Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


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: Why not a PDP 11? (Score 1) 90

by Virtucon (#49356527) Attached to: Rebuilding the PDP-8 With a Raspberry Pi

The 8 was a great system but the 11 was far better.

Just checking ebay, this guy selling the 8E is smoking something. He thinks it's a mainframe.

However this PDP-11 can be had for a reasonable price.

The point being, you can run emulation software on commodity hardware but I guess as the TFA indicates he wanted the nostalgia look. He could have easily just mounted an LEDs behind the panel with small pattern generator circuit instead of using the Pi.

Comment: Where is Groklaw when we need them? (Score 2) 269

by Virtucon (#49335749) Attached to: Developers and the Fear of Apple

IMO this is an example of exclusive dealing arrangements and restricting free trade.

15 USC Code 1 Trusts..

Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal. Every person who shall make any contract or engage in any combination or conspiracy hereby declared to be illegal shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $100,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $1,000,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding 10 years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.

From that, $100 mil is a slap on the wrist, wait, a mosquito bite for Apple.

Exclusive dealing agreements require a retailer or distributor to purchase exclusively from the manufacturer. These arrangements make it difficult for new sellers to enter the market and find prospective buyers, thus depressing competition. However, because companies widely-use requirements contracts, which essentially are exclusive dealing agreements, for purposes that promote competition, exclusive dealing arrangements only face rule of reason scrutiny..

Section 2 makes illegal a firm's refusal to deal with another firm if the refusing firm refuses for the purpose of trying to monopolize the market. Meanwhile, section 1 prohibits a group from refusing to deal with a particular firm. A group refusal to deal is known as a group boycott. Because of seemingly contradictory Supreme Court decisions over the years, the question of whether group boycotts are subject to the rule of reason or a per se rule has been left murky.

Apple with it's walled garden can certainly dictate who's allowed in but I think there could be legal grounds for challenging that in court. Sure Apple can say "we're protecting our customers" but at the same time they're restricting competition and free access to markets, namely the app store.

Comment: It's a start but what about China et al. (Score 3, Insightful) 186

by Virtucon (#49335555) Attached to: New Bill Would Repeal Patriot Act

I have a lot of Internet facing applications and it's becoming more and more apparent that certain nations, China for one, are constantly scanning or trying to break into systems. We've been leveraging mod_geoip/geoip2 etc. for awhile but that's at my point of presence. When are we going to start filtering IP addresses or subnets from nations where this kind of activity is permitted? It's a matter of national security but I don't see much in the way that the Patriot act or any act is really protecting intellectual property and websites from these kinds of coordinated efforts not just spying on citizens? I would much rather see a substantial amount of NSA resources focused on that problem rather than worrying of about who I send e-mails to.

Comment: Re:Security theater (Score 2) 224

by Virtucon (#49328961) Attached to: $1B TSA Behavioral Screening Program Slammed As "Junk Science"

If you travel that often, why haven't you signed up for the PreCheck program? It lets you go back to the pre 9/11 security screening procedure. Truly frequent travelers can get in the program free via their airline, otherwise the application fee is not significant with respect to other travel costs and is worth it.

I'm already PreCheck but a lot of places don't have it yet and there is the random factor. For example, Las Vegas which is one of the worst places to go through with a domestic 2 hour pre-flight arrival recommendation. I guess they do that so you can gamble more before boarding the flight or going through the checkpoint.

You intentionally frequently travel on a plane in tight quarters with lots of other people and you opt not to use deodorant?

Not intentionally but only when I go through special airports on my list. It also cuts down on people reclining their seats. ;-)

Comment: Re:Security theater (Score 2) 224

by Virtucon (#49326741) Attached to: $1B TSA Behavioral Screening Program Slammed As "Junk Science"

I can assure you it's not just bad for people coming to the US, it's bad for everybody traveling within the US. The TSA security theater causes more delays than bad weather and the current "open, transparent" administration has put billions more into this charade. I travel sometimes every week and it's a pain in the ass. Because of this I always opt out of being scanned and force the pat down. It frustrates the officers and other travelers because you get to stand aside while a screening agent comes to get you. Yeah it adds 5 to 10 minutes per checkpoint but you know what I get special satisfaction in doing it especially if I haven't used deodorant that day.

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