Zothecula writes: We've seen it in numerous TV shows and movies – the witness to a crime looks through a book of mug shots, then works with a police sketch artist to come up with a likeness of the nasty person they saw. After looking through hundreds of mug shots, however, it's possible that the tired-brained witness could look right at a photo of the guilty party and not recognize them. It's also possible that there is a mug shot of the criminal on a database somewhere out there, but that this particular witness will never see it. A computer system being pioneered at Michigan State University, however, could be the solution to such problems – it automatically matches faces in police sketches to mug shots.
rsmiller510 writes: "Last week's Gmail issues played into the hands of the anti-cloud crowd, but when Google appeared to recover all of the data from backup tapes, it ultimately proved cloud computing works as designed."
EnergyScholar writes: "Former Intelligence Chief of MI6 credits Wikileaks with helping spark revolution in Middle East, in a (supposed to be) off the record speech. In previous stories about the Middle East revolution there were several conversation threads in which people asked for evidence that Wikileaks had helped spark the Middle East revolutions. This is my first story posted to slashdot, although it's safe to say there are more to come on this topic. This author is hoping for a Nobel Peace Prize for Wikileaks, and suggests interested readers check out "disruptive compliance"."
Hugh Pickens writes: "The Phillipine Daily Inquirer reports on a recent case where the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) lost an appeal after seeking to impeach the testimony of a defendant's expert witness by citing an article from Wikipedia. In her brief, the defendant said "the authority, alluded to by oppositor-appellant, the 'Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Health Disorders DSM-IV-TR,' was taken from an Internet website commonly known as Wikipedia" and argued that Wikipedia itself contains a disclaimer saying that it "makes no guarantee of validity." The court in finding for the defendant said in its decision that it found "incredible... if not a haphazard attempt, on the part of the (OSG) to impeach an expert witness, with, as pointed out by (the defendant) unreliable information. This is certainly unacceptable evidence, nothing short of a mere allegation totally unsupported by authority.""