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


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:SlingBox (Score 1) 484

by guytoronto (#47317271) Attached to: Supreme Court Rules Against Aereo Streaming Service
With SlingBox, you are your own cable company. Within your own household, it really wouldn't be considered public rebroadcasting. If you gave your neighbor access to your SlingBox, now you are rebroadcasting to the public, and as per this ruling, you are the same as a cable company and have to pay the appropriate fees to the original broadcaster.

Comment: Re:Wrong decision (Score 1) 484

by guytoronto (#47317215) Attached to: Supreme Court Rules Against Aereo Streaming Service
And because of all that, the Supreme Court ruled it's a violation of copyright law. Aside from the copyright issues, OTA broadcasters make their money via local advertising revenue. Local advertising doesn't mean much if the programming is being sent to the other side of the country. If you really want to access OTA TV through your web browsers, buy an OTA TV tuner + antenna + Slingbox.

Comment: Re:good (Score 1) 350

Yes, because we all know that incarceration would be very beneficial to a 16yo. It will give him 5 years to interact and socialize one-on-one with the scum of the earth, and when he turns 21 he will come out as a model citizen. Or (and this is just a hypothetical), we could be more civilized, make him do a ton of community work, and actively work at rehabilitating him.

Comment: Autonomous weapons could be good (Score 1) 180

In a ground combat scenario, autonomous weapons could be a good thing. Right now, soldiers are tasked with protect others as well as themselves, and in most situations the safest resolution is to kill the antagonist. A machine or robot wouldn't suffer from emotional lapses in judgment (anger, hostility). A robot may have better weapons skills, so instead of a kill shot, may only need to wound. A robot would be more willing to put itself in harms way to protect a living person.

The programming required for such a machine would be incredibly complex, but controllable with defined precision. A human soldier can't be controlled or programmed, and history shows that humans make a lot of bad decisions when it comes to the use of deadly force.

Comment: Re:Pinto? (Score 1) 800

On a side note, it's sad that they exploding Pinto myth continues to be perpetuated. The Ford Pinto was just as safe (or just as dangerous) as every other average car on the road at that time. The urban legend of how deadly the Pinto was really needs to die in an exploding ball of fire.

How come financial advisors never seem to be as wealthy as they claim they'll make you?