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


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. ×

Comment Re:Reduce tomato sauce wastage (Score 1) 173

I make a point of buying viscous products in flat-topped containers, but standing the bottle upside down is a poor alternative even for those wide-topped ketchup bottles that are designed to be stored that way.

If they are designed to be stored that way, then they aren't being stored upside down in the first place, are they? If the writing on the bottle appears right-side up, but the opening for dispensing is on the bottom, how can you say that it is being stored upside down?

You may, however, have to manipulate the bottle to be upside down briefly while you are opening and closing it in order to have some control over exactly how much of the contents you dispense.

Comment Re:Fake news (Score 1) 130

While I'm sure you are right that it is not what they mean, it most definitely is what they said. They said "each" without qualifying it with "average", and as such have said something that at best is simply factually false, and at worst just plain confusing.

For example, while it's true that there is an average of approximately one human testicle per human being, it is ludicrous to think that each human has one testicle.

Comment Re:I knew Wheeden was from the future... (Score 1) 271

Except for the fact that the Firefly 'verse had "dozens of planets and hundreds of moons", sure. I'd say that to measure up to that, it would need at least 3 or 4 times as many rocky worlds as they've found in what seems to the habitable zone in the Trappist system, and probably have another dozen or two of gas giants in the habitable zone as well.

Comment Re:Senator Wyden: (Score 2) 191

Would *you* risk getting detained for an indefinite period, however illegally, just because you want to assert that your constitutional rights are being violated? Of course I can appreciate the sentiment behind what you are saying, but people are bending over and taking this kind of crap at the borders not because they particularly *want* any appearance of increased security, but because they just want to fucking go home, and cooperating fully with the border agents, even the ones who might abuse their position, and even if your rights are being violated, is generally expected to be the most expedient path to that end.

Comment Re:What does this mean for free software copyright (Score 1) 144

Oracle vs Google re: the Java API comes to mind as one noteworthy example...

But what, exactly, makes their use of this work "fair"? They rebroadcasted the work without permission of the copyright holder, and I'm not sure they even acknowledged the copyright holder in their rebroadcast. Unless facebook live's terms of usage states that they own the content that is uploaded to it, I think that the guy's copyright was most definitely infringed.

Comment Re:CRISPR for the masses (Score 1) 162

Eugenics became a dirty word because of Nazis, who would improve humanity by killing off the "degenerates". But there is nothing wrong with improving the human stock per se..

Perhaps not, except for the fact that if you *don't* "kill off the degenerates", then they will continually breed with your so-called "improved stock", defeating any attempts to improve them over the course of generations, unless you legislate mandatory sterilization for absolutely everyone that does not fit certain criteria, which itself poses no small ethical problem for those that might consider it... Perhaps almost ironically, it has much in common with the ethical problems created by outlawing abortion.

Comment Re:If the *.AA think it's bad (Score 1) 134

Nothing in the definition of property necessitates that it should necessarily be physical or tangible, that is a wholly arbitrary distinction that you have randomly chosen to apply to it.... The only criteria for property is that it belongs to someone... and at best the only reason why the exclusivity of control would not be considered property is because perhaps you, personally, do not recognize it as such.... but because that exclusivity is entirely the point of having copyright in the first place, the law recognizes that this exclusivity *does* belong to the copyright holder, and so any unauthorized copying of their works amounts to theft of that property to a commensurate degree. You can steal cable and internet bandwidth, for example... neither of these have any tangible component, but they are the property of those who have rightful access to them, and as such can most *definitely* still be stolen.

Comment Re:If the *.AA think it's bad (Score 1) 134

Theft - the unlawful deprivation from the rightful owner of some of their lawfully recognized property.

Copyright infringement - the unlawful deprivation from the rightful owner of some measure of exclusivity of control over who may copy a work. This exclusivity is supposed to be part of copyright, and so is rightfully the property of the copyright holder. You can hardly say that the copyright holder has just as much exclusivity of control over who may copy a work if somebody copies the work without authorization because by definition, exclusive means that nobody else is doing it.

So how, exactly, is copyright infringement not theft?

Slashdot Top Deals

Brain off-line, please wait.