Slashdot Mirror

http://wilwheaton.typepad.com/wwdnbackup/2007/11/autographed-gui.html
Guitar hero controller signed by clever nick name, gabe, tycho, a buncha people,
proceeds to child's play.

By the way, I know just who to ask.

And go straight to electronic tagging?

Perhaps you and the GP should read TFA and become aware of some of the issues here.
Oh, and for the "it's the Register, pooh pooh" crowd, the original FA was frist psoted on Security Focus.

For those who haven't seen the movie in a while... Dynamo ain't exactly sexy.

Its blatantly obvious that Sam Hiser, proponent of the blog post that sparked this frenzy, doesn't know jack shit about the real specs of ODF, read the comments on the blog I linked, they more than make the point (aside from the initial long-winded comment attempting to discredit anyone with enough common sense to disagree with Hiser, its a nice try but anyone with a hint of mental forethought and reasoning ability, can see right through the propaganda). Twenty minutes of actual research would've saved Hiser and the ODFoundation a lot of grief.

Additionally, if this isn't some backroom Microsoft inspired posturing, I'd be VERY surprised. The very essence of "CDF" in the way Hiser frames his argument is compatibility with MS OOXML. Who gives a rat's ass about specific compatibility within the framework of a particular document directly with another type of document, thats not the point of the whole exercise the odf format is attempting. The ODF is OPEN for any application to implement 100%, that allows for clearer communication between applications, and as a result, real living people.

Cheers.

http://teblog.typepad.com/david_tebbutt/2007/07/the-last-one-pe.html

But, everybody runs for Hokey-Pokey!

Down in the prison number nine-nine-nine
he's a-working like a bee in a hive
He's still dreaming of Hokey Pokey
Helps to keep that boy alive
Helps to keep that boy alive...

It's about the FBI pulling Ministry of Truth revisionism on online court records. YRO actually is an appropriate category. Your right to know.

True. And more worrisome, the 2nd Circuit trying MinTruth tricks at the FBI's request, and evidently without due consideration of the legal issues for the redaction. The minor picadillo of a coerced confession by the FBI isn't very happy news, but it's not the original offense but the attempted coverup that really makes 'em all look bad.

Is a great theoretical concept, but unfortunately it only makes sense in the context of assuming that everybody really thinks for themselves.

Is a great theoretical concept, but unfortunately it only makes sense in the context of assuming that everybody really thinks for themselves.

There is a part of me hoping this article gets discussed by Dilbert creator/evolution denier Scott Adams, and another part dreading it. link

They're the folks who claimed that their Cease and Desist letter regarding bad online reviews of one of their clients was copyrighted and thus couldn't be posted online: http://pubcit.typepad.com/clpblog/2007/10/dont-publish-th.html

They also proudly represent spammers: http://www.cybertriallawyer.com/commercial-email-spam

Whoever modded offtopic, this is from the public citizen blog. its not the best, but its not offtopic.
http://pubcit.typepad.com/clpblog/2007/10/you-hereby-agre.html

What you all need to realize is that this would have happened with or without the idiotic "prank" the kid pulled. U.S. citizens are routinely attacked in their own homes (in law, their "castles") and killed when they defend their family.

After trending upward for decades, album sales are falling. Digital music sales make up some of the difference, but not all of it. http://bigpicture.typepad.com/comments/2005/12/down_7_for_05.html

Either people are taking ownership of less music by all methods or they're substituting pirating for purchasing. The first is possible - people may only be buying digital singles rather than full albums - but I find the second to be much more likely.

I found photos of the actual newspaper articles here:

http://britainandamerica.typepad.com/britain_and_america/2007/10/british-judge-f.html

I still disagree with his position based on the precedent Congress allowed with the MPAA and what they push at children. As a column by Gregg Easterbrook pointed out this week, we have an interesting hypocrisy when it comes to our media (Do a find for "MPAA" to skip to the relevant part). The example he used is that movie studios are making an effort to remove on-screen smoking, while retaining the grisly and horrific on-screen torture/death of teenage girls. So the message we seem to be saying is if you want to torture a human being, that's fine...but don't you dare smoke while doing it! Similar issue in terms of video games...it's okay to see someone get shot...but pressing X to do it rather than watching it is simply too much!

The problem is much deeper than videogames and their "interactivity", the problem is that the government has allowed parents to abdicate their responsibilities as parents by attempting to protect the children FOR the parents. In the long-term, this encourages lazy parenting where they DON'T pay attention to what their kids are exposed to because "the government will decide what's safe and what isn't" which inevitably causes "Innocent Little Johnny" to see boobs somewhere and the parents throw a hissyfit. This in turn drives a further "need" for government regulation and you end up in a slippery slope further and further down the line.

Another blog by Mr. Wil Wheaton (Hi CleverNickname!) points out that he got carded trying to buy Dead Rising. Now, I'd bet his not ever carded going into an R rated movie, or at a bar, or if he was to buy cigarettes...any of these activities arguably being as "dangerous" to kids as anything else, but they card him to buy a video game?

This is what it boils down to for me: No state or national government has any business trying to legislate morality, period. That is a responsibility for the local communities to decide upon for themselves, not have crammed down its throat from on high. Our country would be a lot better off if the people in Washington, D.C. worried about what is happening to our economy and foreign relations rather than worrying about what videogames people are playing and where people go on the Internet.

Of course, that's based on the silly ideal that our government is there to serve anyone but itself...but one can dream, can't they?

... this is still a bad move for Roger Ailes & Co.

Some people can throw too much emphasis on Carly's involvement with the "Investi-Gate" scandal (where she authorized the investigations to pinpoint who was leaking privileged information to the outside). She may have authorized the investigations, but in a bit of turnabout, she herself became a subject of her own boardroom's paranoia; the actual (mis)handling of the investigation fell largely to Chairwoman Patricia Dunn, who was indicted as a result. (At best, she ended up being a scapegoat.)

From a leadership perspective, I compare Ms. Fiorina with former U.S. President Jimmy Carter: untried, uninspiring, and unimaginative. Her guidance of HP during Investi-Gate at the corporate political level can be compared with Carter's decision-making during the Iran hostage crisis at the government political level. She essentially authorized the board to "do something," and then failed to keep control of the situation and take decisive action when necessary.

Fox News is based on fast-paced, hard-hitting, "damn-the-torpedoes"-style reporting, where journalists try to wrap a riveting story around a collection of often incomplete or unverified facts (and so are most other 24/7 news channels).

Given her otherwise okay but hardly noteworthy performance in leading HP, I'm not sure she's the one for the job...

And I love this ringing endorsement that appears on every single sub-page that he has linked at the top of the main page:

"Thank goodness for John and his team. These big law firms just don't understand how to handle technology litigation. With their trial record, technology expertise, and legal and business perspective, they have been a godsend...."

-- Internet Content Company CEO.

Yeah, it was Larry Niven.

I wrote about it in my blog, thusly:

Around 1987 or 1988, I saw Larry Niven at a convention. I was officially there to be the Star Trek guy, but I didn't have to go on stage for a few hours, and rather than sit in some suite with the rest of the Star Trek people who didn't want to get too close to the masses, I grabbed my backpack and wandered around the convention as nerdy fanboy number 42.

I bought a ton of crap in the dealer's room (mostly FASA sourcebooks, and some bootleg anime videos IIRC) and on my way down a hallway toward the gaming room, I saw this guy who was dressed in a Space Shuttle flight suit (blue) sitting behind a table that had some books on it.

Holy shit, it was Larry Niven.

I walked up to him and the conversation went something like this:

        Me: OMG YOU'RE LARRY NIVEN!

        Him: OMG YOU'RE WESLEY ON STAR TREK!

        Both: CAN I HAVE YOUR AUTOGRAPH!

        Both: YOU WANT MY AUTOGRAPH?!

        Both: YES!

        Me: I don't have a pen.

        Him: It's okay, I have several.

He pulled a pen out of the shoulder pen-holding pocket thing on his blue Space Shuttle flight suit. I was so out-nerded, it wasn't even funny. I tried to counter-attack by producing my own copy of Ringworld that I had in my backpack, because I carried it with me everywhere in those days, just in case, you know, I felt like reading it. (I am not exaggerating at all. I loved -- and continue to love -- that book that much. For reals.)

Don't mix entertainment with history

No...
They are called Fatwa's (See Salmon Rushdie)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_well-known_fatwas#Fatwas_promoting_violence_against_a_particular_individual

and Jihad's
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2006/11/islamic_jihad_i.html ...the Islam Defenders' Front says it is religiously permissible to murder ...

So that their religion will dominate
http://atheism.about.com/od/islamicextremism/a/daralharb.htm

And well, just kill you because you upset us.
http://2008vote.wordpress.com/2007/07/04/islam-versus-islam-violence-within-islamic-community-is-it-not-a-price-to-pay-for-hating-the-world/

Or even sillier, let's kill a lot of our own people because you upset us.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4684652.stm
At least five people have been killed in Afghanistan as protests against European cartoons mocking the Prophet Muhammad swept across the country.

Oh... yea... almost forgot.
They do incidentally set things on fire when they get mad
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/02/05/cartoon.protests/index.html
Muslims burning embassies.

http://www.biblenetworknews.com/africa/112202_nigeria.html
Muslim mobs burn churches, over 100 killed, Christians retaliate ...

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/014647.php
School principal and teacher killed, bodies burnt in Thailand's Muslim south...

Of course, exploding random people who happen to be near other faintly valid targets* is more their lines. That and kidnapping random people and beheading them.

---
* while I don't want our young americans to die, I recognize that they are in a foreign country and are legitimate military targets. However, the children near them, the random shopkeepers (who are also islamic) are not valid targets by any shred of the imagination.

---
We get the message- piss christians off and they will complain, march, vote, etc. Some people that call themselves christians will murder but the rest of christians will be shocked and say it is a bad thing. In fact christians are much more likely to beat the hell out of each other for wearing a Teasip shirt into an OU bar (and it was an oklahoma church deacon at that!) than over a religious issue. And I say that as a non-christian.

But if I piss off a islamic people, those that do violence to me will be silently supported by the islamic community. Around the entire world, they repeatedly get caught bombing, murdering, kidnapping, etc. people. If it goes on, we really do have a war of civilizations setting up.

And for that reason, I'm glad that they are anti-science.

"Instead of addressing the concerns the Video Professor has decided to take the litigious route."

No, they brought their claims to civil court under tort law. Tort exists precisely for the purpose of settling claims like this.

The original complaint, which is buried (thanks to linking to a blog, which links to a blog, etc...why can't you people cite original sources? Christ), asserts that customers, or a competitor, are maliciously posting reviews (ie, reverse astroturfing) with false information.

It's not up to a bunch of yahoos on the interbutt to decide if they meet the burden of proof in a civil case (which is much lower than a criminal case) on these two issues. The court decides whether to give them a court order seeking records on their posters.

It's also up to Video Professor to prove that the posts are false. If they are, guess what kiddies! That's libel, and yeah, shockingly, it is NOT legal to public false information maliciously.

In short, stop bitching and let the judiciary do their job, which is to dismiss the lawsuit if it is frivolous, or let it proceed to discovery, etc. Do any of you realize how stupid you sound complaining about tort law, which has existed as a key part of societies for several centuries, almost the world over?

The thing that has irritated me about this is that for a very long time, the FireFox leadership has insisted that there where no memory issues

I don't know if there's a need for "official" extensions ...

See my small cartoon:
http://geekandpoke.typepad.com/geekandpoke/2007/09/the-podnoses---.html

Bye,
Oliver

Looks like that argument hinges on that idea that there is no consideration. But one can argue that there is consideration. In exchange for GPL'ed code, you agree to provide/release your code under the same terms. Basically a trade of intellectual property.

Now who the beneficiary would be is an interesting question in that the beneficiary is the "community". The community as a third party is kind of vague. But no more vague than terms like "public" or "public domain" or "public trust". The specific community for a GPL'ed work is probably less vague than those since there are identifiable leaders, members and places where they convene.

Finally, here is the obligatory link. This one provides a reason why someone could make a case for the GPL as a contract: http://hietanen.typepad.com/copyfraud/2005/06/creative_common.html

See the first response.

"Show me one piece of evidence indicating that UN weapons inspectors dismantled ONE piece of weapons making technology between 1991 and 2003."

They couldn't find their ass with both hands. They had iraqi-made phosgene laying about for the janitor to find in the UN building. Last month.

http://righttruth.typepad.com/right_truth/2007/08/wmd-phosgene-fr.html - has a summary of many of the reports

They dismantled enough to hold onto a piece of those WMDs that "never existed".

... see:
http://geekandpoke.typepad.com/geekandpoke/2007/09/bloggers-social.html

Bye,
Oliver

Add to this the fact that their heads are firmly planted in their rectal cavities and the whole picture is complete.

If you don't want to (or can't) sign up, perhaps a review is what you need.

A look inside SpiralFrog...

Inside SpiralFrog Beta

SpiralFrog... Mixed Reviews

And many more.

The most expensive of which is this.

I don't know who writes your material, but it is top class all the same. What a shame someone has to spend their time torturing the language just to earn a crust .. :)

"OOXML is ECMA standardized .. Yes, there are problems with the standard, but they are all minor"

'The goal of the Technical Committee is to produce a formal standard for office productivity applications within the Ecma International standards process which is fully compatible with the Office Open XML Formats '

"The OOXML XSDs are not proprietary. Microsoft has made them freely available .."

'Like the specification itself, the license contains a seIf-contradiction: it is a promise that is not, in practise, a promise'

"MSIE is "tied to the OS" for the same reasons that Konqueror is tied to KDE; it is a shared library reused by the Explorer shell to provide similar services. It's called modularity, and it's a good design. This was an inevitable result"

'modularity' must have a different meaning in your universe where in the modular MSIE can't be removed without breaking the OS. Konqueror can be totally removed from this Ubuntu or not even installed, without breaking the OS.

MSIE was first tied to the OS to kill NETSCAPE, remember to cut off their oxygen supply. There was no valid technical reason for doing so. That they later on buried part of it in the OS regardless of the security implications merely demonstrates the priorities at Redmond at the time.

See my small cartoon:
http://geekandpoke.typepad.com/geekandpoke/2007/09/intelligent-dmc.html

Bye,
Oliver

You can get guitars without strings.

Oh really? Proof? Maybe you ought to report that to someone if you have information of a national security nature. Or are you just using vague scare tactics to push policy?

Well, first there's Beslan.

Proof? I have no more proof than the alarmists had on 9-10-01. I do have my reasons for concern, however:
here
here
here
here
and
here

(of course, consider the sources as always!)

I've been looking for this type of thing since Beslan. Glenn Beck is reporting on it all week. Not that I expect you to be a Glenn Beck fan or anything, but his points on this are valid, if a bit alarmist.

Really? Hell to pay? Voluntary resignations and the firing/court martials of low level NCOs is hardly hell being paid. Maybe if someone responsible for OKing various abuses were ever charged, or [gasp] impeached then your sentiment would be comforting. From what we have seen thus far, a wrist slap is the most anyone has gotten. Case in point: although the FISA court was the ONLY legal way to tap certain international calls it was sidestepped completely by this administration. In total defiance of the law. Name one conviction of someone involved in ordering or executing those wiretaps without going through FISA. Zero accountability. It matters not whether the President, his legal council, or anyone other than SCOTUS thought the law should be different. It was defined, it was breached as defined, not one bit of accountability.

There is something more powerful than SCOTUS, POTUS and even COTUS (Congress). It's the Press. I linked to the Clinton trying to abuse political opponents by using their FBI files against them and they got caught. Just like if a Prez tries to use a wire tap against a political opponent for political or other nefarious purposes will also be caught and tried in the court of public opinion, much like we are doing here.

Ooops... I meant to be a smart alec, but also to be informative... then I hit "submit" instead of "preview" before I was finished. Here's are two interesting articles, submitted for serious consideration on the (off topic) question that you raised.

Paul Krugman: Death by Insurance
Million-Dollar Murray

Mr. Krugman is an economist and writes regularly and eloquently about health care issues. You may or may not agree with his policy recommendations, but his analysis of the issues with our current system is always interesting. Health care is more expensive than it probably should be for a few reasons. One is that our system in the United States is based on the concept of health insurance. This drives up costs in several ways, some of which are explored by the two articles above.

People seem to believe that lawyers get a free ride. It isn't true.
A lawyer who gets caught breaking the law or violating the Bar's
regulations will be punished. The thing is that lawyers, being
lawyers, are adept at staying out of trouble even if by only a
hair. Boies is particularly notorious for skating near the edge.

The California Bar uses most of its budget to discipline/disbar/etc. lawyers.
http://www.courthousenews.com/editorials/Policzer/ policzer140.htm

Here's an abuse of process case:
http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/family_law/2006/0 4/case_law_develo_35.html

A little casual googling will find you thousands of lawyers who have been
punished/suspended/disbarred. BTW, there is a difference between playing
hardball in a case that has some merit and bringing forward a case that
has no merit. Judge K. is pissed and his rulings make it clear. Take for
example his warning to SCO that they should quit trying to argue things that
he has already decided. Also consider his previous comments about the lack
of evidence they produced after an amazing amount of discovery. AllParadox
thinks there will be sanctions and he has a heck of a lot more legal experience
than either of us.

The Wikipedia lithium phosphate battery link with better formatting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium_iron_phosphat e_battery/ The Energy Blog is a source of some good up to date information about automotive power developments using safer lithium phosphate LiFePO4 batteries: The Energy Blog, at http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/batterie s/ It talks about the upcoming GM Volt car, airship batteries, A123 Systems batteries (used for several years now in power tools) moving into automotive use, Altair NanoSafe batteries being used in electric pickup trucks, Mitsubishi's investment in a LiFePO4 battery manufacturing plant expected to produce vehicle batteries in 2008, and Nissan and NEC combining to invest in a safe automotive lithium ion battery manufacturing plant with products expected in 2009. In response to the many sweepingly inaccurate comments above about high energy density batteries being inherently unsafe, energy density alone does not make a chemical battery spectacularly dangerous. The LiFePO4 batteries appear to be roughly as safe as alkaline or NiMH cells (which have a broadly similar energy density per volume, but aren't as energy dense by weight). Lithium primary (disposable) 3.0v cells are not nearly as safe as alkaline and NiMH, despite being approximately as energy dense. When made with good quality control, they're reasonably OK to use in devices that use only one lithium cell. Even then, when poorly manufactured, they can overheat and burn or explode. They are not really reasonably safe to use in devices that use two or more cells in series. LiIon batteries of the conventional kind are also notably more unsafe when two or more such cells are used in series.

... did not exist in the Paradise. See my small cartoon: http://geekandpoke.typepad.com/geekandpoke/2007/09 /the-no-sin-pate.html Bye, Oliver

Uh.. monkey? I am really sorry dude.

I did hear about someone got his dreams of marrying Natalie Portman crash and burn after he saw the developed photograph, one person joined the new weighloss reality show as a result of that joke email and atleast one incident from the era of Black&White monitors where someone threatened to kill the person who started that stupid joke after facing serious identity crtisis as a result of the picture produced by that wonderful embedded camera.

Its ok. We are here for you. Beauty is only sin deep anyway.

Well, if you dont see any difference, I expect to see you in the enlistment line first thing tomorrow morning. And dont make up some BS that youve 'already served' because it will be a lie. NO SINGLE PERSON who has been in war, will make the suggestion to simply to go to war over a PC break-in.

And if you STILL dont see any difference, try the following links; http://theheretik.typepad.com/the_heretik/images/c hild_of_war_life_in_death_053005.jpg http://www.videos1.informationclearinghouse.info/i mages/seven.jpg

Those that modded this 'insightful' I would expect will be in the front of that enlistment line tomorrow, right ahead of you.

... for this great piece of software. See my small cartoon: http://geekandpoke.typepad.com/geekandpoke/2007/09 /privacy-award-f.html (But the privacy award is no joke!) Bye, Oliver

STFU.

In no way does doing their job include breaking the law and harassing a customer. Since when is it even good to harass a customer? The property rights that are paramount here, are the rights of the consumer who has exchanged legal tender for a product but then is being called into question - he has the right to refuse them permission to examine his goods.

Obviously they thought he stole something but why would you say 'Oh, follow the rules or don't shop there' you fucking AC troll. The only people that showed aggression were the attendant who blocked their vehicle from leaving, and the manager who placed himself between the car's door and the person and kept repeating his intent to inspect the customers goods. Read this in case you missed the link earlier.

Here is another blog that for the moment isn't dead and has the story.

There is a rumour that instead of wi-fi, the new iPod will use this technology:

http://lunchat.typepad.com/my_weblog/2007/01/kleer .html

thus it may not have any skype/wireless capabilities.

To quote Scot Adams' My New Favourite Response to people answering to their own mis-understandings of what he wrote, "I agree with your analysis of your hallucination."

I never said that the cost of manufacturing dictates the market price. It does however, yes, dictate whether you stay in that game or not. "Would it still sell for $1000?" is actually a damn valid question. It's the "can we stay in that game?" question, in fact.

Apple's model is based on getting a hefty part of the price subsidized by AT&T. Without it, would they still be in the game of selling iPhones? The others faced the exact same question, and that's why they didn't make an iPhone before. That's what I'm saying there.

So if you got tripped that badly by "Would it still sell for $1000?", then maybe it's you who needs to re-read those econ 101 notes. Because while you've proven that you can repeat the trivia, I see no sign of actual understanding there. _That_ question is exactly what determines whether you're in that game or not. If you don't understand that, the rest is just mechanically spewing trivia, and not much of a sign of economic wisdom.

Now it's time to use it in the SciFi stories.
See my small cartoon:
http://geekandpoke.typepad.com/geekandpoke/2007/09 /the-weapons-of-.html

Bye,
Oliver

I was never a huge Star Trek fan, so perhaps my opinion is worthless, but I really liked the proposed reboot of the Star Trek universe that Straczynski and Zabel envisioned, and wrote a treatment for. I think it's worth a read and consideration.

Cheers.

..by Scott Adams (yes, the creator of Dilbert) Slap the Monk, eh?