Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Critics should provide their own services (Score 1) 152

What they are offering is not internet access, it is a place in his walled garden (or maybe fenced pasture is better). Wikipedia and such are the sugar that he was hoping would help them swallow the bitter facebook medicine.

There are a lot of secondary effects to allowing something like this, from crushing any local competition with facebook before it begins, to letting them choose and price what it takes to reach the populace. If he is only going for the betterment of everyone involved, he can straight up donate the money to do this, or allow all sites which meet certain bandwidth requirements.

Comment Re:These discussions are getting dumber (Score 1) 235

If it only decimates it I will be sorely disappointed, I expect automated cars to do much better than that.

Incidentally, I have programmed that robot in a cage. Mine stops moving if you trip an optical sensor on the way in (possibly damaging the robot due to the application of too much force in the process).

Comment Re:There will probably be inspections (Score 1) 235

It will not drive off a cliff if it is aware of the cliff under any circumstances, it will instead come to a stop before the road ends.

If stopping in time is impossible as something was basically dropped into its path, it will end up hitting the object at the lowest speed it can achieve. It will never intentionally hit anything for any reason at all, and my expectation is that they will be very good at this. Accidents so far always involve the automated car being struck by rather than striking an object for a reason.

The "drive off of a cliff" vs "run over some kids" scenario is not something a car will be aware of at all, it is something humans with no programming experience relevant to this kind of project suggest in an attempt to make it something they can relate to.

Comment Re:make it user-selectable (Score 1) 235

This response is exactly what will happen.

If there is no way to avoid an accident, the car will attempt to stop in its lane as quickly as possible. There is no other conceivable way this could work due to the extreme liability any other decision would imply.

This will in most cases greatly minimize the forces involved in a collision as well.

Comment Re:Sue Blizzard (Score 1) 130

The original suit filed by blizzard was in the US, but they cannot file suit using that law as it is criminal. They would need to get a prosecutor to take it up on behalf of the state, and it is likely not a big enough deal to do that (nor should they, this is better handled as a civil suit.)

They may have some difficulty in Germany, as while I am not familiar with German law it is usually required that the issue the court will decide has taken place in that country. It is my understanding that all of this took place in the US (the original suit, the settlement, and the location of the copy of source code in question).

Comment Re:Well, not quite (Score 1) 130

As someone who was formerly a consultant I was asked to do illegal projects every once in a while (ranging from "go tap and monitor all telecommunications traffic to this address" to "build this sports betting site" to "crack this software" to "lie under oath as an expert" to "retrieve our competitors source code").

Vetting your clients and their projects is part of that line of work, and is the responsibility of the contractor or their organization. You fail to do this at your peril, it can and does end in jail time if you produce a program which breaks the law.

Now my position gives me final say in what our company produces as a product, and I regularly shoot down ideas which would not be legal (usually these are somewhat tame aggressive marketing schemes, but occasionally a product idea is blatantly criminal.)

Comment Re:A bot that flagrantly violated Blizzard's TOU (Score 1) 130

Normally I would agree, but in this case Blizzard owns the server they accessed.

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

The terms of use may or may not be enforceable, but they definitely constitute what would be considered authorized access to the server owned by Blizzard.

Comment Re:Sue Blizzard (Score 1) 130

While this is not really a big enough deal to interest the feds... not only is there a law, it is among the oldest of laws related to computers.

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

Violations of the following parts would likely make it past a grand jury (although it would not exactly be the most solid case.)
  18 U.S.C. 1030
(2) (c)
(4)
(5) (b)
(5) (c)

Comment Re: Sue Blizzard (Score 1) 130

I am not sure about Germany, perhaps that is why they are suing in a German court rather than US (the original suit was in CA.) In the US the contractor would own the code even if the contract specified a number of hours and not a specific deliverable unless:

1) It was a contribution to an existing work
or
2) The copyright was transferred after the software was written by specific assignment.

As long as the contractor wrote all of the code in question he likely owns the US copyright (which may or may not be the case, there are a lot of small software companies who do not employ a programmer and use contract work for everything.)

I am not sure it would even be a problem for blizzard US to have the source in the US... I would think they at least need to have it or a derived product in Germany before they could sue over the German copyright.

Slashdot Top Deals

"There are things that are so serious that you can only joke about them" - Heisenberg

Working...