Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Skype Forcing Mac Users To Upgrade Client 250

mijkal writes "Nevermind a huge outcry over the iTunes-like behemoth of Skype v5 for Mac. Users with v2.8 are being pushed an update to v5 regardless of update preferences. I even restored v2.8 from TimeMachine only to have it update itself again within minutes, offering only an option to relaunch the app."

Submission + - Apple lifts ban on native Google Voice application (

SD_92104 writes: Following last weeks change to the iPhone developer agreement and publication of AppReview guidelines, Apple seems to have also changed its view on native Google Voice applications. GV Connect, an application that has been in approval limbo since last year (and has been available as a MacOS Dashboard widget for well over a year) is now available for download from the iPhone AppStore. Let's hope that Apple won't change its mind again and start pulling Google Voice apps again after a while

Comment Annoying article (Score 1) 586

The primary PNAS article is pretty annoying IMHO. One of the main purposes of publishing research is to describe the methods so that others can reproduce it. In the Materials and Methods section, the only description of the fields applied refer to using 70% intensity setting of a commercially available product, the Magstim SuperRapid, which does not even appear on the manufacturer's website. Also, the orientation of the field is described only by referring to the orientation of the handle of the device. I would expect a published article to describe the actual field intensity, orientation, and some description of field geometry.

Guessing that the SuperRapid is equivalent to the Rapid, they are applying 70%*3.5 Tesla = ~ 2.5 Tesla. Holy cow, that's a lot. For comparison, Earth's field is 0.0005 Tesla.

I assume that no one really cares what happens when you apply these kind of fields to the brain given that one doesn't experience anything like this in normal situations. Is the point that we can learn about brain function by poking it in various ways, and this is just a good way to poke it?

Comment Re:What's the big deal? (Score 2, Informative) 483

My understanding is that Apple now approves most apps in a few days.

Your understanding from personal experience, from Apple's official stance, or from what you hear from a few developers?

It seems as if Apple can decide to block an application without actually rejecting it (in order to keep the FCC of their tails) - I'm currently on day 63 "In Review" with an app which I now consider (unofficially) rejected by Apple


Apple Bans Jailbreakers From the App Store 507

Hugh Pickens writes "Adam Mills writes in the Examiner that Apple has been cutting off access to the iTunes App Store for iPhone hackers and jailbreakers. Sherif Hashim, the iPhone developer who successfully hacked the iPhone OS 3.1.3 and unlocked the 05.12.01 baseband for iPhone 3GS and 3G devices, discovered he'd been cut off and twittered: '"Your Apple ID was banned for security reasons," that's what i get when i try to go to the app store, they must be really angry.' Another hacker, iH8Sn0w, who is behind the Sn0wbreeze tool, confirms that his account has also been deactivated even though iH8sn0w's exploit had only been revealed to Dev Team, the group responsible for the PwnageTool. 'It is kind of surprising that two people associated with jailbreaking have had this happen to them so soon after one another, but it's too early to say if this is a campaign that Apple is starting up,' writes Mills."

Comment Allow my to introduce my friend Occam... (Score 1) 329

...he has a razor that is very useful in these situations. You have three choices: one and two are rather bizarre theories that require significant new physics (reflecting gravitational waves or Heim theory). Choice three uses conventional physics, and is therefore boring. But it explains the GpB data so far.

Until polhode effects can be ruled out, Occam's razor pretty much requires us to stick with this explanation. Don't use a complex experiment to make claims about new physics unless you understand the experiment really, really well. It is just too easy for the "new physics" to turn out to be some subtle effect in the experimental hardware.

Comment Re:Buy European? No chance. (Score 1) 640

My understanding is that a modern twin (777) is less likely to lose one engine than an older quad (747) is to lose three engines. The 777 was more or less required to meet this challenge in order to be certified for over water use.

A 777 certainly does not have to divert to the nearest airport if it loses one engine. After all, the things fly over the Pacific where there are no airports!

Slashdot Top Deals

I have a very small mind and must live with it. -- E. Dijkstra