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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Pity the poor bank robber (Score 0, Offtopic) 180

This seems to be similar to asking the question "how many bank robbers families went hungry because the Fed's confiscated the money the bank robber stole." I'm not a big proponent on software patents, most of them aren't really novel. But company A invents something cool. Company B likes it, copies it, and sells it. Of course it was a cool invention, so company B's customer love it. And of course the B's customers are going to hate it, and complain when B can no longer provide the invention. That is kind of like the whole point behind patent protection. If B doesn't want to license the invention then they need to come up with some other solution, that might not be quite as cool.

Comment Think of the children! (Score 1) 374

From TFA:

“Properly understood, his crimes encompass inviting total strangers into a scheme to defraud and obstruct, and joining in their criminal enterprises,” prosecutors wrote. “Dixon adopted a mercenary-like attitude towards the nation’s border security and the security of the nation’s secrets. He also acted with callous disregard for the most vulnerable in society – our children. . . . Dixon’s misconduct was purposeful, dangerous and it requires punishment.”

Apparently if you tell someone who claims their brother or cousin is a drug dealer, to tell their potential LEO boss that you don't know what your brother does, is a crime against children!

Comment Re:conspiracy? (Score 1) 374

If someone said their brother was a drug dealer, are you required to call the cops? You have no evidence, other than hearsay. If you knew that person was going to apply for a LEO position, would you tell them "I wouldn't mention that you know what your brother does?" Well there you go, you are a heinous criminal and should be locked away.

Comment Re:Legal slippery slope (Score 1) 374

Reading the article, I 'think' he was aiding specific people that had committed crimes (gave methodology how to get around what they did)

Did you really read the article? From TFA:

However, the most incriminating evidence appears to have come from Dixon’s interactions with two undercover agents.

One agent was posing as a brother of a drug dealer, and apparently he told the agent to say "look I don't know what he does."
Of course the prosecutors brought up the fact that he supposedly taught 9 sex offenders. Although they offered no evidence that he taught them to hide crimes, and in fact in one instance he notified authorities.

Comment frivolous (Score 4, Insightful) 555

Is everyone just ignoring the reasons given for a recall? From TFA:

Most infuriating was the commission's argument that a total recall was justified because Buckyballs have "low utility to consumers" and "are not necessary to consumers."

Quite a LOT of stuff is sold that is low utility to consumers, and not necessary. Should something, bought by consenting adults, for adults, be recalled because it might pose a danger, and is "low utility?"

Comment Re:Suggestions on how to reduce piracy in Australi (Score 1) 57

I'm not ok with piracy.

I'm not ok with plagiarism or commercial piracy, but I'm fine with file sharing.

So you are ok with sharing, as long as the person sharing doesn't make any money off of it? I guess your argument is "if they didn't pay for it, then they wouldn't have given me any money for it, but if they paid someone else, I want that money." This is fine, except for the fact that many people would pay for it. But free is cheaper.

Comment Re:Patent novelty? (Score 1) 135

They did not patent the concept of targeting ads based on content. They patented a particular method for doing that.

And their particular method is different from the other methods how? Reading the patent, about the only thing that is different is that they use the reply as the content.
The method involves using keywords from the content. Applying some sort of weighting that meets a threshold, and a few other things. How does this method differ from a method to introduce advertising based on other content?
Surely figuring out the reply isn't novel. Surely looking for keywords isn't novel. Surely weighting isn't novel. There is some stuff in there related to email and databases, but the only thing that really matters is keywords and weighting and replies. I don't see how this is novel, or different than any other content based syste,

Comment Patent novelty? (Score 2) 135

How is this remotely patentable? It is just taking some content, and presenting an ad based on the content (and keywords in the content). What does it mater that the content is a reply vs a web page vs anything else?
Ohhh "determining reply content associated with the reply" If only three was some standard way to determine the content of an email. What is novel about this? Once you have a system to provide an ad based on keywords, what does it matter if you pull keywords from a reply, or from something else?

Comment Re:Missing the point of text messages... (Score 1) 628

Let's say that you're robbing a store after hours and you know your friend brought a gun.

While you may be right in your first assertion, your analogy is flawed. If you DID NOT know your friend brought a gun, and your friend shot and killed someone. You will be liable (well tried for homicide) in the guys death. Shoot, if the cops show up, and shoot your friend, you will be "liable" for his death. Basically if you are involved in a felony, and someone is killed, then EVERYONE guilty of the felony will be charged with homicide as well.

Comment Re:Idiocracy (Score 1) 628

You're making a proactive effort to communicate with a driver in an unsafe way, on the other hand. You're sending them text messages. You know they're driving. You know the recipient is likely to respond, which means you're expecting them to respond.

"Hey Bob are you coming to the party?"
"Yep, on my way, driving down the freeway."
"Ok great. When you get here, go through the back door."
Now I expect bob to not answer my text or read it until he can safely do so. I've sent him a message I expect him to read when he arrives, or stops. But somehow I am responsible?

Comment Re:Idiocracy (Score 1) 628

The driver has free will

. Yep, and his 'free will' choice is now 'ignore the text and lose my job, or look at the text and maybe be in an accident'. I'm guess that one of those outcomes is much more likely than the other - so much for his 'free will'.

Or, I don't know, maybe we can pull over, stop the vehicle, and check the text message.
Or better yet, if the boss has "urgent" info that has to be answered right this second, or the guy loses his job. Perhaps the boss can CALL the person, rather than just text him and hope that the text gets to him. Cause you know, just because the text is sent, doesn't mean the driver gets it, and will get it right that second.

Comment Re:As usual. (Score 4, Insightful) 622

. Granted, there's a lot of reasons he could pass through and it wouldn't be noticed, but I'd think there's some protection.

Apparently measles is not strictly on the list, if I'm reading this right.

There is some protection, its called vaccines, and pretty much the rest of the US population has taken them. So why bother?

Slashdot Top Deals

CChheecckk yyoouurr dduupplleexx sswwiittcchh..

Working...