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: When will the right people get to test controller (Score 5, Insightful) 182

by ShiftyOne (#44979549) Attached to: What Valve's Announcements Mean for Gaming
I'd much rather see the headline "pro-gamers get their hands on the steam controller and approve" than anything else. Especially any that use the claw or hammer grips (aka keeping a finger on the a b x y buttons at all times). Game developers aren't necessarily known for being good at their games.

Comment: Re:Restraint of Trade (Score 1) 352

by ShiftyOne (#41330619) Attached to: Alibaba Says Google Threatened Acer With Banishment From Android
EVERY contract is a restraint of trade. A restraint is only part of what is needed to be illegal. You also need either an agreement that unreasonably restrains competition under Sherman act section 1 (such as a horizontal agreement to split up the market or price fix), or a restraint using monopoly power under Sherman act section 2. An exclusivity agreement not to sell android code unless it comes from Google is not a violation of either section.

Comment: Re:Energy Policies (Score 1) 608

by ShiftyOne (#41232603) Attached to: Obama and Romney Respond To Questionnaire
If you read the whole section he didn't say he would do nothing about it because China was worse. He said that there are better ways to fix it than taxing carbon emissions in America. What would our corporate overlords do if there was a Cap and Trade tax? They would dodge the tax, like they dodge any tax they can, by moving their operations elsewhere, in this case, out of America. A tax on just American operations would have no net decrease in emissions.

Comment: Can't use in criminal case? (Score 4, Insightful) 79

by ShiftyOne (#39823119) Attached to: Who Needs CISPA? FBI Has a Non-Profit Workaround
Interesting to think about whether the Fourth Amendment applies here. The Fourth Amendment only protects us from government action. This non-profit would be considered a private person, whom are only covered when they are acting in their capacity as an agent of the government. This is determined by the level of government involvement in the situation and the totality of the circumstances. I'm not a lawyer, but based on the facts here it seems like this non-profit would be considered an agent of the government, and therefore you may not be able to sue them for money damages, but the material they collect probably cannot be used as evidence in a crime.

+ - Galaxy Prime Delayed Over Google-Verizon Dispute w->

Submitted by ShiftyOne
ShiftyOne (1594705) writes "In case there wasn't already a reason for wanting net neutrality, the latest rumor for the delay of the Galaxy Prime is a dispute between Google and Verizon over whether Google Wallet will be allowed on their new flagship device. Verizon has partnered with Isis to bring its own payment system to their network. Under the current FCC net neutrality rules, mobile broadband providers may not block websites, or applications that compete with their voice and video telephony services, but the rules do not explicitly block discrimination against of services that do not compete in voice and video. Whether this rumor is true or not, it is evident that this type of exclusion by wireless providers should not be tolerated."
Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:Bait and switch! (Score 1) 170

by ShiftyOne (#38312340) Attached to: Draft Alternative To SOPA Released
The internet was always somewhere just beyond the reach of the law because laws always focused on taking down the illegal program or site through technical means. The most recent set of laws focuses less on technology, and more on financial backing, which has proven much more effective at censoring any program or website. You can get around DNS blocking, but you can't get around a site not having any way whatsoever to collect revenue. Ensuring no revenue will cripple websites in a way that none of your technological solutions can prevent.

To err is human -- to blame it on a computer is even more so.