Slashdot Mirror

http://www.newscorp.com/news/bunews_39.html
http://www.newscorp.com/news/bunews_40.html

http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/402737/The-News-of-the-World-was-the-subject-of-some-ferocious-attacks.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124713962333917725.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124710587096916143.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124725579809924597.html
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2528020/Met-Police-No-investigation-into-hacking.html
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2530062/No-truth-in-News-of-the-World-phone-tap-claim.html
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Article/200907215334404
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Article/200907215335802
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25762968-401,00.html
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25763994-23109,00.html
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/business/story/0,28124,25759684-7582,00.html
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25757545-2703,00.html
http://www.skynews.com.au/showbiz/article.aspx?id=351326
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6670747.ece

just a few links about it from News Corp. owned sources.

/deafening right?
//oh and in the end, it seems like the guardian (a rival newspaper to News Corp. in the uk) got a bit carried away with reporting this because they didnt seem to have any of the evidence of the claims that they were making.

http://www.newscorp.com/news/bunews_39.html
http://www.newscorp.com/news/bunews_40.html

http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/402737/The-News-of-the-World-was-the-subject-of-some-ferocious-attacks.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124713962333917725.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124710587096916143.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124725579809924597.html
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2528020/Met-Police-No-investigation-into-hacking.html
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2530062/No-truth-in-News-of-the-World-phone-tap-claim.html
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Article/200907215334404
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Article/200907215335802
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25762968-401,00.html
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25763994-23109,00.html
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/business/story/0,28124,25759684-7582,00.html
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25757545-2703,00.html
http://www.skynews.com.au/showbiz/article.aspx?id=351326
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6670747.ece

just a few links about it from News Corp. owned sources.

/deafening right?
//oh and in the end, it seems like the guardian (a rival newspaper to News Corp. in the uk) got a bit carried away with reporting this because they didnt seem to have any of the evidence of the claims that they were making.

He owns some newspapers in the UK... IIRC, he owns The Sun or for the historically savvy, the newspaper that happened to be the main media support of this obviously benign guy

"Sorry you can't call The Sun a 'newspaper'! Seriously, a publication who's most popular story today is entitled "I had walk with a yeti on holiday"??"

Famously, the Sun writes to a reading age of 6 years old. And sells 3 million copies a day or thereabouts. Last read a copy in 1982 but it has not improved. When the Navy sank the General Belgrano in 1982, killing about 2,000 people the Sun's triumphalism (and all the other tabloids, I've not read one since) sickened me. This was during the "discussions" between the UK and Argentina over the ownership of the Falkland/Malvinas islands.

The Sun has not improved since. Sadly, it sets our penal policy nowadays and has a strong emphasis on revenge as the point of justice. I work with a lot of people who were sent by courts into the mental health system. Thanks to scum like Murdoch (Any of the vile clan), they will never get out regardless of their danger or otherwise to society.

Just about all of their vile outlets are used to propagate a frightening agenda which will profit Rupert and his vile family - not society. What really scares me is that anyone at all doesn't see through their horrible agenda.

"owns the Times, the Sunday Times and Sun newspapers"

Sorry you can't call The Sun a 'newspaper'! Seriously, a publication who's most popular story today is entitled "I had walk with a yeti on holiday"??

It will be a total sham and a waste of time.

Votes are being sold for $10 a pop, nobody expects the elections to be fair so whoever wins election results will be contested, election ink safeguard is washable (then again, that may save some people's fingers), 13-year-olds vote, there are reports of people being hanged for voting and somehow Britney Spears is registered to vote.

But yeah. Sure...
A map and a bunch of anonymous SMS messages will SURELY fix all that.

Actually, he's not the dad. Here: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2435283.ece

This is the UK where kids are becoming parents at 13. They're in the maternity ward before they get sex-education. And those are the good kids, the other ones are knifing each other.

Hey, as long as they include this kind of hard-hitting news, I'm sure there will be some people who will pay for a subscription.

Well, I didn't want to drag the rest of the story into it and make the off-topic post as complicated as the original scenario was, but the guy was (a) Black, (b) tripping on acid, and (c) stark naked. The girl was okay with him getting shot, because she was the girlfriend of a good friend of mine (my best friend actually, to the point where we call each other "brother by a different mother") and he'd already beat the fuck out of the guy for hitting on his girl. While the Black guy had been a friend of hers (and my brother as well), that had ended when he started hitting on her. As a White man, if I found a Black teenager naked outside my daughter's window in the wee hours, I'd blow his ass away too (I'd do the same for am unknown, naked White guy as well, but being of a different race only compounds the idiocy of his actions...I know the politically correct and socially/scientifically ignorant crowd can't accept this, but for many reasons - especially genetic and social ones - I do not condone miscegenation; before everyone starts screaming "racist!", I have friends and colleagues of all races, but they share my opinion of interracial "romance" - it leads to nothing but problems, often violent or fatal ones...recent example : http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2539094/Model-Amy-Leigh-Barnes-chilling-999-call.html). Besides, this wasn't even romance. She didn't want him there, and he had the misfortune of waking her father. Though it might be a good thing, considering the fact that no one really knew whether his intentions were just to visit her or if they were more sinister than just being wasted and annoying.

I felt somewhat bad for the guy, because I don't think he meant any real harm and it's been my experience that Black people don't do well on acid (every single Black person I've ever known that took acid wigged out and dig dumb shit to one degree or another on LSD-25). But what he did was very stupid (not to mention creepy), high or not, and he paid the price for it. I didn't shed any tears (about a year later) for some guys that my brother and I sold acid to that tried to rob a Burger King while tripping and ended up a in a shoot-out with the law that killed several of them, either, so why would I have a problem with it?

Do stupid things and pay the price for the it. Pretty simple concept.

Can't argue with the facts...

Actually, freedom of speech is guaranteed in the Bill of Rights, 1689. However, keeping a freedom requires the populace to care about it. In Britain's case everyone's too busy hating Europeans (then going on holiday there), being paranoid about jails full of paedophiles and being scared of terrorists and KnifeCrime(tm) to worry about the finer points of freedom of speech. Obviously these two are a pair of scum bags, so no-one cares to defend them, for what it's worth I believe their freedom of speech should be guaranteed, but try telling that to the populace.

Here are a few ideas of w h o, and wh at, might be responsible for this situation. :)

The 1285 Statute of Westminster even gave the English people the right (actually it was a requirement) to bear arms, it was due to this -- and technologically 'advanced' longbows -- that we managed to trounce those ghaslty frogs at Agincourt, but that's another story.

Dont you think your over-reacting a little bit? RF is very heavily policed because of the shere dependancy we have on it. Take this story for example http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article78725.ece apparently this sort of thing is not uncommon but it raises the question why was it not operating on one of the FFA bands like it should have been.
It may seem a little heavy handed but when this happens it must be resolved in a very tight time frame and i know for certain that i wouldn't deny entry to an officer who believed some rf interference was coming from my property. I'm sure i'm like most people that don't want a mid-air collision over my house.

I agree... It appears most Americans are more easily offended by even mild nudity than by horrible acts of violence.

The newspaper that Apple didn't like, The Sun , is the best selling newspaper in Britain, available from every corner shop and supermarket.

And soon accessing the website will cost money, so the app is moot anyway.

The reason that the wall street journal is able to charge for access to its website is that it comes up with quality articles based on independent reporting that people are willing to pay for.

With articles like Dont tax bigger boobs during crunch The sun is Murdoch's only hope to achieve a business model similar to that of the Wall Street Journal.

I agree... It appears most Americans are more easily offended by even mild nudity than by horrible acts of violence.

The newspaper that Apple didn't like, The Sun , is the best selling newspaper in Britain, available from every corner shop and supermarket.

They have a special website for their page 3 content.

If you want more topless women in your newspaper, try the Daily Star. If even that has too much writing, there's always the Sunday Sport and Daily Sport.

(Three of those websites are blocked as "Adult - Sexually Explicit" at my work, which should give you a clue.)

"The article is from the Daily Mail, hardly a good source."

Why aren't they a good source? They're the second best selling mainstream newspaper in Britain. You're going to have to elaborate on this one.

The best-selling daily newspaper in Britain is The Sun. Here (NWS) is a "story" linked from their front page. They will have printed those pictures on Page 3. At least half of the stories on the (web) front page are about women (preferably topless), sport, celebrities (especially the Royal Family), and sex. A story about a topless sporting celebrity having sex with a member of the Royal Family is guaranteed front-page material for a week.

That's what sells in the UK, not accurate, in-depth news.

The Daily Mail doesn't have topless models but does have celebrities and royals (and more sport than the more serious papers).

Is that why they're not "a good source"? You don't like their editorial stance?

No. The Daily Telegraph has a similar political stance (UK right-wing), but I'll trust their reporting a lot more than the Daily Mail.

I would call the style of Daily Mail reporting inflammatory.

Compare the current front page headline articles (first few sentences):
Mail: "Six children at same school hit by deadly swine flu virus as British toll hits 27
Britain's toll from the deadly swine flu virus has hit 27 as nine new cases were confirmed by the Health Protection Agency. Seven children, five at the same school, were among the latest sufferers diagnosed with the killer disease."
Hit! deadly! hits! deadly! hit! sufferers! killer!

Telegraph: "Nine new cases of swine flu in Britain with five at one leading school
Nine new cases of swine flu have been confirmed in Britain with five of them at one of Britain's leading independent [private] schools. The outbreak happened among Year 7 pupils at Alleyn's School in Dulwich, south east London, which became the fourth UK school to be closed down because of the H1N1 virus. There are now 27 confirmed cases in the UK. Of the nine confirmed today seven were spread by person-to-person contact among people who had not travelled to Mexico or the US."
Cases, confirmed, outbreak.

Mail: "Despite fears a second 'wave' of the killer virus could erupt later this year, Hilary Benn admitted the disease looks less serious than first thought."
Ouch, criticising the politician for being cautious! The Telegraph's article on this isn't critical of anyone -- in fact, it seems to support the caution.

"The article is from the Daily Mail, hardly a good source."

Why aren't they a good source? They're the second best selling mainstream newspaper in Britain. You're going to have to elaborate on this one.

The best-selling daily newspaper in Britain is The Sun. Here (NWS) is a "story" linked from their front page. They will have printed those pictures on Page 3. At least half of the stories on the (web) front page are about women (preferably topless), sport, celebrities (especially the Royal Family), and sex. A story about a topless sporting celebrity having sex with a member of the Royal Family is guaranteed front-page material for a week.

That's what sells in the UK, not accurate, in-depth news.

The Daily Mail doesn't have topless models but does have celebrities and royals (and more sport than the more serious papers).

Is that why they're not "a good source"? You don't like their editorial stance?

No. The Daily Telegraph has a similar political stance (UK right-wing), but I'll trust their reporting a lot more than the Daily Mail.

I would call the style of Daily Mail reporting inflammatory.

Compare the current front page headline articles (first few sentences):
Mail: "Six children at same school hit by deadly swine flu virus as British toll hits 27
Britain's toll from the deadly swine flu virus has hit 27 as nine new cases were confirmed by the Health Protection Agency. Seven children, five at the same school, were among the latest sufferers diagnosed with the killer disease."
Hit! deadly! hits! deadly! hit! sufferers! killer!

Telegraph: "Nine new cases of swine flu in Britain with five at one leading school
Nine new cases of swine flu have been confirmed in Britain with five of them at one of Britain's leading independent [private] schools. The outbreak happened among Year 7 pupils at Alleyn's School in Dulwich, south east London, which became the fourth UK school to be closed down because of the H1N1 virus. There are now 27 confirmed cases in the UK. Of the nine confirmed today seven were spread by person-to-person contact among people who had not travelled to Mexico or the US."
Cases, confirmed, outbreak.

Mail: "Despite fears a second 'wave' of the killer virus could erupt later this year, Hilary Benn admitted the disease looks less serious than first thought."
Ouch, criticising the politician for being cautious! The Telegraph's article on this isn't critical of anyone -- in fact, it seems to support the caution.

And in a related news article, The Sun reports that Google Earth's new ocean-floor imagery reveals the location of the lost city of Atlantis on the ocean floor west of the Canary Islands. A photo of Patrick Duffy is used as an illustration, and a reaction commentary by none other than Plato accompanies the story. You can't make shit like this up... because The Sun does it for you.

The actual article: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2284752.ece

Plus there was the link to this on the article page. Talk about wetness!

I have no idea why the parent post was modded "Troll"?? This is what concerns me more than anything. The Daily Fail will sensationalise anything, and unfortunately it's read by a lot of old people and a lot of people who are marginally too intelligent to read The Sun but not intelligent enough to realise the Daily Mail is no better. People who will turn out in record numbers to vote for any legislation that will hang hoodies and expel immigrants.

Light bulbs...not a particularly sensational story right? Wrong. Apparently. My grandad now believes it's every citizen's right to be able to buy "traditional" light bulbs, especially as those new-fangled light bulbs can give you The Skin Cancer!

The 70 and 80 year olds around today may have fought in the war, but they didn't know why. They were at war with The Hun and that's about as far as there understanding of world-politics ever went. "The 60s" as you say, was an era of love and peace, but think about all the 25-40 year olds who couldn't shirk responsibilities like work and family to discover theirselves. While Mary Quant was stirring up the Kings Road, and The Beatles were visiting the Maharaja, they were working to put food on the table. So the dissonance between those two things is actually quite easy to understand. And don't forget, anyone over 18 between 1939 and 1952 will have had to carry an ID Card, as they see it, if you have nothing to hide, then why should you have anything to fear?

I don't believe any police were ever tried for the murder of that Brazilian electrician, were they?

Tried? Yes, twice. Just not in the right way.

It was abundantly clear that he had that 'Doctor-ness' about him

He certainly does look weird, in a sickly, pervy way. Perhaps that will translate into an intriguing character, if they intend to write some episodes involving sex with corpses.

This is extremely old news - The injectable bone story was covered by the Sun two years ago....

Imagine a Beowulf cluster of one of those, controlling a Beowulf cluster of these!

is the world leader in creepy technology

Keep making the mistake. The guy in you Sun's article is a Vietnamese origin and he's living in Canada.

is the world leader in creepy technology

... except that was done in Canada
... and that person isn't even Japanese, so what does that have to do with Japan again?

is the world leader in creepy technology

i mean, does /. really have nothing better to put up on the front page than fluff pieces from The Sun? this kind of tripe might impress technologically illiterate housewives, but it doesn't belong on a site purportedly aimed at nerds.

that's why it's in idle?

that part did seem rather awkward. it doesn't help that the article tries to play up the capabilities of the robot.

"She is always happy to clean the house for "husband" Le, help with his accounts or get him a drink.

right... how does she get him a drink or clean the house without being able to walk? i don't see any wheels attached to her in any of the photos. typical media sensationalism...

this story seems to be more hype than substance. it's just a creepy nerd who's added speakers and some actuators to his Real Doll(tm). i don't see any technology demonstrated here that hasn't already existed in some form or another in various children's toys from the 80's and 90's.

i mean, does /. really have nothing better to put up on the front page than fluff pieces from The Sun? this kind of tripe might impress technologically illiterate housewives, but it doesn't belong on a site purportedly aimed at nerds.

um, ever seen a ford focus?

perhaps you see what you want to see

Hey, absolutely everything causes cancer (according to the Sun. This is just one of my favourite ridiculous headlines).

Well, except stand by and watch kids drown.

Except they didn't stand by and watch him drown, and a lot of newspapers printed apologies for saying they had. When they arrived they couldn't see the boy (http://www.septicisle.info/labels/Peaches%20Geldof.html, http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article1066157.ece). So: jump in and swim where exactly, if they can't see where he is?

Of course, "CSPO's are rubbish" makes for better sensationalism than "CSPO's do just the right thing", so you can be forgiven for missing the reporting of the fact that the original story was bogus.

ahh, so you're one of those that believe it is Bush's fault Russia did this. Watching much Russian state tv lately? Do you believe the Earth is flat, too?

How about we say that what the Russians did was, well, the Russian's fault. And your "quagmire" crap is looking weaker and weaker these days. We're the evil ones, right? Because when we went into Iraq, we were looting and robbing banks?

No. It's not a typo as a little time on Google News shows. The original source story was printing in the Sun. Online copy here. Of course The Sun is not exactly a reliable new source, but it should do for a xenophobic little shit like you.

Well, since Slashdot is now getting its stories from blogs that seem to be finding their 'well sourced' information in UK lowest common denominator tabloid The Sun:

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/motors/phil_lanning/article1314732.ece

we might as well link to their story about Jet Packs!:

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article744857.ece

Well, since Slashdot is now getting its stories from blogs that seem to be finding their 'well sourced' information in UK lowest common denominator tabloid The Sun:

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/motors/phil_lanning/article1314732.ece

we might as well link to their story about Jet Packs!:

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article744857.ece

Then stop reading The Sun!

From the scary-but-true dept. I don't know if you read Fark, but they had a guy on there who was barred from entering a plane because he was wearing a Transformers shirt.

On the offending shirt, the transformer's arm was a gun (drawn, completely cartoon-ey), but that was enough for Security to bar him from entering the plane unless he changed his shirt.

Read it and weep for our world:

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article1234193.ece

Dave

Using this for this. Would make it titillating.

I've worked on a number of large sites such as that: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/ = hand coded. http://www.thesun.co.uk/ = hand coded. http://www.nhs.uk/ = hand coded. http://www.metrofrance.com/ = hand coded. I could go on but I think you get the idea. Sure those sites use CMS systems and templates that spit out the HTML but it was all hand coded in a text editor before being added to the back end. I would guess that this is actually far more common than using a WYSIWG editor for HTML & CSS creation these days.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article902014.ece

Some kids may produce intereference that blocks outbound RF. Better to use tags hung through pierced ears.

A restraining order against an anonymous coward on Slashdot? Heh. Almost always, the people assigned to these sorts of duties are doing an "ammends project" to be allowed back "onlines" with the Cthurch of Scientology. They seem to get picked for the nasty jobs because (a) they're deniable as working for Scientology, (b) they're frequently judgment-proof because they have no assets or they're so dubious in sanity that no one would believe any liable and no damages could be proven. (There's also the danger that Scientology would help out in the legal fight in order to make it as time-consuming and expensive for a critic as possible. "The purpose of a lawsuit is to harass", in the words of L. Ron Hubbard.)

It's not worth my time because I can do more to help expose the organization in an hour of working on my media references page than wasting months in court.

It's no accident that he Godwin'ed himself immediately. When Scientology starts flinging poo at anyone who dares criticize the "most ethical organization on the planet" (their words), they always reach for Hitler and the Nazis first: Germany (which is why Cruise had recent troubles there), psychologists and psychiatrists, newspapers, journalists, Germany again (Bringing your kids along to a Nazi uniformed protest is weird by anyone's standard yes?), and probably a lot more. It's no wonder that some people occasionally fling it back, where it seems to sit better (and when the poo sits...):

*"[..] This is nothing compared to what will happen when we start taking SPs out of the government. They are rightly afraid. So don't you be. Tomorrow belongs to us. Inevitably there are bumps in the road."
L. Ron Hubbard

Behead those who insult Islam [Picture]

London protesters: 'Behead those who insult prophet'

Placards calling for anyone who insults the prophet Mohammed to be beheaded have been waved during an angry protest outside the Danish Embassy in London.

Hundreds of Muslims gathered there yelled anti-British chants to protest against the recent publication of cartoons satirising the prophet Mohammed.

They met after Friday prayers outside Regent's Park mosque in central London and marched through the streets towards the Danish embassy on Sloane Street.

Scores of them brandished angry placards, one declaring: "Free speech go to hell."

They chanted religious slogans in Arabic, paying homage to Allah and the prophet.

Among those protesting was 26-year-old Bushra Varakat, a student from Egham, Surrey. She said: "This is our prophet, he did a lot of things for humankind, both Muslim and non-Muslim.

"We don't know why these silly people use these cartoons unless they were showing how much they hate us.

"We have to defend our prophet otherwise Allah will punish us. We will not accept this ridicule."

Ms Varakat said Muslims respected Christian figures such as Jesus and Moses and believed that they were also prophets.

But, she said, Mohammed was the last prophet and therefore the most important to Muslims.

She said the European media who had published the pictures knew how much it would upset the Muslim community.

I found this site which has some examples.

Slashdot readers interested in the news that the NYT is "free" might be interested in other free as in beer newspapers. Who could possibly resist the temptation to visit the best newspaper in the English language - The Sun. http://www.thesun.co.uk/
You can check out if it is going to be a Zoe McConnell day, which legend has it, augurs good luck.
The Miami Herald http://www.miamiherald.com/ is free too and available in a Spanish edition. Speigel (the English version) http://www.spiegel.de/international/ is free too, and the Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/ and the Telegraph http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ are also free. Oh and the Independent http://www.independent.co.uk/ which could once claim to be the finest newspaper in the English language is free also. Robert Fisk appears in that one, I believe he finds some sympathy with some slash dotters. Private Eye http://www.private-eye.co.uk/ remains annoyingly non-free for cheapskates like myself and neither is Viz http://www.viz.co.uk/- which used to be funny once. Top Tip number eleven is quite funny. A very brief trawl of the internet should probably result in an appropriate newspaper for every possible shade of opinion.

For those not aware of how British politics works: Blair (and now Brown's) government both follow what is known as the 'tabloid agenda', the most read tabloid in the world is 'The Sun' this is owned by Rupert Murdoch. Heads of the Labour government regularly meet with Rupert Murdoch, in fact Murdoch was known as the hidden member of Tony Blair's government. Don't think Brown is any better though: an interview (sadly I think that's been taken off-air so you'll have to trust me) with the editor of The Sun revealed that Rupert Murdoch often used to joke about having to visit both Number 10 and Number 11 whenever he was in the UK.

As the BBC is competition to Murdoch he would like to see it shutdown. This is natural. Unfortunately for him the BBC is not controlled by the government, but the BBC Trust is. So when the government comes out with weird statements like:

there is evidence that certain aspects of the proposals may have a negative effect on investment in similar commercial services which would not be in the long-term public interest.

It's pretty obvious to me who's behind the complaints. The people--whom the government are supposed to serve--just want the BBC to be the best it can be, and if private media can't keep up? Then it shouldn't be in business! Particularly when considering how these words are touting 'public interest' then enforcing the use of DRM? Public interest my arse. In the words of Hugo Swire (shadow culture secetary):

We're going to have to see if this trust has teeth and the iPlayer is the test... There are companies who feel threatened by the BBC.

So as usual, it's all big company interests. I somehow doubt that the BBC Trust will listen to the Open Source Consortium. Not that I think they shouldn't try, however it's unlikely they'll be able to remove their heads from Rupert Murdoch's arsehole long enough to listen. :)