Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:IT the bottleneck? (Score 1) 173

Just so all parties know the risks involved, it's all good.

Yeah, that's the problem. Once IT owns it, they're also the ones that take the blame when it fails; known risk factors don't make a bit of difference to the scapegoat when data is lost.

Therefore the scapegoat buys the most reliable storage it can afford.

Comment Re:additional advice: (Score 1) 413

as opposed to a zero chance of survival from the idiot swiping you from behind because you cannot SEE him at all, and have NO chance of evasive maneuvers

Repeating this fallacy doesn't make it any more valid than it was the first time.

Fact: you're riding on a road designed for cars. If you can't handle that, then don't do it.

Fact: all vehicles on that road (motorized or otherwise) are responsible for their own ability to drive safely and within the law. If you can't handle doing what every other driver and rider expects of you, then you have no business being on that road.

Fact: riding against traffic on a bicycle is no less stupid than riding against traffic on a motorcycle. There's no difference whatsoever. Well, except that the motorcycle is generally easier to see.

If you're having visibility problems, then you must be too cool for a rear-view mirror. They're five bucks at the local bike shop and solve that problem quite nicely. "Can't see the people behind me" isn't a valid excuse for endangering not only yourself, but everyone else on the road by doing something completely and idiotically unexpected, like driving head-on into traffic.

In short, you're the kind of guy that routinely fucks up my morning commute due to (a) an overinflated sense of entitlement to the use of a road intended for motorized vehicles, and (b) a complete and utter lack of common sense and self-preservation skills.


Submission + - /. member tries to appear human

gwjenkins writes: "My partner just left for a whole week, taking my darling less then 1 yr daughter. In typical /. fashion I'm spending the next 6 nights surfing the net, drinking, eating frozen meals and watching Miyazaki anime dvds! Oh friends, help me. When they return I know they'll expect some sort of emotional thing. Surely you're been through this? What can I do?"

Submission + - Apple charged with iPod-iTunes music monopoly

mblase writes: An unspecified plaintiff is asking for unspecified damages from Apple in a lawsuit charging them with creating an illegal monopoly with their FairPlay DRM. Apple said that "the suit, filed in July, centers on Apple's use of a copy-protection system that prevents iTunes music and video from playing on rival devices. As well, songs bought elsewhere aren't easy to play on iPods." Apparently someone hasn't heard you can still rip music from CDs for listening on any MP3 player on the market.

Submission + - IBM says perfect teleportation possible

trex279 writes: In the past, the idea of teleportation was not taken very seriously by scientists, because it was thought to violate the uncertainty principle of quantum mechanics, which forbids any measuring or scanning process from extracting all the information in an atom or other object. According to the uncertainty principle, the more accurately an object is scanned, the more it is disturbed by the scanning process, until one reaches a point where the object's original state has been completely disrupted, still without having extracted enough information to make a perfect replica. But the six scientists found a way to make an end run around this logic, using a celebrated and paradoxical feature of quantum mechanics known as the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen effect.
Technology (Apple)

Submission + - Apple Monopoly?

An anonymous reader writes: A lawsuit claims that Apple Computer Inc. has created an illegal monopoly by linking iTunes music and video sales to its iPod players. The lawsuit centers on Apple's use of a copy-protection system that prevents iTunes music and video from playing on rival devices. Is this a good approach to force companies to stop using DRM? Or just a waste of judicial resources?

Slashdot Top Deals

Anything free is worth what you pay for it.