writes "A study concludes that people who play car racing games may be more likely to take risks and drive aggressively when driving in real life.
According to the article, "The study appeared in the Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, published by the American Psychological Association"." Just because after I play Grand Theft Auto I want to ram other cars does not mean I'm a worse driver. Honest.
Submission + - RIAA and University of Wisconsin-Madison
stephencrane writes: http://www.joegratz.net/archives/2007/03/16/univer sity-of-wisconsin-stands-up-to-riaa/
A student at the University of Wisconsin-Madison shares what his school is doing in response to the RIAA P2PLawsuit.com campaign. In this campaign, attorneys for Sony, Universal, EMI, Warner Music Group and more sent letters to several colleges demanding that they be forwarded to students. The letter (PDF) threatens students with a lawsuit and instructs them to identify themselves and pay a settlement to the recording companies via the website P2Plawsuits.com.
UW-M has sent an email informing students that although they've been given letters to forward to students, they university will not comply without a written subpoena.
Submission + - Mozilla Desktop Environment
Andreas writes: "A discussion at mozilla.dev.planning list has given the birth to the idea of a Mozilla Desktop Environment. This sure sounds like a possibility for Mozilla as it already has many of the applications needed and the company is more than well familiar with XUL, which is a more than potent language to build a Desktop Environment upon. By building a desktop environment Mozilla doesn't have to worry about drivers (and such) and can choose from a variety of kernels, and still be in the center of attention. Mozilla has to expand some of the applications for this to work though, like adding local file management with Firefox."
Submission + - Why is the RIAA against music download services?
GuyverDH writes: I've been sitting here scratching my head, trying to come up with a reason beyond greed as to why the RIAA is against download services, whether they be pay services or non pay services.
As I tried to sift through information, it suddenly came to me. I think I know the reason they do not like download services. It (the non DRM'd download services) is not defective by design. Let me re-state this. The original download services did not have DRM. They didn't care about piracy, they cared about defective by design. DRM free downloads can be copied off to backup media, and re-used on just about any platform. Essentially the user would NEVER have to buy another copy of that music again. This, in my opinion, is the real reason the RIAA is against this.
Let's look at the history of the music industry.
One of the first commercially available music formats was the vynil album. It had the built in defect that the media was easily damaged. Small scratches were enough to make the media unusable.
Next we had tape — reel to reel, 8-track, cassette, DAT. All of these had the inherit defect that they were easily damaged. The tape was easily mangled or erased, either by dirty heads (as the tape dumped magnetic residue onto the heads), or because of different speed reels or other components that the tape was routed through.
Next we had optical media — Compact Disc, Music DVDs. These were probably the most defective media ever created or adopted by the RIAA. Why? Because something as simple as a fingerprint is enough to cause the media to fail (at least until it's cleaned). The act of cleaning the disc, if not done properly, is enough to permanently damage it.
Finally, the digital file format, DRM free. P2P file sharing services were the anti-defective by design. Not only were the files DRM free, but they were in formats that just about anyone could read. There is also the fact that simple replication to additional media (backup tapes, discs, other hard drives, flash media, etc...) gave the end-user the ability to re-create any failed media without re-purchasing the music.
Every one of these media formats were designed with a built in defect. They were designed to fail during normal use. They were designed to fail in a way that we'd blame the media not the industry that used the media. They were designed to fail to increase their revenue streams through re-purchasing music due to media failure.
Guess what? We fell for it.
This, I believe, is the reason the RIAA is against DRM free digital music distribution.
It's not about pirating. It's about lost revenue due to the fact that people aren't having to re-purchase music over and over and over and over again due to (surprise) failed defective by design media.
Give it some thought. Maybe I've gone over the deep end, but I truly think this may be the root cause.
As I tried to sift through information, it suddenly came to me. I think I know the reason they do not like download services. It (the non DRM'd download services) is not defective by design. Let me re-state this. The original download services did not have DRM. They didn't care about piracy, they cared about defective by design. DRM free downloads can be copied off to backup media, and re-used on just about any platform. Essentially the user would NEVER have to buy another copy of that music again. This, in my opinion, is the real reason the RIAA is against this.
Let's look at the history of the music industry.
One of the first commercially available music formats was the vynil album. It had the built in defect that the media was easily damaged. Small scratches were enough to make the media unusable.
Next we had tape — reel to reel, 8-track, cassette, DAT. All of these had the inherit defect that they were easily damaged. The tape was easily mangled or erased, either by dirty heads (as the tape dumped magnetic residue onto the heads), or because of different speed reels or other components that the tape was routed through.
Next we had optical media — Compact Disc, Music DVDs. These were probably the most defective media ever created or adopted by the RIAA. Why? Because something as simple as a fingerprint is enough to cause the media to fail (at least until it's cleaned). The act of cleaning the disc, if not done properly, is enough to permanently damage it.
Finally, the digital file format, DRM free. P2P file sharing services were the anti-defective by design. Not only were the files DRM free, but they were in formats that just about anyone could read. There is also the fact that simple replication to additional media (backup tapes, discs, other hard drives, flash media, etc...) gave the end-user the ability to re-create any failed media without re-purchasing the music.
Every one of these media formats were designed with a built in defect. They were designed to fail during normal use. They were designed to fail in a way that we'd blame the media not the industry that used the media. They were designed to fail to increase their revenue streams through re-purchasing music due to media failure.
Guess what? We fell for it.
This, I believe, is the reason the RIAA is against DRM free digital music distribution.
It's not about pirating. It's about lost revenue due to the fact that people aren't having to re-purchase music over and over and over and over again due to (surprise) failed defective by design media.
Give it some thought. Maybe I've gone over the deep end, but I truly think this may be the root cause.
Submission + - History's most romantic geeks
Cupid writes: CNET have compiled a list of history's most romantic geeks. The entries include Albert Einstein and Mileva Maric, who Einstein described as "a creature who is my equal and who is as strong and independent as I am." There's also Alan Turing's homosexual infatuation, Christopher Morcom. Other famous geek lovers honored on the list are Linus and Tove Torvalds, and the astronaut Lisa Nowak who drove 1,000 miles in a nappy to attack her fellow astronaut and love rival. If you need cheering up this Valentine's day, the list is worth a read.
Submission + - Gmail Opens Registration To Everyone
Yahoo Music Chief Comes Out Against DRM 304
waired writes "It seem that a trend has begun in the music industry after Steve Jobs essay. Now a senior Yahoo chief has spoken out in favor of Apple CEO Steve Jobs' call for major labels to abandon digital rights technology (DRM). It points out that consumers are getting confused and that the Microsoft DRM "doesn't work half the time"."
Submission + - 10 Signs an Employee is About to Go Bad
ancientribe writes: Tomorrow is the two-year anniversary of ChoicePoint 'fessing up to its credit-card data exposure fiasco. A Dark Reading article today gives 10 warning signs that an employee is about to flip on you or give away the company jewels or other sensitive information — and what to do about it.
http://www.darkreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=117 323&WT.svl=news1_1
http://www.darkreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=11
