Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Preservation letter? (Score 1) 49

"Farah Issa, studio manager of Hot 8 Yoga, showed the Chronicle a copy of the surveillance video from her phone, noting how the Waymo dropped off the suspect and waited for him to finish the burglary before taking off again."

I'm taking that as meaning she would have told them right from the start. She obviously cared, they did not.

Comment Re:Open source it then (Score 1) 47

I was behind CGNAT at the time, so I told someone else to host the server

There are some countries where ALL users are behind CGNAT, and the lack of IPv6 support in games is a serious problem.
Here it's easy to get gigabit fibre with low latency between users, but all legacy traffic goes through CGNAT. It's perfect for playing games between friends, but only possible with IPv6.

Quake3 got patched with IPv6 support many years ago however:
https://ioquake3.org/ioquake3/...

Having routers which block inbound traffic by default is also a problem. People are hung up on a 20 year old threat model, modern client devices don't have exposed services by default, and are often connected directly to untrusted networks (eg public wifi, vpn, mobille data etc). The threat model today comes from services users make outbound connections to, and yet the typical home user router blocks all inbound and leaves outbound totally open.

Comment Re:Open source it then (Score 1) 47

If the code is open, then third party dependencies can be replaced or removed. A lot of games have been successfully open sourced and continue to be played to this day - eg quake/doom etc.
Also there's far less likely to be such dependencies in server side code, so long as the game has the ability to connect to an arbitrary server instead of having a fixed address hard coded.

Comment Re:Good. (Score 1) 47

Or "RENT", explicitly stating that you are renting access to the game for a fixed period of time.
After all, "a licence to use the game" is being violated if you can't use the game any more due to it requiring access to a server that no longer exists.

If a game is no longer commercially viable then they should be required to release the server components and/or the source code, allowing anyone to create their own server. Since by their own admission it's not commercially viable they wouldn't lose anything by giving the server components away for free.
This has worked well for games like Quake and Doom which remain fully playable today, even taking advantage of modern hardware which did not exist when these games were developed. It also generates (some) continued sales as although the source code is free, the game assets are not.
If they shut off needed servers and render a game unplayable, then not only do they guarantee no further sales whatsoever, they also generate bad sentiment among former players, and turn all physical copies into completely worthless e-waste.

Submission + - Scientists ejected from diabetes conference for distributing journal reprints (arstechnica.com)

Submitted by ArchieBunker
ArchieBunker writes: Five leading scientists were ousted from the annual meeting of the American Diabetes Association (ADA) in New Orleans on Friday. Their crime: handing out copies of an editorial, published in the journal Diabetes Care on April 29, sharply criticizing the Trump administration’s ongoing attacks on scientific research.

Those ousted were Steven Kahn, professor of medicine at the University of Washington and editor-in-chief of Diabetes Care, who co-authored the published editorial; former ADA president Desmond Schatz of the University of Florida, Gainesville; Aaron Kelly, pediatrics professor at the University of Minnesota; Justin Ryder of Northwestern University; and Irl Hirsch, also of the University of Washington. The five were handing out reprints of the editorial outside a room where NIH director Jay Bhattacharya had been scheduled to speak. Bhattacharya cancelled and another NIH official spoke in his stead.

“They physically grabbed us, forced us out of the conference center, and now are telling us we can no longer attend this meeting,” Kelly told MedPage Today, which first reported the incident. “They’re taking our lanyards. It really has come to this in America. Censorship is real. America needs to stand up. Scientists, stand up. Physicians, stand up.”

The ADA confirmed to MedPage Today that five registered scientists had been removed from the meeting, claiming the scientists had violated the organization’s code of conduct for conferences. “These attendees were escorted out by our onsite event security because they demonstrated behavior not consistent with this code of conduct,” the ADA media team said in a statement. “They were respectfully given the opportunity to cease this behavior and chose not to which is why they were escorted out.”

“All attendees will conduct themselves in a professional and respectful manner, free from any form of discrimination, harassment, or intimidation,” the code of conduct states. “Inappropriate conduct, including but not limited to harassment; threatening or unwelcome physical or verbal actions; or disorderly or disruptive conduct such as protesting, will not be tolerated.”

Online backlash to the ADA’s actions spread rapidly on both Twitter/X and BlueSky, and sharply increased the number of page views for Kahn et al.’s April editorial. According to Kahn, the editorial was published with a disclaimer, added by ADA leadership, insisting that the ADA had nothing to do with developing or writing the article. He has written to the ADA seeking re-admittance to the conference, since he is slated to speak and chair a session.

Some questioned how handing out reprints of an editorial published in the ADA’s own journal, at the ADA’s own annual conference, could be construed as a violation of that code. The scientists were not disruptive or disorderly in their conduct, based on the videos posted by MedPage Today, although the fact that they were handing out reprints just before an NIH representative was scheduled to speak might be construed as a form of protest. But it could just as easily be argued that such actions fall under valid scientific dissemination and discussion, the conference’s stated objective.

“It is no longer enough to stand idly by or work behind the scenes with lawmakers,” the authors wrote in their editorial. “Moreover, it is no longer appropriate to fret about political backlash. Now is the time to recognize and fight to reverse the spiraling fall of the United States of America’s status as the foremost nation in health care innovation. As a nation, we must continue to believe in ensuring better health for all. A few brushes of a pen, some clearly visible through budget requests, others less so through internal machinations, are rapidly destroying what generations have built. We can no longer afford complacency and fear. We must all act now!”

Comment Evil will always triumph because good is dumb. (Score 1) 94

A 50% stake is arbitrary, indefensible, and dumb.

How about a non-voting stake commensurate with the revenue linked to job loss?

If the AI models are trained on/made from the illegally hoovered intellectual property of countless American (or global) intellectual property owners, then distribute the ill-gotten gains among the original rights-owners. The AI companies can take their middle-man share.

Slashdot Top Deals

The world is no nursery. - Sigmund Freud

Close