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:GPL is the problem (Score 2) 1075

I think the point was to have quality crowd-sourced code that solves a problem elegantly available for free and nondiscriminatory use. Businesses saw the value in FOSS because in many cases they didn't have to reinvent the wheel. I think the problem now is, FOSS supporters, contributors and programmers see that the software has real market value that they may not be cashing in on. Or rather, they have a romantic idea in their head that they can dictate usage policy to large profitable companies. IMHO, contributing to FOSS is a donation on your part, but does not imply charity.

Comment Re:This one makes some sense (Score 0) 446

He's being tagged as a conservative because it was a Democrat that was shot. Would the tables be turned if it was a Republican? Would we assume the shooter was a liberal? Doubtful.

Why wouldn't $NEWS_NETWORK_X assume that given the nature of discourse in this country? I am sensing you are either setting up a strawman otherwise this statement is woefully naive.

Comment Re:Summary sucks. (Score 2) 663

Good info here, I actually read that OSnews report when it first came out and was shocked at the fine print. I think Peter Bright's problem is that Google is taking a Paternalistic approach to the problem by completely excluding the codec instead of bringing all codecs into the loop and letting the user decide. I see other readers getting caught-up in the definition of "openness" or perhaps it's application. H.264 is a gratis codec with strings attached (patents) while WebM promises to be gratis and libre with no "gotchas" based on how you use it (business vs. personal).

Comment Re:bring back the pr0n! (Score 2, Interesting) 165

Terrorism is meant to cause terror while performing everyday activities or a general sense of fear and paranoia in the general population. General public != internet-using public, and I find it hard to believe that any type of act committed in cyberspace would cause such feelings in any average internet-using person. Until cyber-activity gets to a point where such activity causes personal harm, whether psychologically or physically, I would say the term cyber-terrorism has no relevancy to the general public.

Slashdot Top Deals

Uncertain fortune is thoroughly mastered by the equity of the calculation. - Blaise Pascal