snoggeramus - Slashdot User

Submission + - Google changing history?

Submitted by jrsumm on Saturday March 31, 2007 @11:20AM

jrsumm writes: The investigative subcommittee of the House Science and Technology committee is investigating whether Google is "airbrushing" history on Google Maps by replacing recent New Orleans satellite imagery with older, pre-Katrina imagery. Specifically, the committee wants to know if Google was persuaded into changing its imagery by local governments eager to make the recovery effort look like its going smoother than it really is. Google says it is just using higher resolution imagery now. CNN has the story here.

Submission + - Digg Violates its Own Terms of Service

Submitted by

derami

on Saturday March 31, 2007 @08:39AM

derami writes: "Digg.com administrators refused to remove a plagiarized submission about a highly humorous and bizarre new Google Maps feature, then banned the original author for reporting the issue. The copied version was posted by the well-read Consumerist.com blog and linked to Digg a matter of hours after the original Allsux.com post was listed on Digg. When the Allsux blogger alerted Digg administrators about this clear case of plagiarism, his Digg account was promptly suspended without notice or explanation. So, not only is Digg ignoring their own policy against plagiarism but they also censored a valid complainant without just cause."

Private File Sharing To Remain/Become legal In EU 147

Posted by Zonk on Friday March 30, 2007 @03:14PM from the nice-change-of-pace dept.

orzetto writes "Italian newspapers are reporting that the European parliament's Commitee for Legal Affairs approved an amendment presented by EMP Nicola Zingaretti (PSE, IT), that makes piracy a felony—but only if a monetary profit is made. As in the EU parliament's press release: 'Members of the Legal Affairs' committee [...] decided that criminal sanctions should only apply to those infringements deliberately carried out to obtain a commercial advantage. Piracy committed by private users for personal, non-profit purposes are therefore also excluded.' The complete proposal was passed with 23 votes in favour, 3 against and 3 abstained, and is intended to be applied to copyright, trademark, design and other IP fields, but not patent right which is explicitly excluded. The proposal has still to pass the vote of the parliament before becoming law in all EU countries, some of which (like Italy) do have criminal laws in place for non-profit file sharing. A note: Most EU countries use civil law, not common law. Translation of legal terms may be misleading."

Submission + - Windows Vista: more than just a pretty face

Submitted by Nash on Tuesday March 20, 2007 @11:11PM

Nash writes: Ars Technica takes a look under the hood of Vista, discussing the need for a new API and comparing the graphics engine in Vista to that of Mac OS X. 'With Windows Vista it will be possible to implement Exposé properly-with live window updates and low system overhead. That said, it doesn't thus far look like Microsoft will be doing anything so useful as Exposé. Though the blurred glass effect is rather attractive, it's not exactly useful. Other visual effects include miniature window previews when the mouse cursor is hovered over taskbar buttons and an upgraded alt-tab device, and Flip3D.'

Submission + - Are TelecommunicationsTying Arrangments Back?

Submitted by

MCTFB

on Tuesday March 20, 2007 @11:08PM

MCTFB writes: "With the merger of AT&T (formerly SBC) and Bell South, many of the features of the Ma Bell Monopoly seem to be in full force. Nevertheless, telecommunications consumers now at least have the option of internet phone companies like Skype and Vonage, or do they?

According to an entry on the Technorabble Blog, the blog author claims that he was the victim of a tying arrangment from AT&T where in order to get DSL service, he had to effectively get voice service as well. AT&T of course does not officially claim that one must purchase voice service, in order to get DSL service (because this would be overtly illegal), but the pain the blog author went through just to get his voice service removed, suggests that there may indeed be a covert attempt by AT&T to make it so difficult for DSL consumers to get DSL service without voice service, that DSL consumers will think twice about even bothering with internet phone service from a company such as Skype or Vonage.

What if anything can be done about this other than have telecommunications consumers spend many, many hours on the phone just to get someone at the home office to change a few settings in their customer database entry that will painlessly give them the services that they actually want?"

Submission + - How do you re-sell a domain name?

Submitted by dclayman on Tuesday March 20, 2007 @09:51PM

dclayman writes: What's the best way to go about selling a domain? I've never sold a domain before. I just received a $400 offer for a domain I own (radicaltrust), but I don't know if I should sell it or auction it off. And if I auction it, what site should I use? eBay? I could really use the extra cash. I was hoping to get some ideas from others here at Slashdot.

Submission + - BitTorrent's Cohen Bags on Joost

Submitted by

wjamesau

on Tuesday March 20, 2007 @09:34PM

wjamesau writes: "... and Om Malik's NewTeeVee is on hand to document the beat-down: "Joost is kind of a quirky thing, it's fundamentally based on the channels concept, which, like I've said, is kind of an old media way of doing things." Old media crack leads to old school rumble?"

Feed Google's Sly New Homepage Themes (wired.com)

From feed by wiredfeed on Tuesday March 20, 2007 @09:32PM

The search monolith's new dynamic page designs morph according to time of day and weather conditions. They're cute now, but wait'll the ads show up. In Monkey Bites.

Submission + - Phone Companies Blocking Numbers

Submitted by ePhil_One on Tuesday March 20, 2007 @08:55AM

ePhil_One writes: The major phone companies; Cingular/AT&T, Sprint, and Qwest; have begun blocking access to a free conferencing service. The service is FreeConference.com and their FAQ has details (Read #4, "I received an email recently concerning number blocking by some major phone carriers. Is this a legitimate issue from your company?"). This seems to be a pretty egregious offense. Now, I'm not beyond seeing this as a publicity stunt (I've used them often and have AT&T as my Long Distance carrier without incident), and I have seen no replies posted from any of the cariers either way. But its a potentially important issue that should get out there as soon as possible if true, and if not the "dot com" needs to see this stunt backfire in a very loud way.

Submission + - AT&T/Cingular Blocks Calls to Some Numbers

Submitted by

jj

on Tuesday March 20, 2007 @01:46AM

jj writes: "Ars Technica reports that Cingular/AT&T has blocked their customers from calling various 'free' calling services, like FuturePhone and PartyLine Connect, in the 712 area code. Cingular representative Mark Siegel said, "We have to pay terminating access for every minute the person is on the line. Typically these companies run them through local exchange companies that charge high access rates, so we end up paying high access charges."

If Cingular/AT&T is allowed to unilaterally block their customers from calling specific telephone numbers, what will stop them from blocking calls to competing cell carriers or even worse growing VoIP Providers like SunRocket or NuFone?"