Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Good (Score 1) 139

Yeah I'm just going to leave this here for the world to see, along with the revolutionary omelette maker who responded below.

Or, they could just hit the link to "parent". You don't actually have to do anything to "leave this here", but you believe you do. Narcissism, delusions of grandeur... That fits with your earlier statement calling yourself the "voice of truth" that you believe everyone is trying to silence, as does your paranoia.

In short, you're a looney.

Comment Re:Good (Score 1) 139

Next, you're going to be outraged about Jonathan Swift's Modest Proposal, right? I mean, clearly, you don't understand satire.

You have no idea who Valerie Solanis was, do you. Once again since your memory appears to be a bit flaky, she attempted to murder Andy Warhol and left him permanently mutilated, he was forced to wear a surgical corset for the rest of his life, for which she was diagnosed with chronic paranoid schizophrenia.

And Warhol is mentioned in the SCUM Manifesto? No? Maybe surgical corsets are? No? So what exactly does the attempted murder of Andy Warhol have to do with your insistence that the Ada Initiative should be responding to dead comment threads? Is this just an attempt to tie a schizophrenic who tried to kill someone she thought was stealing from her to feminism as a whole? Of course it is.

The conference organizer apparently is, since he disagrees with her characterization of what happened. Unless you're calling him a liar now. And you must be, or else you've just proved my accusation of you as a hypocrite to be true. So, come on - are you calling him a liar, or are you admitting you're a hypocrite?

I'd say he was trying to cover his own ass as much as possible after the whole thing went viral, for which he can hardly be blamed.

Ah, so you accuse me of calling her a liar, but the conference organizer was just "covering his ass" for saying the same thing? Do you have any idea how schizophrenic you sound?

I'm going with Violet's version of events, without a doubt.

Now then, at this point I have to wonder - why are you trying to drown out the facts?

There are three stories of an event, but you choose one that agrees with your prejudices and then say everyone else is "trying to drown out the facts". Got it - you're a paranoid schizophrenic, hence your obsession with Solanis. I'm glad I don't have a Factory for you to visit me at.

Comment Re:Good (Score 1) 139

...based on any hope they might have that people would take them seriously? I mean do you know what the SCUM Manifesto actually is? It makes Mein Kampf look like a rational and reasonable body of writing by comparison.

Next, you're going to be outraged about Jonathan Swift's Modest Proposal, right? I mean, clearly, you don't understand satire.

The bare notion that it would be recommended reading for anyone but students of psychiatry boggles the mind,

Unless, of course, it's recommended for the same reason Swift's essay is.

and yet there's a comment, unchallenged, not so much as an eyebrow raised, recommending it right on the Ada website.

A comment left in a dead thread with no replies. Gawrsh! Again, I ask whether you've ever browsed Slashdot at -1?

It's all right there in black and white buddy, direct from Violet herself. Unless you're calling her a liar now.

The conference organizer apparently is, since he disagrees with her characterization of what happened. Unless you're calling him a liar now. And you must be, or else you've just proved my accusation of you as a hypocrite to be true. So, come on - are you calling him a liar, or are you admitting you're a hypocrite?

Comment Re:Good (Score 1) 139

You think that a comment with no replies means that the organization isn't bothered by it? If you're not a hypocrite, go read Slashdot at -1, and make those same accusations about the crowd here.

Slashdot deliberately exercises very little editorial control, I would certainly expect a professional organisation to police the commentary on its website.

Based on what? Apparently, they aren't, but rather than facts get in the way of your rhetoric, you'll just go on your own expectations.

... who was going to give a talk about sex, rape, and the use of drugs to obviate consent, at a computer security conference. And it wasn't the Ada Initiative that "shut it down", but rather, the conference organizer decided to shut it down because 'the talk included "discussion of date rape drugs"'. In fact, contrary to your accusation, the Ada Initiative suggested ways that the speaker could still make the presentation, specifically doing a video of the talk or as an after-con talk. As the organizer states, "I have since reached out to Violet about recording her talk so we can put it up on our video site."

Trying to rewrite history doesn't work very well on the internet, you know.

You're right, it doesn't. I'm not sure why you think the conference organizer's statement is "rewriting history", though. Is it because, again, you would rather disregard facts when they disagree with your rhetoric?

Yeah your colours are showing

Yep. Anyone who disagrees with you or provides evidence that you're wrong must immediately be attacked as biased. As someone else noted, anyone who refers to themselves as the 'voice of truth' is indicating that they're nothing of the sort.

Comment Re:Good (Score 1) 139

The Ada Initiative is a hardcore feminist organisation whose conference guidelines were used to justify the expulsion and subsequent firings of two engineers in the donglegate debacle. Despite claiming to be non violent, apparently they aren't bothered by suggestions to hand out the S.C.U.M. Manifesto at conferences - that would be the Society For Cutting Up Men - whose deranged author had attempted to murder Andy Warhol.

You think that a comment with no replies means that the organization isn't bothered by it? If you're not a hypocrite, go read Slashdot at -1, and make those same accusations about the crowd here.

... who was going to give a talk about sex, rape, and the use of drugs to obviate consent, at a computer security conference. And it wasn't the Ada Initiative that "shut it down", but rather, the conference organizer decided to shut it down because 'the talk included "discussion of date rape drugs"'. In fact, contrary to your accusation, the Ada Initiative suggested ways that the speaker could still make the presentation, specifically doing a video of the talk or as an after-con talk. As the organizer states, "I have since reached out to Violet about recording her talk so we can put it up on our video site."

These sorts of parasitic strident supremacist organisations aren't helping women, they're actively trying to damage men, and the sooner they are revealed for what they are the better.

Along with hypocrites and those who misrepresent facts, yes.

Comment Directional arrows aren't as silly as you'd think (Score 1, Insightful) 376

These can not be very good cables because they lack the direction arrow that the Belden audiophile Ethernet cables have (had?). This was so you would know which way to plug them in. Packets flow from hub/switch to the device.

And if you believe this, I have a bridge to sell you. It is orange and you will make your money back in picture postcard royalties.

It's in the caption of the very first picture:

Audiophile-grade "Vodka" Ethernet cables, from AudioQuest. They even have directional indicators!

But, surprisingly for Ars, they missed the point of those directional indicators. The article on electrical testing hints at it:

Finally, the braided shield inside the cable drew some comments. "There is no continuity from the body of the one connector to the body of the other, indicating that the shield has not been terminated to one or both of the connector," noted Denke. "Our 6A uses an absorptive shield—that is, the cable is shielded but the shield is not terminated at either end. Alien crosstalk is the crosstalk which occurs between cables, as opposed to the internal crosstalk which occurs between the pairs in a cable. This may also be why there are unterminated shields on the Audioquest cable—I’m not really sure what the reason is there, though I had thought that the shields on Cat 7 were required to be tied to ground. It is also possible—I have no handy way to test—that they've tied the shield to one end only, though this would be highly nonstandard for network cabling." (emphasis added)

It's highly nonstandard for network cabling, but highly standard for audio cabling - it's called a telescoping shield and is used to prevent ground loops and audible (60 Hz) hum. Typically, you leave the shield connected at the low-impedance source, and disconnect it at the high-impedance load... as a result, the cable actually does have a directionality, but on the shield, rather than the signal lines. I can guarantee that's the intent with these cables and why they're marked with directional arrows, and it's pretty surprising that Ars and Denke missed it. Maybe they were stuck thinking "network" cable rather than "audio" cable.

That said, because these are network cables, that telescoping shield is irrelevant. You're not going to get ground hum into your amplifier from your network card, the way you would with a shield on an analog audio cable. They're simply not connected, and if they were, you'd have much bigger issues - like that hum causing all sorts of problems on your PCI bus. This is why network cable shields are typically connected at both ends: ground loops are irrelevant.

Comment Re:Right to Privacy in One's Backyard? (Score 1) 1181

You know, I generally don't agree with open carry ... most of the world cringes at that, and it's something Americans cherish.

But if your drone was hovering in my backyard looking at my teenage daughters for no good reason, and if I'd shot it down and you were about to come onto my property in a threatening manner without explanation, I can see the point.

Do you really need an explanation, considering you just shot down their drone?

Comment Re:Jury Nullification at least (Score 1) 292

As a resident of Georgia this would be ONE case I would not mind being on the jury for. As with so many things that this State's legislature does this is beyond absurd. If this is being published by the State of Georgia as an official document then it should fall under the Open Records Act.

And since it's not, then you'd be a typical uninformed jury member who has made up his mind based on what one media source says about something.

As others have noted, this is not an "official document" and the statutes are not subject to copyright. It's a bunch of third party commentary about the statute that is subject to copyright, much like a textbook or treatise or thesis.

Comment Re:Copyright needs reform (Score 1) 93

Making a "non-commercial" copyright infringement tier would level the playing field a bit. It would still let copyright owners smack down infringers, but it wouldn't allow for the abuse of "settle on our terms or face a $75 million fine!"

There actually already are two tiers for commercial or non-commercial infringement, but they're rarely utilized: there are criminal penalties for for-profit infringement that don't apply to non-commercial stuff; and you know how people always say that statutory damages are "up to $150,000 per work"? That's for willful infringement. The regular tier is $750-$30,000 per work. And, in this context, "willful" does not mean "intentional" or even "I knew this was under copyright, and still infringed" (there's an entirely separate tier for innocent infringement, with 'up to $200 per work' statutory damages). Rather, "willful" means something closer to "malicious". Like, if you hate movie ticket prices, so you pirate and distribute the movie in order to drive theaters out of business. Or if you're distributing pre-release leaked versions, knowing that it will kill the release-day market.

Normal infringement should be in that $750-$30,000 tier. However, infringement defendants have never raised that argument, because they've taken the (always losing) position that $1 should be adequate damages, and for them, even $750 is too much. So, the judges hear one side saying "$150,000" and the other side saying "$1", and only the former is supported by the law, so that's the end. If some defendant were to try to not shoot for the moon, for a change, we might see proper application of these tiers.

Comment Re:In favor of paid copyright protection (Score 1) 93

This is how copyright should be changed: give every 'work' ten years of free protection - plenty to understand whether it is making money or not. And beyond that, allow for infinitely repeatable five-year terms, paid for at a progressive rate.

Other people have mentioned the "infinitely repeatable" issue, so I'll simply mention that aside from that, your idea isn't terrible and has parallels in patent law: patents are valid for 20 years from filing, provided the patent owner pays maintenance fees at 3.5 years, 7.5 years, and 11.5 years... and those fees are $1600, $3600, and $7400 respectively. As a result, many patents get abandoned long before their full 20 year term.

Comment Re:Copyright needs reform (Score 1) 93

2) All non-commercial infringing (i.e. no profit motive - and, no, ads don't count) would carry a penalty of $100 times the market value of the work. For example, get caught distributing 500 MP3s? Your fine would be around $50,000 (500 * $1). Still high, but not "bankrupt you for life" high.

But that's not the relevant market value. For example, Apple distributes MP3s on the iTunes Music Store. Do you think, for example, they only paid $1 to Taylor Swift to distribute Bad Blood? Of course not. They're paying royalties and likely have a fixed floor amount too (e.g. 30 cents per copy sold, minimum of $100,000, with the expectation that they're going to sell way more than a million copies). Or, for another example, remember a decade or two back when Michael Jackson bought distribution rights for a whole bunch of the Beatles' catalog? He paid $47.5 million for 4000 songs, or a little under $12k per song.

So, the market value for a single download of an MP3 may be $1, but the market value for distributing the MP3? Try somewhere between $10k and $150k or more. And suddenly, the damages of $9,250 per song for Jammie Thomas-Rasset, or $22,500 per song for Joel Tenenbaum sound a lot more reasonable.

It's not that copyright damages are flawed... It's that people aren't making just copies for themselves, but are entering the market as distributors.

Comment Re:package bomb (Score 1) 431

I love how they say that Mercury switches can detonate explosives, as if any other switch can't.

A mercury switch operates on gravity. Tilt a package (like, say, pick it up carelessly, or rotate it to face the label up to read who sent it) to complete the circuit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

So, mercury switches are more interesting to law enforcement than other types.

So does a pinball tilt switch, and you can build one with just wire and a weight. Should anyone who purchases wires or weights be "more interesting to law enforcement"?

Comment Re:Kill the account (Score 1) 213

When people sign up for things using one of my email addresses, I simply recover the password through email, then login, cancel the account, change the password and move on.

There is a jackass in NYC who shares my name, and has signed up for things like Spotify and Netflix using a variation of my gmail address (minus the periods, which do not matter to gmail). I cancel everythng he orders using my email address.

I get the same thing, but I've found, if you simply cancel the account, the jackass tries to make a new one the next day. I've found it's better to reset the password. After he tries to reset the password a few times, he'll go away.
Better yet is if it's tied to an account ID rather than an email, change the email to something at mailinator.com or another throw-away address. Then you don't even get the account reset attempts.

Using TSO is like kicking a dead whale down the beach. -- S.C. Johnson

Working...