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: Article author is confused (Score 1) 385

The author is confused. See this discussion on HN where a lawyer or two explain what is actually going on.

Basically, nothing is changing concerning the substantive requirements for a warrant. All that is changing is which judges can issue a warrant after the police have satisfied all the requirements of the Constitution and of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Suppose a crime took place in district X, using a computer in district Y. Before, the police would have to go to a judge in district Y. After the change, they will be able to go to a judge in district X if and only if something like TOR or VPN was used that prevents them from determining Y.

+ - Cygnus ISS Resupply Vehicle Explodes on Lift Off

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes "Several seconds after lifting off on schedule at 6:22PM, and clearing its tower, the Cygnus Antares rocket slipped back, crashing into the launch facility and exploding. A large fireball consumed the vehicle and caused apparently significant damage to the facility."

Comment: Re:Contract issue (Score 1) 153

by harlows_monkeys (#48254971) Attached to: Can Ello Legally Promise To Remain Ad-Free?

There are substitutes for consideration. The magic words used to hand wave away a need for traditional consideration are "promissory estoppel" or "detrimental reliance".

I think a bigger problem for the $1000 trick would be that a court might see that as effectively a liquidated damages clause, and find it invalid because it was not chosen as a rough approximation of the actual damages likely to befall the user if Ello started running ads.

Comment: Re:Nonsense. Again. (Score 1) 432

What is the difference between selective breeding and genetic modification?... nothing.

Wrong. Genetic modification allows for a greater range of modification in a shorter time than can be achieved with selective breeding.

As Ben Parker wisely noted many years ago, "With great power comes great responsibility". Does our current food industry collectively have the great responsibility to wisely handle the great power of GMO? They have pretty clearly demonstrated that they do not.

Comment: Re:Just do SOMETHING (Score 4, Informative) 190

He was a cable lobbyist (sort of--he was head of the largest cable trade association, and that association did do lobbying among other things) 30 years ago, when cable was the underdog trying to provide an alternative to the big broadcasters, and there was no such thing as a cable ISP because the public internet did not exist yet.

He worked for the wireless trade group 10 years ago.

Also in there he founded or was a heavy investor in several companies that were more on the content provider side of things, and would be hurt by a lack of net neutrality. There is no evidence that he is any more influenced by his very old (and irrelevant to internet) cable association or his more recent but still old wireless association than by his association with those other companies that were on the content side of things.

Comment: The summary doesn't match TFA. (Score 2) 154

by Bootsy Collins (#46999075) Attached to: Momentous Big Bang Findings Questioned

Specifically, the original poster writes: " Intriguingly, the BICEP team has yet to flat-out deny this."

However, the very first link quotes one of the PIs for BICEP by saying: "As for Falkowski's suggestion in his blog that the BICEP has admitted to making a mistake, Pryke says that "is totally false." The BICEP team will not be revising or retracting its work, which it posted to the arXiv preprint server, Pryke says: "We stand by our paper.""

The /. editors didn't actually look at the submission before approving it. Yeah, yeah, I know.

Comment: Re:on the subject of cutlery, american cutlery. (Score 1) 46

7" is not long enough for a chef's knife. Even 8", the most popular length with home/amateur cooks, is pushing it.

10" is what you want. That might seem long to you, but it won't after you use it for a while (or, as my instructor at L'Academie de Cuisine said, "get over it). And once you get used to it, you'll wonder how you got by without the benefits of a longer knife.

Comment: Re:tool for communication not a "feature" (Score 1) 181

by Bootsy Collins (#46429807) Attached to: Physics Forum At Fermilab Bans Powerpoint

Let me put what I'm trying to say differently.

Imagine that you're presenting an equation to an audience. Consider the following four ways that you might choose to present that equation:

1. You could write it out in front of them on a chalkboard;
2. You could type it into PP or some other display software, live, with the equation being displayed on a screen of some sort as you type it;
3. You could type it into PP or some other display software in advance, and have the equation slowly revealed to the audience as if it was being written out;
4. You could type it into PP or some other display software in advance, and simply have the equation presented immediately in its entirety (akin to the entirety of a PP slide being revealed at once).

With admittedly nothing but personal experience, and the experience of professional acquaintances, to base this on, I claim that these four approaches will differ in the (for lack of a better term) psychological response they obtain from the audience, that those differences have to do with fundamental characteristics of how human beings process their environment, that much of those differences have to do with the psychological perception that the presenter is creating the information being presented at the time the presentation is taking place, and as a result those differences have nothing really to do with the effective use of software.

Comment: Re:PPT = complex communication channel (Score 4, Insightful) 181

by Bootsy Collins (#46428761) Attached to: Physics Forum At Fermilab Bans Powerpoint

I could be wrong, but you seem to me to be operating from the premise that the only meaningful difference between communicating via chalkboard and communicating via PP is that PP is more featureful -- hence, referring to using a chalkboard as "regressing to using ONLY CHALK." I don't think that's true at all.

What TFA is suggesting is that communicating by chalkboard has fundamental differences from communicating by PP, in the same way (if not to the same severity) that communicating by in-person lecture is fundamentally different from communicating by a video on YouTube. It's conceivable that you could eliminate some of those differences by using PP in a way similar to how one uses the chalkboard -- for example, by entering content into slides live, in front of your audience -- but it's not obvious to me that there's a gain to doing that.

+ - Harvest Energy from Internal Organ Movement->

Submitted by TempeNerd
TempeNerd (410268) writes "A consortium of research institutions have published research on a new implantable piezo-electric device that will harvest energy from internal organ movements (lungs, diaphragm, heart) to power devices like pacemakers.
As reported in Phys.org, this appears to be the first time that such a design is actually powerful enough to do so without any external charging or other inputs required.

Of course, this is still in the animal testing phase, but this tech seems attainable and life changing."

Link to Original Source

+ - Bitcoin exchange operatores arrested, BitInstant now down->

Submitted by Grantbridge
Grantbridge (1377621) writes ""The Department of Justice said Robert Faiella, known as BTCKing, and Charlie Shrem from BitInstant.com have both been charged with money laundering.
The authorities said the pair were engaged in a scheme to sell more than $1m (£603,000) in bitcoins to users of online drug marketplace the Silk Road." from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/tech...

It seems that BTCKing and Bitinstant have had people arrested over money laundering charges, and are now unavailable. If running an exchange counts as money laundering, then is the USA making itself a no-go area for bitcoin exchanges? Or will a reputable bank step up and run one complying with money laundering regulations."

Link to Original Source

To downgrade the human mind is bad theology. - C. K. Chesterton

Working...