ronadams - Slashdot User

Comment Re:fp (Score 1) 199

by ronadams on Tuesday November 18, 2008 @09:30AM (#25801157) Attached to: Feds Can Locate Cell Phones Without Telcos

Can we stay on topic for a change? This is important.

You must be new here.

Comment These are not the Drones you seek... (Score 1) 229

by ronadams on Monday November 17, 2008 @11:20AM (#25786981) Attached to: Preview the New MythTV User Interface

You do realize it's ATI's fault their hardware support is bad, right? Linux developers can't make it any easier for ATI to make a good driver and API; they have the complete source of the OS at their disposal. If ATI doesn't release good drivers and/or APIs, you get bad hardware support.

Comment Hawked? (Score 2, Funny) 857

by ronadams on Friday November 14, 2008 @01:55PM (#25760875) Attached to: Woman Admits Sending $400K To Nigerian Scammer

I'm picturing a banjo suddenly sprouting wings and a razor-sharp beak, soaring over the landscape and tweeting bluegrass licks. It's terrifying.

Microsoft Says VBA Is Here To Stay 116

Posted by kdawson on Friday January 18, 2008 @09:24AM from the thought-we'd-seen-the-back-of-it dept.

Angostura writes "Microsoft's team blog for Microsoft Excel and Excel Services has responded with a denial to the earlier report that Visual Basic for Applications will disappear from Windows Office in 2009. The Slashdot discussion on the report on Tuesday got pretty animated."

House To Vote On Paper Trail and OSS Voting Bill 258

Posted by kdawson on Thursday June 14, 2007 @09:37AM from the good-start dept.

Spamicles writes "A vote is imminent for the bill that is a direct response to problems in the 2006 elections. This legislation would create a paper trail for elections, require a manual audit of every federal election, and open the source code of voting software in certain circumstances. The bill currently has 216 co-sponsors and is expected to be brought to the floor of the House and passed any day."

How Bad Can Wi-fi Be? 434

Posted by Zonk on Tuesday May 22, 2007 @08:38AM from the good-thing-we-have-real-experts-here dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Sunday night in the UK, the BBC broadcast an alarmist Panorama news programme that suggested wireless networking might be damaging our health. Their evidence? Well, they admitted there wasn't any, but they made liberal use of the word 'radiation', along with scary graphics of pulsating wifi base stations. They rounded-up a handful of worried scientists, but ignored the majority of those who believe wifi is perfectly harmless. Some quotes from the BBC News website companion piece: 'The radiation Wi-Fi emits is similar to that from mobile phone masts ... children's skulls are thinner and still forming and tests have shown they absorb more radiation than adults'. What's the science here? Can skulls really 'absorb' EM radiation? The wifi signal is in the same part of the EM spectrum as cellphones but it's not 'similar' to mobile phone masts, is it? Isn't a phone mast several hundred/thousand times stronger? Wasn't safety considered when they drew up the 802.11 specs?"

Slashdot Top Deals