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


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Buy our money ink from China? (Score 1) 114

by DodgeRules (#48423589) Attached to: Blowing On Money To Tell If It Is Counterfeit

So the article is somewhat suggesting we buy our ink from China to print money? The same country that keeps trying (successfully some times) to hack our businesses and government? It isn't like they would print any counterfeit US money themselves, right? I'm guessing they would put lead in it like they do all the toys and other crap we get from them.

Buy American!

Comment: Easy fix (Score 1) 269

by DodgeRules (#48003659) Attached to: 2015 Corvette Valet Mode Recorder Illegal In Some States

Valet mode can only be set when car is off. When enabled, as soon as the key is inserted the video starts recording with no audio. The screen flashes with the consent to be recorded message and a consent button to enable audio recording as well as enabling the car to be started. If the valet doesn't press consent, he can not start the car.

Any other method cannot guarantee that the valet was aware of the recording, especially since a different valet may retrieve the vehicle.

Comment: Imminent Threat (Score 1) 249

by DodgeRules (#47317095) Attached to: Supreme Court Rules Cell Phones Can't Be Searched Without a Warrant

IMHO and IANAL, an imminent threat where they would need to search the phone would be if the phone contained info on a bomb about to go off or info on an abduction where the abducted person is expected to be killed or harmed. Having drugs on the suspect or a suspect speeding is not an imminent threat.

Comment: It is the NSA's fault ... (Score 2) 406

by DodgeRules (#46464917) Attached to: Apple Demands $40 Per Samsung Phone For 5 Software Patents

... that we have to read a Florian Mueller's post to get this information rather than be able to read Groklaw's PJ giving us the low-down. You know though that Apple MUST be trying to overcharge if even he states: "... I face the first situation in which I don't merely disagree with Apple but am rather wondering whether it has lost its mind."

We miss you PJ !!!!!

Comment: Re:Story is unclear - e.g. 1 gun or two? (Score 1) 1431

by DodgeRules (#45954959) Attached to: Man Shot To Death For Texting During Movie

I have seen enough of the local reports to know this is not the case. And interview with one witness says as soon as the man was shot, he gurgled up blood and fell backward into the witness, so I suspect that witness was close enough to see what happened. And if you were holding popcorn and get shot, see what happens to the popcorn. I'm sure he wanted to place it down nicely but he never got the chance.

Comment: Key words: "IS OPERATING" (Score 1) 638

by DodgeRules (#45281449) Attached to: Drive With Google Glass: Get a Ticket

First, IANAL.

27602. (a) A person shall not drive a motor vehicle if a television receiver, a video monitor, or a television or video screen, or any other similar means of visually displaying a television broadcast or video signal that produces entertainment or business applications, is operating and is located in the motor vehicle at a point forward of the back of the driver's seat, or is operating and the monitor, screen, or display is visible to the driver while driving the motor vehicle.

Key words are "IS OPERATING". If the Google Glasses were off or he did not see them ON then the ticket should be thrown out. According to what I read the monitor must be turned ON and visible to the driver to be a violation.

Comment: Who pays for the Technology? (Score 1) 336

by DodgeRules (#44422061) Attached to: How Outdated Data Distorts Doctors' Pay

While it is stated: "... technology has advanced and now the images are processed and displayed on a large screen in high-definition video.", the cost of the technology and the "overage" in cost per procedure goes hand in hand. It may now only take 15 minutes to preform what used to take 75 minutes, but if the doctors are only reimbursed for their time for the procedure, they would never be able to afford the technology which would put them back to 75 minute procedures.

This technology not only helps to produce more accurate test results, but allows more patients to be able to have these tests each day. That all comes at a cost. If a procedure is reimbursed $100 for a supposed 60 minute procedure using older technology, and that procedure now only takes 15 minutes using newer technology, More of the $100 has just been shifted from doctor salary to technology cost.

Instead of cutting the cost of the procedures, they need to find the doctors and facilities that are scamming the system, billing for procedures that aren't actually performed. (Like Columbia/HCA that Governor Rick Scott of Florida resigned from as Chief Executive in 1997 amid a controversy over the company's business and Medicare billing practices. He was not implicated, but the company ultimately admitted to fourteen felonies and agreed to pay the federal government over $600 million.)

Comment: I'd ban drivers in a moving vehicle from texting (Score 3, Insightful) 417

by DodgeRules (#43183163) Attached to: If I could (or had to) ban texting in one place ...

I didn't vote to ban texting in cars because that statement is too broad. That unfortunately covers passengers and that is just idiotic. It also covers while the car is stopped and turned off. If I want to text someone while I am driving, I will hand my phone over to the passenger and have them do it for me, or wait until I am stopped at a red light or in a parking lot. (If the light changes before I am finished sending my text, I place the phone on the passenger seat until I am stopped again before finishing.) Now if the choice was to ban drivers from texting while the car is in motion, then I would choose that option.

Comment: Proposal to Law Enforcement (Score 2) 342

by DodgeRules (#42183647) Attached to: Cops To Congress: We Need Logs of Americans' Text Messages

I have no problem with the carriers having 1 year retention of SMS messages if law enforcement have no problem with getting a court ordered warrant before they can access them. The warrant needs to be narrowed to a particular phone number and for a specific date/time range and not a blanket "everything in this zip code during the month of July".

More than 1 year retention required by Law enforcement and they aren't doing their jobs properly. And sorry Columbo, no peeking without probable cause.

Comment: Possible scenario (Score 2, Insightful) 391

by DodgeRules (#41688925) Attached to: Nissan Develops Emergency Auto-Steering System

The driver of the car in front of you jams on his brakes. The road is wet and your car can't stop in time. There is a truck to the left so your brand new intelligent car decides to swerve to the right because there is only a small object there and won't cause as much damage. Too bad for the student walking home from school.

This idea, while the concept has good intentions, just sounds like a disaster waiting to happen with a huge lawsuit for an ending.

Thrashing is just virtual crashing.