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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:writer doesn't get jeopardy, or much of anythin (Score 2) 455

Indeed. Other BS things called as "singularity".

1) What is at the center of a black hole? Answer: Singularity. Real Answer: No freaking clue

The singularity of a black hole simply means we can't see that far. It is the point from which information cannot escape. It's not some psuedomystic hand-waving nonsense promising unicorns and fulfilled dreams. It's just the name for a region for which there is no way to discover what is inside of it.

The singularity in the context of technological progress uses the black hole as a metaphor. It describes a point at which technology becomes self-propelling in a manner that makes it impossible for us to project what life would be like then, in a similar way to how miniaturisation and Moore's law have given us a present that couldn't have been projected in the 1940s. People then like to project what it could look like as an interesting exercise, and some of them choose to promise unicorns, but that doesn't make the concept of self-propelling technological advance itself inherently wrong.

Comment: Re:yes (Score 4, Informative) 330

by malacandrian (#48441497) Attached to: Eizo Debuts Monitor With 1:1 Aspect Ratio
Human field of vision is wider than it is tall, therefore our video recordings are landscape , therefore our video display devices are landscape . Unfortunately, when reading there is a cost in time and readability when a line of text extends beyond a certain length, hence why we use paper in portrait, and why some early displays were portrait. But there's nothing stopping you from having multiple portrait windows on a sufficiently large landscape monitor.

Comment: Re:This copywrite shit is getting pathetic (Score 2) 186

by malacandrian (#47739251) Attached to: BBC and FACT Shut Down Doctor Who Fansite

"The purpose of the site was not to let fans discuss their favourite episodes, it was to store and distribute copyrighted material without licence. This is precisely what copyright laws were designed to tackle. This isn't news, this isn't relevant to any serious discussion about copyright reform, this is the system working as intended."

You are completely full of shit and I would like to know why you feel it is okay to come in here and just lie? They did not "store and distribute copyrighted material without licence".

I'm going to hazard a guess that they were hosting links to torrent files of the episodes. Which should be legal but for some insane reason isn't.

In response to the announcement on their Facebook users are lamenting that they can no longer use the site to stream full episodes of both new and classic Who. Clearly the site must have offered streams of full episodes for the users to be upset that they aren't there anymore.

Comment: Something's not right here... (Score 4, Interesting) 186

by malacandrian (#47736831) Attached to: BBC and FACT Shut Down Doctor Who Fansite

The fact that he yielded on this suggests to me that he was aware that a search warrant would find something on his computer(s) that shouldn't have been there in the first place. It's unfortunate the site is gone, but we're not actually seeing the whole story here. Sadly, because of how things have already went, we probably never will.

We are seeing the whole story here, /. is just choosing not to cover it adequately. The site was hosting full episodes, which was the main reason anyone visited it. This isn't the BBC using overreaching copyright laws to leverage control over its brand, it's the BBC using the reasonable end of copyright law to protect its right to control the distribution of content.

Comment: Shot themselves in the foot there (Score 1, Informative) 186

by malacandrian (#47736811) Attached to: BBC and FACT Shut Down Doctor Who Fansite

That site was doing nothing except positives for the Doctor Who show. If they wanted to exercise more control over their brand, they could have at least tried to work with the site first, or even take it over and let the same people continue to run the site under their oversight. Fuckwits.

From the summary:

DWM's core focus was to provide a central location and community for everything in the 'Whoniverse,' from reconstructions of missing episodes to the latest episodes, and whatever lay between.

The purpose of the site was not to let fans discuss their favourite episodes, it was to store and distribute copyrighted material without licence. This is precisely what copyright laws were designed to tackle. This isn't news, this isn't relevant to any serious discussion about copyright reform, this is the system working as intended.

Comment: Re:Anyone know what, exactly, was the issue? (Score 2) 186

by malacandrian (#47736793) Attached to: BBC and FACT Shut Down Doctor Who Fansite

Thank you for giving more information.

Hey Slashdot Editors and posters. Information like this would have been nice to know in the summary. Otherwise it make it sounds like a fan site was shut down for having information about a show.

Get your fucking act together and stop trying to feed into FUD.

From the summary:

DWM's core focus was to provide a central location and community for everything in the 'Whoniverse,' from reconstructions of missing episodes to the latest episodes, and whatever lay between.

They do at least hint at it in the summary. That said, it's still beyond a joke that they're treating this like an outrage when it's simply the law acting like it should. How can we hope for a serious discussion about copyright reform when so many people take the childish approach of simply demanding to have exactly what they want for free all the time?

Comment: This copywrite shit is getting pathetic (Score 3, Insightful) 186

by malacandrian (#47736771) Attached to: BBC and FACT Shut Down Doctor Who Fansite

Now you can't even organize a group to talk about something that interests you, if you dont own the rights to the topic of discussion!?

From the summary:

DWM's core focus was to provide a central location and community for everything in the 'Whoniverse,' from reconstructions of missing episodes to the latest episodes, and whatever lay between.

The purpose of the site was not to let fans discuss their favourite episodes, it was to store and distribute copyrighted material without licence. This is precisely what copyright laws were designed to tackle. This isn't news, this isn't relevant to any serious discussion about copyright reform, this is the system working as intended.

Comment: Re:So, which is it? (Score 1) 151

by malacandrian (#47602237) Attached to: Planes Can Be Hacked Via Inflight Wi-fi, Says Researcher

Volkswagen hooks up their audio systems to the CANBUS on cars. Those audio systems may have bluetooth enabled. This may allow a hacker to get onto the CANBUS via BT. I haven't tried, but it's definitely something that one could attempt. Other manufacturers do this also, such as GM and Chevy.

A 2009 study claim to have managed it. Given the range & pairing requirements of BT though, it does mean crashing a car that you're currently in. Giving the victim a specially prepared CD that will hack the CANBUS half way through their road trip seems a much more sensible idea to me.

Comment: Re:That's how I say SQL (Score 1) 234

Yes, people sometimes mispronounced it, but that is due to ignorance.

Actually, the technology that became SQL was originally called Sequel, but that was trademarked so they changed to SQL. So the correct answer is /s kju l/, but that's only for legal reasons, and mispronunciations are as likely to be due to knowing more about the technology and its history as less.

Comment: Re:I can't get one thing (Score 5, Insightful) 93

by malacandrian (#45011869) Attached to: Another 100 Gigabit DDoS Attack Strikes — This Time Unreflected
That is the point of using a botnet to run a DDoS, yes. A single control signal issues a huge surge in traffic. That doesn't make it an amplified attack though. An amplified attack is when the zombies trick a third party (such as a DNS server) to reply to the victim with more information than you sent them. This can up the size of the attack 100-fold.

"Free markets select for winning solutions." -- Eric S. Raymond

Working...