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


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! ×

Comment Re:Instead, just force people to make a decision (Score 1) 343

I'm a second year law student, and I for one would hate to do without my laptop. I can type about 5 times faster than I can handwrite, and when I need to make corrections or additions to earlier notes, I can do it in an organized manner without scribbling things out and squeezing things in the margins and whatnot. When it comes time to put it in to outline form, organized notes are key. Also, taking exams using SofTest is a godsend.

Given that tuition my school costs about $1/minute for every lecture attended, you wouldn't figure too many students would be interested in screwing off, but it happens. There's only so many hours of Tax Law you can take before your mind craves escape. But still, lectures for some subjects and some professors frankly are a waste of time. You can read the materials and commercial briefs on your own and get everything you need. Listening to rambling philosophical ruminations is a terrible waste of preciously limited supply of time. The ABA requires minimum attendance of 80% of classes, which is fine, but when you have the inevitable 12 hours of studying or outlining to catch up on, skipping classes would help.

One professor I had last year for Property Law banned laptops from her classroom. She was a rather feminist type. I heard that the reason she banned them was because a student the year before had a screen saver which featured a hot chick who would loose an article of clothing after every couple minutes. The guys in the back of the class would all be like "awwww!" when he moved the mouse to take notes, and the timer would be reset to fully clothed.

I have actually found it distracting when someone is playing WoW or whatever in front of me in lecture, but I don't think there should be a universal ban. Law classes are pretty intimate settings and usually everyone pretty much knows everyone. The vast majority of the time students in a class can just handle these problems one-on-one.

Submission + - Fake ID DMCA Notice - Facebook!

Phillip Lamb writes: "Apparently, the girl who sent the notice has used facebook to post info about Rachel Hyman, the bartender who posted the girl's fake. Well, I started my own group on facebook — "Ashley Heyer Abused the DMCA and All I Got Was This Lousy Slashdot Link" Still waiting to see if Ashley herself joins the group..."
The Courts

Submission + - Scientology critic Keith Henson extradited

muldrake writes: "Engineer, writer, and Scientology critic Keith Henson has been extradited from Arizona to Riverside County, California, following his arrest in February. Henson had fled to Canada following his conviction for "interfering with a religion" in 2001 for his pickets and Usenet posts criticizing the Church of Scientology, returning to Arizona after his asylum claims were denied."

Submission + - Google begins Massive Roll out of Web History

untouchableForce writes: "It has been well known for some time that Google could record your search history and associate it with your Google Account. It was used to create service such as Personalized Search. A couple of weeks ago Google released a new tool called Web History and apparently it recently has began enrolling all of its new and existing users into it. I noticed it on my account today despite having previous disabled personalized search in my account. To their credit it was "paused" but I was still quietly enrolled in something I knew nothing about. Here is an overview of Web History can be found at this blog entry. Here is Google's FAQ regarding why it has suddenly appeared along with directions on how to remove it from your account.

Given all of the ways things are being interpreted in this world today I want absolutely no one having access to a complete history of what I searched. I submit this only to bring it to the attention of others who may have missed this. To Google's credit they do give you the ability to delete items from your web history, which will keep them from using it to make recommendations but they likely still have other records of it. The only positive aspect of this that I can see is at least we getting an additional glimpse on just how much information the search giant has on us."

Submission + - Another DMCA Takedown Notice For Digg

ngottlieb writes: "Digg has received another DMCA takedown notice for a post containing a number used to decrypt a copyrighted poem. The hosting of the key violates the DMCA's "ban on trafficking in circumvention devices" in the same way the hosting of the AACS key violated it. Will comply with this takedown notice, or continue it's stand against the DMCA, supporting its users all the way?"
The Media

Submission + - Can YouTube help bring about justice and change?

concerned_calgarian writes: Here in Calgary, Alberta, Canada two members of our local police force were caught on video beating a black man by an anonymous source. The video was then sent to the media outlets and then to our mayor who forwarded it to the Police Chief who was then forced to suspend the two officers. ry.html?id=063cfabf-b144-4540-a76b-ffdfc34657e3

The You Tube video in question is here:

This comes on the heels of another report where local city police are being paid as bouncers to enforce alleged racism where non-whites are barred entry to most bars in Calgary.

This is after a previous case in which the Calgary City Police were accused of racism but nothing was done since it was the officer's word against this person. Who after being beaten and falsely arrested was charged with resisting arrest.

My question is, is it legal to record the Police in Canada if they are using excessive force? The person in question that recorded the video must be afraid if they are sending it anonymously. What kind of repercussions could they face if the police took exception to this?

Has You Tube been able to bring about social change and justice in previous cases of police brutality/racism caught on film?

Submission + - Warner cancels Canadian Promos due to Piracy

sunwukong writes: Warner Brothers has decided that Canada is such a force in the world of movie piracy that they have cancelled all public promo screenings of their upcoming movies.

"The newly enacted policy represents the studio's response to the lack of legislation in Canada to curtail the growing wave of camcorder-shot ("camcorded") films being trafficked around the world," Warner Bros. said in a statement.

Submission + - Holllywood Trying to Starve Canadian Pirates

KenAndCorey writes: "From an article on the CTV News web site, Warner Brothers has decided it won't be giving Canadians previews of its summer blockbusters.

Citing a failure by the government of Canada to make illegal the recording of movies directly from the screen by camcorder, the studio will not issue advance screenings of such audience pleasers like "Harry Potter and the Order of The Phoenix" and "Ocean's 13."
This is total crap, as we already know that the Canadian Movie Piracy Claim is Mostly Fiction. But as is the norm in Canada, we try to make it sound like it's not as bad as it may first appear. Douglas Frith of the Canadian Motion Pictures Distributors Association says,

We're not looking at the individuals who go in for fun to camcord a film in a theatre. It's organized crime. People are going in, they get paid between $5,000 to $7,000 for a very good copy of a film."
Well, not yet, anyway."

Yes Virginia, ISPs Have Silently Blocked Web Sites 204

Slashdot contributor Bennett Haselton writes "A recurring theme in editorials about Net Neutrality -- broadly defined as the principle that ISPs may not block or degrade access to sites based on their content or ownership (with exceptions for clearly delineated services like parental controls) -- is that it is a "solution in search of a problem", that ISPs in the free world have never actually blocked legal content on purpose. True, the movement is mostly motivated by statements by some ISPs about what they might do in the future, such as slow down customers' access to sites if the sites haven't paid a fast-lane "toll". But there was also an oft-forgotten episode in 2000 when it was revealed that two backbone providers, AboveNet and TeleGlobe, had been blocking users' access to certain Web sites for over a year -- not due to a configuration error, but by the choice of management within those companies. Maybe I'm biased, since one of the Web sites being blocked was mine. But I think this incident is more relevant than ever now -- not just because it shows that prolonged violations of Net Neutrality can happen, but because some of the people who organized or supported AboveNet's Web filtering, are people in fairly influential positions today, including the head of the Internet Systems Consortium, the head of the IRTF's Anti-Spam Research Group, and the operator of Spamhaus. Which begs the question: If they really believe that backbone companies have the right to silently block Web sites, are some of them headed for a rift with Net Neutrality supporters?" Read on for the rest of his story.

Slashdot Top Deals

"There is no statute of limitations on stupidity." -- Randomly produced by a computer program called Markov3.