Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


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: Sum it up for me gents. (Score 1) 325

by Palmsie (#36795492) Attached to: Company Claims Ownership of Digital Messaging

I'm not in the patenting arena (rather a researcher by day), I read a ton about how the patent system is totally broken but since I don't interact with it at all would one of you fine scholars be noble enough to provide myself (and perhaps a few others) with some resources that illustrate how broken things are so I can better understand the situation? I would greatly appreciate this. Thanks!

Comment: Comforting (Score 1) 45

by Palmsie (#36732990) Attached to: Court Rules "Locker" Site Is Not Direct Copyright

Find comfort in knowing that while the copyright trolls continue their march into the bowels of the internet, other companies will have opportunities to succeed who take advantage of more creative business models (i.e. Hulu, Netfix) rather than force old models down the throats of customers. Those new models don't have to spend millions on lawyers and instead can spend that money on R&D and outpace and outprofit those older models. Essentially the damage has bee done, these companies are the new Borders to Amazon, or Best Buy to NewEgg. They won't win, even if they win this battle.

Comment: Re:so what (Score 1) 193

by Palmsie (#36579402) Attached to: Is Google Playing Fair With Groupon, et al?

I think people are missing the point. Of course this is not surprising. Of course a for-profit company wants to advertise their own products. Of course they want you to use their stuff before you use Groupon et al. Of course. The point is, Google touts itself as providing a fair service that doesn't favor its own services (as conflicting as that may be). It claims that its algorithms are unbiased. I think that is all the author was trying to point out (i.e. they may not be as unbiased as Google is touting themselves to be... as unsurprising as it is). A small point but an important one.

Comment: Re:Congratulations Lulzsec (Score 1) 188

by Palmsie (#36565406) Attached to: Telstra Fears LulzSec Attacks, Hesitates On Internet Filter

we are possibly seeing the dawn of a new world here.

Or the resurgence is an old world. Hacking is nothing new, neither is the hacker culture. Wikileaks was the spark that rekindled the soldering embers that once were in the 80s and 90s with their unwavering pursuit toward exposing organizations and governments (regardless of whether you agree with their actions or not). I expect we will see much more of these types of groups and actions until the US adopts serious net neutrality laws or in (one might wish) that they add net neutrality or freedom of information to the constitution as a basic human right.

Comment: Re:Am I the only one? (Score 5, Insightful) 244

by Palmsie (#36493440) Attached to: LulzSec Offers to Take Revenge On Sega Hackers

I actually think just the opposite. The origins of the hacker spirit have long been washed away. Lulz is exposing a lot of things people don't like to hear - that all you thought was secure was in fact not at all (SQL injections anyone?). This is especially important as end-user services move to the cloud. Innovation is a result of people like Lulz forcing otherwise complacent experts to upgrade their infrastructure. We need more people like them imho. If the people who worked for these companies were so hard working Lulz wouldn't be breaking into them on an almost daily basis. I'm glad they don't have a purpose, they don't need one either. Some men just want to watch the world burn (I couldn't resist).

Comment: Re:This changes or improves NOTHING (Score 2) 300

by Palmsie (#36480444) Attached to: ICANN To Allow<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.brandname Top-Level Domains

I agree completely. It solves nothing. In fact, it just makes things needlessly complicated. For instance, does some nature conservatory body about the amazon river get dibs on .amazon if they front the cash or does the internet giant get it? Does that infringe on Amazons copyright? The classic excuse regarding similarly named companies is that it confuses consumers, e.g. Facebook sueing all "___Book" companies. So now both big and small companies can spend more time sueing each other than making products or actually running their businesses. Super move ICANN.

Comment: In the words of my man Sagan... (Score 2) 155

by Palmsie (#36316014) Attached to: Project Icarus: the Gas Mines of Uranus

"It does seem to be sufficient short-term profit to motivate private industry. If we humans ever go to those worlds than it will be because a nation or a consortium of them believes it to be to its advantage or to the advantage of the human species...

Just now, there are a great many matters pressing in on us that compete for the money it takes to send people to other worlds. Should we solve those problems first or are they a reason for going?"

Comment: Assumptions out the window (Score 2) 76

by Palmsie (#36250504) Attached to: New Google Tool To Find Trend Correlations

Correlations are one of those simple statistical terms that lots of non-technical people like to throw around without actually knowing what it means. It's a wonderful tool that Google has provided for everyone but people need to remember what the basic assumptions are of correlations, namely a relatively normal distribution of scores and independence of observations. Independence is especially important if you're tracking search engine results because if you were to look at how many times people Google'd Randy Savage's name the day he died it would influence the subsequent day, ultimately biasing whatever other variable you decided to correlate it with.

What is worth doing is worth the trouble of asking somebody to do.