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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

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: Same deal as Petraeus? (Score 5, Insightful) 656

by duckintheface (#49174595) Attached to: Snowden Reportedly In Talks To Return To US To Face Trial

It was annouced today that former General David Patraeus (former head of the CIA, former commander of US forces in Afghanistan) has been allowed to plead guilty to one misdemeanor count of disclosing classified information after providing large amount of secret info to his mistress and biographer. Should Petraeus, who was motivated by vanity and sex, get a better deal than Snowden who was motivated by love of country and his own idealistic morality? I think not.

Comment: It's cold up there (Score 4, Interesting) 244

There is a reason that Glacier National Park has fewer zombies. It has fewer people to start with so there would be less "feed stock" to make zombies. But there is a reason there are so few people in the area. It's very cold and hard to survive there. So maybe Key West would be a better alternative. And of course, if everyone tries to get to GNP, it will be very crowded with people... and zombies.

Comment: Re:Stomp Feet (Score 5, Insightful) 389

" imposes rules on broadband Internet services that were written in the era of the steam locomotive and the telegraph."

Oh, you mean back in the days when giant corporations used their monopoly status to squeeze huge amounts of money out of their customers in the absence of competiton? Those days?

Comment: Re:Like some baby bees with that? (Score 2) 131

by duckintheface (#49133405) Attached to: Inventors Revolutionize Beekeeping

Yes, some beekeepers use a queen excluder. But they can cause problems. For example, worker bees, which can pass through the excluder, move eggs around all the time. So if they move an egg across the excluder into an area where the queen cannot spread her supression pheromone, the workers may decide to raise a new queen on the "wrong" side of the excluder. Also, you have the issue of worker-laid eggs which make up about 10% of all the eggs laid in a hive. If the queen pheromone is not stong enough in the "excluded" part of the hive, those worker eggs will be raised as queens.

Nobody who raises bees only opens their hive twice a year. Once is enough to harvest honey. And honey can be harvested when the hive is opened for other reasons. So the reduction in work is miniscule and comes at a great cost in terms of equipment cost. Also, the exposure of honey on the tap is very dangerous to the hive because it will attract all kinds of parasites and bee preditors. Yellow jackets and Japanese hornets will be drawn to the honey and will end up attacking the hive.

Comment: Like some baby bees with that? (Score 1) 131

by duckintheface (#49132613) Attached to: Inventors Revolutionize Beekeeping

Sorry but this is ridiculous. For one thing, taking care of bees involves moving frames around for many reasons other than collection of honey. So you are not going to create a hive that never has to be opened. Honey collection is not the main reason for opening a hive.

And bees to NOT obligingly lay their eggs only in the brood frames. There will be eggs, and thus baby bees in the honey section as well, so when you turn the tap you will get baby bees.

Comment: Re:Congratulations (Score 5, Insightful) 599

by duckintheface (#49126683) Attached to: Republicans Back Down, FCC To Enforce Net Neutrality Rules

Those 300 pages of regulations codify how the internet has always been. These regulations were necessary becasue the ISPs embarked on a new plan to squeeze content providers. They wanted to be paid both by the subscriber and by the content providers. But by nature these ISPs are utilities because they rely on access to the public domain in the form of conduits, telephone poles, street rights-of-way, and municipal owned fiber. Bu using Title II regulation, the FCC ensures that competitors like Google Fiber will have the same access to the public domain assests. That is the only way to have competition for the last mile of the network.

Comment: The title is the problem. (Score 5, Insightful) 145

by duckintheface (#49082987) Attached to: The Burden of Intellectual Property Rights On Clean Energy Technologies

The title of this post refers to "intellectual property". There is no such thing. There are patents, copyrights, and trademarks. But none of these is property. If they were we would not need a special part of the US Constitution to deal with these things (Article 1, Section 8). Because none of this is "property" it is not covered by property law.

And that's the problem. Patents, copyrights, and trademarks exist to further innovation. They represent a monopoly limited in time and held by the innovator who created the thing that is patentable, copyrightable, or tradmarkable. But when we treat those temporary monopolies as property that can be bought and sold, inherited and used as collateral, we have destroyed the impetus to innovation and replaced it with an impetus to profit even at the peril of innovation.

And so we have the ridiculous spectacle of a copyright extended and extended ... even beyond the lifetime of the innovator. How does a copyright encourage creativity in a dead person? The solution to all of this is simply to return to the original short terms of these monopolies and not to allow property law, buying and selling of rights, to insert it's corrupting hand into the crucible of creativity.

Comment: There is no problem here. (Score 4, Interesting) 130

As Linus makes clear, there is no decrease in non-paid contributions. They are a smaller percentage becasue more professionals are now being paid to develop Linux. That is a good sign becasue it means more businesses see Linux development as something worth investing in. And it's probably the same people doing the programming. Previously they would have to do it for free but now they get paid. Nothing wrong with that.

Comment: Exponential growth (Score 5, Insightful) 271

by duckintheface (#49046455) Attached to: Peak Google: The Company's Time At the Top May Be Nearing Its End

Yes the article says "growth in Google's primary business, search advertising, has flattened out at about 20 percent a year" But a constant growth RATE year after year is not flat. It is exponential growth. It is compounded growth where each 20% increase is an increase over and above the 20% increase of the previous year. Where else can you get a 20% compounded interest rate on your savings?

Comment: launchers and panels (Score 1) 193

by duckintheface (#49010895) Attached to: Xfce Getting a New Version Soon

User defined launchers (apps, locations, folders) and user configurable docking panels were standard until Gnome 3. Even the "Classic" Gnome that came with Ubuntu 12.04 allowed launchers with a bit of scripting. But the newest Gnome requires detailed .desktop file fiddling to set up launchers.

Xfce permits user defined launchers with a right-click on the desktop. And docking panels for those launchers are easily configurable.

Unity and Gnome take away the simple usability features that make a desktop efficient. I understad why Unity is doing this. Their vision is to be one desktop for PCs and mobile devices. Everything has to work from menus on a small screen. It's harder to understand why Gnome is following along without even the option of launchers and panels on a PC.

Bottom line is that Xfce works and improves usability of the desktop. That's all I can ask.

Comment: Re:"Free Market" religion (Score 1) 182

by duckintheface (#48847293) Attached to: Republican Bill Aims To Thwart the FCC's Leaning Towards Title II

I think you're right Dragon. Truly free markets are a very efficient means of allocating resources. The problem is that markets have no way of determining the will of the majority of people. Maximizing profits is not hte same thing as determining what is best for society. The belief that it is the same thing is what I call a religion. Once society, through it's elected representatives, has decided on a course of action, truly free markets within a regulatory framework are the most efficient way to reach that goal.

Take your work seriously but never take yourself seriously; and do not take what happens either to yourself or your work seriously. -- Booth Tarkington

Working...