Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:It's obvious (Score 1) 502

If the patient REALLY wants that head CT, even though it's unnecessary and expensive, what about that one in a million chance that there was really a problem that the doctor missed that the test would have caught? Can you say lawsuit? Over-medicating and over-testing are a big problem, but don't blame the doctors, blame the lawyers and the misguided notion among the public that more treatment is always better.

Microsoft Launches Its Own Open Source Foundation 344

darthcamaro writes "Microsoft already had its own open source (OSI-approved) licenses, its own open source project hosting site and now it's adding its own non-profit open source foundation. That's right, the company that is still banging the patent drum against open source now has its own 501(c)(6) open source foundation. Officially called the CodePlex Foundation, it's a separate effort from the CodePlex site and is aimed at helping to get more commercial developers involved in open source. Considering how they continue to attack Linux and open source, will anyone take them seriously?"

Comment Re:Hmm (Score 1) 370

I honestly don't even think IPv6 is needed. We just need recall some of those huge blocks of IP addresses that have been allocated for no good reason and implement NAT/proxies more widely.

NAT requires jumping through all sorts of hoops to try to get back to the host-to-host connectivity that IP used to allow. It's slowing the adoption of things like IPSEC and makes any application that requires peer-to-peer connections a chore to set up. NAT is not a good thing.

Just about every single company uses firewalls nowadays anyway, there is absolutely no reason for them to have huge blocks of IP addresses like they currently do (they don't even use them!).

While I agree that some organizations have many more addresses than they will ever use, firewalls have nothing to do with NAT. Every company *should* use a firewall, of course, but firewalls worked perfectly well before NAT, and they will continue to work after NAT dies a deserved death.


Microsoft Poland Photoshops Black Guy To White One 964

wanted writes "If you look at Microsoft's Poland business solutions Web site, you will probably not notice anything odd about the main picture. However, when you compare it with the original English version, you can see that someone decided that showing black people in Poland is probably not going to be convincing to business. They just Photoshopped the head of a white guy in for the black one, in an amateurish way, leaving his hand unchanged. (Here's a mirror in case something should happen to the original.)" We noted a few months back that the city of Toronto had done something similar.

Submission + - Avast Network Shield blocks (

An anonymous reader writes: Avast Network Shield (part of Avast Antivirus) suddenly (I noticed it a mere 10 minutes ago) decided to block classifying it as a malicious site. The Avast support forums so far don't provide any help.

Submission + - Microsoft Poland photoshops black guy to white one ( 1

wanted writes: "If you look at Microsoft's Poland business solutions website you will probably not notice anything wrong with the main picture. However, when you compare it with the original English version, it clearly shows that someone decided showing black people in Poland is not going to be that convincing to business. They just photoshopped the head of the black guy with a white one, in an amateur style leaving his hand unchanged. There's also a mirror just in case."

Typography On the Web Gets Different 378

bstender writes "Most major browsers — including the latest versions of Internet Explorer, Firefox, Safari, Chrome, and Opera — recognize a CSS rule known as @font-face. What that means, in brief, is that Web developers can now easily embed downloadable fonts in their pages. To see an example, load up Firefox 3.5 or Safari 4 and learn more. You'll see three new typefaces — Liza, Auto, and Dolly — used in the body text and headlines." No doubt the licensing issues are just as complex as the font nerd potential.

Comment Re:Assumes a centralized DNS system (Score 1) 89

Your analogy is flawed. IRC is nothing like the web. As you said, IRC is a decentralized network. There are connections between the servers. "The web" doesn't exist - it's just a bunch of servers that have no connection to each other. The IRC split just referred to other people starting their own IRC networks. Maybe you meant to compare IRC to DNS, which is a giant network of sorts. I think a DNS split is very unlikely, though. There's little benefit to having a single giant IRC network, but obvious benefit to having a single DNS network, without which the whole Internet basically gets fragmented, from a usability standpoint.

Comment Re:This use of CAN-SPAM is unconstitutional (Score 1) 319

Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom ... to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

I assume this is the part you're referring to, but I don't agree with your interpretation. I don't think petitioning "the government" in this case means that harrassing one government official in particular is necessarily Constitutionally protected behavior.

Comment Re:First Amendment (Score 2, Insightful) 319

If Thompson's bill was worth supporting before, then his bill should still be worth supporting after annoying e-mails, spam or for all I care: murder.

Clearly you don't understand how the Senate works. Bills need support to pass, regarldess of their content. People make deals to support each other's bills. Having friends in your court is crucial if you want to get anything passed. Is this right? Maybe not, but that's how it is, and it's not exactly a secret. For more information, I suggest reading Fight Club Politics, available at your local library.

Comment Re:You're a fucking moron. (Score 1) 319

"But all that means is that the CAN-SPAM act isn't the appropriate law to attack him with: instead, the Senator should just go for plain-old harassment" did you not understand, dumbass?

I think the part he was actually responding to was "Spam is commercial email. This is email about a pending legislative action, and thus Jack Thompson has the right to send it because he has a right to free speech." Spam isn't necessarily commercial, and no he doesn't. The fact that the CAN-SPAM act in particular may not apply doesn't change the widely accepted definition of spam.

Slashdot Top Deals

ASCII a stupid question, you get an EBCDIC answer.