Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:It's the conversation, (Score 1) 367

by zotz (#46598709) Attached to: More Than 1 In 4 Car Crashes Involve Cellphone Use

Second, I really wonder how they defined a cell phone as being involved in an accident. Did they just record any accident where a phone was someplace visible to the driver? Did they record any accident where a call was in progress? Did they try to determine if the call itself contributed to the accident? Did fault come into it? If you're parked talking on the phone and somebody rear-ends you, does that count as a phone-involved accident?

These stats might be really telling us that lots of cars have cell phones in them.

Ah, someone who thinks along the lines I do. The one I get here in the islands on US AM radio speaks of 1 in every X fatal accidents involves a pedestrian. (I think X=4)

So I say, right, so when a pedestrian jumps in front of a car causing teh driver to swerve and plunge into a deep roadside canal and die, are they counting that as a fatal accident involving a pedestrian? What about one where two cars collide head on and a pedestrian is "involved" as the only witness?

all the best,

drew

Comment: Re:DO NOTE (Score 2) 97

by zotz (#46242121) Attached to: Hyperlinking Is Not Copyright Infringement, EU Court Rules

This ruling only applies to copyrighted content that is legally and publicly available. Linking to content that is behind e.g. a paywall would constitute a copyright-infringement.

Wait, how can it be a problem to link to content *behind* a paywall. Either the person clicking the link will not be able to get to the link as the content is behind a paywall and they haven't paid, or, they have paid, have rights to the content, and can get to it by following the link. Is there some other possibility?

all the best,

drew

Comment: Re:States Rights (Score 1) 665

by MrLint (#46237697) Attached to: South Carolina Education Committee Removes Evolution From Standards

All science, including the technology robots are built on, is an outgrowth of the scientific method. Research, reasoning, and altering your path based on data. If you wish to reject that method when building robots, that's cool. You are going to get a shitbot. You want to reject one of the consequences of scientific research, I call on you should reject all the outputs of scientific research. To assert that the method of gaining knowledge only works as long as you get to ignore the parts that you don't think you "use", or "agree with". Well then you'd a damned fool, and I suggest you return to the stone age animal herders afraid of the night.

Comment: Re:States Rights (Score 1) 665

by MrLint (#46237621) Attached to: South Carolina Education Committee Removes Evolution From Standards

While I don't dismiss trade style training programs or apprenticeships, no part of US high school education make you an expert in anything. The idea, however, of forcing every student into advanced section of every topic is foolish, few people do well in all areas all the time. I excelled in the hard sciences, I could have also excelled in history, but I just didn't care; now oddly I have a not insignificant interest in politics and policy, while my job is IT.

Short version, calculus isnt for everyone, and trying to make every child pass calc is a filing venture. However having basic exposure to the whole set of topics breeds a better base for success than trade only (excluding everything else) programs.

Comment: Re:States Rights (Score 4, Insightful) 665

by MrLint (#46220729) Attached to: South Carolina Education Committee Removes Evolution From Standards

Unfortunately, it will take the child until they are 20 or so to feel the full effects of being poorly educated, worse, being denied the tools of critical thought. At that point bringing that person up to the capability to deal with the technology of the workplace that will face them in 2030 will be nearly insurmountable.

The mere fact that someone should be able to assert that any old idea they have, has equal supportability because of what they assert semantics of words to be, is wrong at best, and megalomaniacal at worst. And we all know that this isn't about "alternate 'theories'" this is about attacking things that don't support the christian creation myth.

I challenge *any* "teach the controversy" supporter to lay out their syllabus and rubric for *ALL* alternative science theories. As it has been stated above, it would have to include astrology, and alchemy, probably phrenology, humors, and I guess demonic possession.

You cannot be honest in this "teach the controversy" thing and only do one piece. Doing so is really a lie to yourself, and everyone knows it.

Comment: Re:Are you kidding me! (Score 4, Insightful) 2219

by macwhiz (#46188781) Attached to: Slashdot Tries Something New; Audience Responds!

Ah, but with the new reality of ownership, we are not the client. We are the product. The advertisers are the clients.

One wonders if the clients will still buy a product that ceases to be profitable once the product delivery system is broken in the name of progress.

I don't really see how the new design truly benefits the advertisers, other than giving DICE's ad execs newer, bigger, louder ad spaces to tout. The fact that it reduces the audience for those ads doesn't seem to enter into the equation.

Comment: Re:Just be honest - it's not for *US* (Score 1) 2219

by macwhiz (#46185897) Attached to: Slashdot Tries Something New; Audience Responds!

The first thing you should ask the design team:

Do you understand that—while most of your readers don't really care about the design—those who do care are the sort of people who take one look at a site that mixes multiple sans-serif fonts in its interface and immediately have a visceral, intensively negative reaction that strips you of all design credibility and makes them look away just as surely as if they'd seen goatse?

The excessive whitespace and awkward layout compounds the problem. There is a "right" amount of line spacing; it's a very well understood thing in the publishing industry. Any nerd understands that nerds tend to favor information density over "right" line-spacing. Therefore, incorporating excessive line spacing on a News For Nerds website simply shouts "incompetence" to the world.

Seriously, the visual aspect of the redesign is as if your web designers saw the style and popularity of Apple's Jonathan Ives' school of design (but not the typical Slashdot readers' reaction to such), and then hired the sort of people whose work is featured on Cake Wrecks to implement their own version.

Someone needs to be put in charge of this effort who has the understanding and the authority to say "our 'audience' does not want a custom, trendy font; they know that webfonts have to be loaded and will slow things down. They want whatever they've chosen as the body font in their browser's options."

Me, I'd start with the idea that Slashdot has to be minimally usable even if no CSS or JavaScript is loaded. It needs to have well-structured HTML that is content-based, not design-based. Then you can start layering design on top of that, in ways that allow for customization. If your guys want to have a CSS option that looks like a marketing MBA's WordPress wet dream (Beta), that's fine, as long as it's not the only choice—or, indeed, the default choice—and doesn't drive the bones of the site.

Scrap the Beta. It's a dead end. Start over after you draw up realistic specifications that include honest user research, not just advertising optimization hacks.

United Kingdom

Now On Video: GCHQ Destroying Laptop Full of Snowden Disclosures 237

Posted by timothy
from the ask-not-what-your-country-can-destroy-for-you dept.
An anonymous reader writes "On Saturday 20 July 2013, in the basement of the Guardian's office in Kings Cross, London, watched by two GCHQ technicians, Guardian editors destroyed hard drives and memory cards on which encrypted files leaked by Edward Snowden had been stored. This is the first time footage of the event has been released."
The Courts

Court Victory Gives Blogger Same Speech Protections As Traditional Press 137

Posted by Soulskill
from the take-that-traditional-journalism dept.
cold fjord writes "Reuters reports, 'A blogger is entitled to the same free speech protections as a traditional journalist and cannot be liable for defamation unless she acted negligently, a federal appeals court ruled on Friday. Crystal Cox lost a defamation trial in 2011 over a blog post she wrote accusing a bankruptcy trustee and Obsidian Finance Group of tax fraud. A lower court judge had found that Obsidian did not have to prove that Cox acted negligently because Cox failed to submit evidence of her status as a journalist. But in the ruling, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco said Cox deserved a new trial, regardless of the fact that she is not a traditional reporter. "As the Supreme Court has accurately warned, a First Amendment distinction between the institutional press and other speakers is unworkable."... Eugene Volokh, [a] Law professor who represented Cox, said Obsidian would now have to show that Cox had actual knowledge that her post was false when she published it. ... "In this day and age, with so much important stuff produced by people who are not professionals, it's harder than ever to decide who is a member of the institutional press."' Further details are available at Courthouse News Service."

Comment: Re:This just in, spy wants spy rules to stay (Score 1) 316

by MrLint (#45828573) Attached to: Former Head of NSA Calls For Obama To Reject NSA Commission Recommendations

"It makes me wonder why the NSA is pushing so hard to keep unconstitutional spying programs in place"

CYA? Seriously, leadership never takes responsibility. When you dump every possible thing on the table for the leaders to look at, at no point can the phrase "we didn't know" be said honestly.

"The medium is the message." -- Marshall McLuhan

Working...