Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


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:TPM? (Score 2, Informative) 146

by jayke (#31182424) Attached to: Nintendo Wins Lawsuit Over R4 Mod Chip Piracy
Depending on the system, definitions can be found outside of the actual legal text. In some systems there is extensive documentation outside of the actual legal text, often based on the prepatory work that was conducted before passing the law. In other systems definitions and specifics are left to the courts, while in other systems the legal texts are extremely detailed.

All of the above systems have their pro's and their con's, but to my knowledge there are very few modern legal systems where you would expect everything you need to know to be located in the actual legal text of the law in questions.

Comment: Re:wii is fail (Score 1) 119

i don't own a single game console. the only game i play is spring rts which is a brillant free rts.

What do you do when you have friends over and you want to play a round of video games? Or do all your friends own laptops and carry them everywhere?

3rd parties are the only way you'll get fresh air in that stale room

There are games for Wii published by third-party major labels. It's just that third parties do an absolutely fecal job of promoting them to players.

Comment: Re:Yep (Score 4, Informative) 667

by jayke (#29762303) Attached to: Toyota Claims Woman "Opted In" To Faux Email Stalking
One solution is to apply the very same punitive penalty, but award the punitive part of it to a fund/charity. In essence, whenever a major company causes somebody harm, that person is eligible to receive whatever amount is considered reasonable depending on the damages. In addition to that, the company is also fined an amount that is relative to its size and financial status, simply as a form of punishment. The latter amount never comes in contact with the victim.

What this does is ensure that company's are probably punished for causing harm, but removes the incentive to sue for enormous amounts for trivial issues (or not-so-trivial issues that don't justify $X million). This system is relatively common, and it always surprised me that people find it reasonable that the amount of damages awarded should be relative to the offenders ability to pay - Not primarily the crime itself.

Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes. -- Dr. Warren Jackson, Director, UTCS