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


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: Re:Secure is now illegal (Score 3, Interesting) 191

For posterity, nowhere does the article claim that the 1.2 Petabytes is all child pornography. The company claims that most of the data is not, but I guess that is a secondary issue. Holding the company responsible is idiotic unless they were complicit in the crime. Did they refuse to take action that the courts claimed they needed to with the data? Try to hide the data when cops came looking? I don't see any of those things, so IMHO this is a scare tactic attempting to get people to do what GP stated: "have companies snoop through all user data" which is asinine.

I'm of the personal opinion that people involved in child porn should be jailed for life without parole if they are found guilty. The rule of law can not be tossed out the window because of my emotion on the topic. That is called chaos or anarchy, and we are supposed to be civilized.

Comment: Re:Viewing Launches (Score 1) 22

by Bruce Perens (#49166815) Attached to: SpaceX Falcon 9 Launches Dual Satellite Mission

With luck, they'll start incorporating our radio transceivers. I hear that SpaceX flies with several USRPs now, so that's not completely unrealistic. That might be as close as I can get. Anyone who can get me a base invitation, though, would be greatly appreciated and I'd be happy to do some entertaining speeches while there. I need a base invite for Vandenberg, too. I got in to the official viewing site for the first try of the last launch (and that scrubbed too), but this next one is on Pad 6.

Comment: Viewing Launches (Score 3, Interesting) 22

by Bruce Perens (#49164783) Attached to: SpaceX Falcon 9 Launches Dual Satellite Mission

I was in Florida to speak at Orlando Hamcation and went to see the DISCOVR launch at Kennedy Space Center. I paid $50 to be at LC-39 for the launch, an observation tower made from a disused gantry on the Nasa Causeway between the pads and the Vehicle Assembly Building. A crawler was parked next door! A hot sandwich buffet, chips, and sodas were served. It was cold and windy! I watched for a few hours and unfortunately the launch scrubbed due to high stratospheric winds.

The next day, Delaware North Corporation, which operates tourism at KSC, decided not to open LC-39 or the Saturn 5 center for the launch. This was the third launch attempt and I guess they decided most people had left. I was annoyed.

The closest beach was going to be closed in the evening, it's a sensitive ecological area. I ended up seeing the launch from Jetty Park. This turned out not to be such a great location, the tower wasn't visible at all and the first 10 seconds of the rocket in flight were obscured before we saw it over a hill.

What's a better viewing location?

Comment: Flawed Statistics (Score 4, Insightful) 198

by pollarda (#49164645) Attached to: That U2 Apple Stunt Wasn't the Disaster You Might Think It Was
I am one of those who listened to U2 thanks to Apple as recent as last week. Why? Well when I click my microphone switch (on the headphones) to hang up a call, if I don't do it just right in comes ITunes and starts playing U2. Or my phone will occasionally "pocket dial" the music app and it will start playing U2. If I could delete or turn off the music app, I would. (Actually if I bury it in a directory on an unused page, I'm sure that would help.). So the statistics really needs to be those who listened to U2 willingly vs those who didn't.

Comment: Re:Buy some suntain lotion (Score 4, Insightful) 229

Actually, this isn't too far from the truth. I've heard of a few cases where simply changing the URL has brought up documents that should be private and the person who reported it was brought up on charges for "hacking". Unfortunately, the public does not understand the difference between simply poking around and trying to mess up someone's system for nefarious reasons. Perhaps someone here on /. will remember the particular cases involved but as sad as it sounds, you are on a shaky legal foundation.

Committees have become so important nowadays that subcommittees have to be appointed to do the work.