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: Re:No. (Score 1) 1486

by ccady (#35785612) Attached to: Is Science Just a Matter of Faith?

Historically, we can demonstrate the existence of Jesus, due to the historical events of Pontius Pillate and Ceaser and other shit happening around that time lining up, and something about some annoying beggar-preacher that they executed.

Oh puh-leeze. The evidence for a real Jesus is slim at best.

Comment: The problem is special access for Google. (Score 1) 234

by ccady (#35587152) Attached to: Federal Judge Rejects Google Books Deal
I think people agree that having these orphaned books available would be a good thing. The problem then becomes that we don't want Google to have some special privilege to access them. What if the books were available through some public service, and Google was merely a consumer of that service? Amazon, Google, and Joe's Random Website could all have equal access to these books.

Comment: Re:Another philosophy taken too far (Score 1) 792

by ccady (#35492126) Attached to: Richard Stallman: Cell Phones Are 'Stalin's Dream'

This bears repeating. RMS is quite clear that "free software" has nothing to do with the price. It means that you have the right to use the software and modify it, or have it modified, as you wish.

Lots of people are paid to create "free software." If there is a demand, software will be created. Just because no programmer has an personal interest in making your mom's quilting program, does not mean that your mom, or Bob's Quilting Supplies, Ltd. will not pay a programmer to create it.

Selling or giving software to someone, but retaining control on what they can do with it (like stopping them from modifying it) is a social evil.

Comment: Re:Kettle, meet pot, pot, meet kettle (Score 2) 453

by ccady (#34866072) Attached to: Microsoft Slams Google Over HTML5 Video Decision

>>No, the insanity here is that Google and Mozilla refuse to use the codecs installed in the operating system that you've already paid royalties for (if they require royalties to be paid) and that automatically take advantage of hardware acceleration and any other features the OS offers for media playback.

Funny, I don't recall paying anyone for my GNU/Linux operating system...

Comment: As a terrorist, I would love it! (Score 1) 309

by ccady (#33913802) Attached to: Can Apps Really Damage a Cellular Network?
If I were a terrorist, I would be thrilled with the network provider putting all this effort into controlling individual applications and devices, rather than just making the network tolerant of abuse. Then, when all the sheeple are using crippled apps and devices, I can do massive damage to the network itself!

Comment: Re:Slashdaughters, let us avoid... (Score 1) 414

by ccady (#33180298) Attached to: Genetically Modified Canola Spreads To Wild Plants


Slashdaughters, let us avoid the tendency to take the focused ruling in a specific legal case and spread it over our most elaborate paranoid fantasies.


People, and that includes people like you, will start shoplifting, then start looting, then start shooting. Monsanto employees will be doing the same thing, too. Nobody will have much use for any kind of intellectual-property horseshit when their real property starts going up in flames.

Good troll!

Comment: Re:Story is from The Sun (Score 3, Insightful) 572

by ccady (#32445930) Attached to: Doctor Slams Hospital's "Please" Policy

Do you read these things at all? This study does nothing to further your assertion that "Fox [is] the most balanced in straight reporting".

The study covered *only* 2008 Election stories during the prime time evening news shows for a period of 3 1/2 months in late 2007.

The methodology was to look for "positive" and "negative" comments about candidates. Suppose we had a story about a serial killer. By this methodology, if the news program called him a thug twice, and a blessing once, then we'd have an "unbalanced" news report which was 66% negative and 33% positive.

(Interesting to note that by these measures, the Fox news was close to 50+/50- for democratic candidates, but the others averaged 47+/53- for those democratic candidates.)

If you wish to learn more, go to ( and find out who funds the Center for Media and Public Affairs ( At the time of the report, the president of the CMPA, S. Robert Lichter, was a paid Fox News contributor.

Comment: Re:Woman can't stop texting, wrecks 3 cars in 3 ye (Score 1) 406

by ccady (#30963860) Attached to: Phone and Text Bans On Drivers Shown Ineffective
This has little to do with her texting. It has to do with her decision to drive recklessly, where recklessness can be proven by the fact that she got into an accident. You are going to write bad laws if you attempt to define all the possible things that can distract a driver. (Driving with children. Driving a car that belongs to somebody else. Driving while sleepy. Driving in snow or rain.) All you need are the laws on the books.

Professional wrestling: ballet for the common man.