Slashdot Mirror

Inasmuch as these aren't actual 3d displays such as this or this, but simply stereo displays, very limited single-perspective (same as 2d) "flat-image-per-eye" technology from about 1900 or so, it seems somewhat beside the point to complain about entities marketing installation with the word "sync."

The market has already looked at the jug, poured the koolaid in its mouth, and swallowed it entirely on its own. There's little point in claiming they didn't want any koolaid.

It's 3D if the display offers more than one viewing angle, composite or not. Or to put it in a way that even the most uninformed consumer can grasp, if a one-eyed person (or a person with one eye closed) can view the object in the perspectives we expect from the real world, it's actually there to perceive. That's something worth characterizing as 3D display.

I can look for you, but it would be on one of a half dozen drives sitting on my shelf.

I was surprised they took it out of public circulation. Now you have to pay for it, or be associated with an institute that has access of the above IEEE digital library.

You should check if you have a document delivery service at your college or university, since they tend to be able to find most anything.

In regards to your comment, divergence is only a problem for ray tracing due to branching with SIMD. But the upcoming GTX 300 is going to have a MIMD hardware architecture, and we will then enter the world of photorealism. There may be some issues for CUDA at first, but I gather OpenCL is more than sufficient for the task at hand.

Here are some good papers on the subject by NVidia:
http://www.tml.tkk.fi/~timo/publications/aila2009hpg_paper.pdf
http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1413968

The second link requires access through a university network or personal account.

In regards to your last comment, I believe light fields are more significant for volumetric displays. The day I get to play with an interactive volumetric display is the day I die a happy man.

If you are interested in light fields, check out:
http://gl.ict.usc.edu/Research/3DDisplay/
http://scripts.mit.edu/~raskar/lightfields

Whatever happened to the Berger Liaw speech recognition system? One article (from 11 years ago) is here. It had the ability to track multiple (dozens) of voices simultaneously, could process speech spoken in a continuous stream, and could detect speech in very high noise environments (in some tests, human listeners could only tell what words were being spoken with 50% accuracy, and the voice recognition system could still tell what was being spoken 85% of the time ---very high noise environments like someone speaking in normal room conversation voice, beside a jet engine. The US Navy (submarine service) was a strong advocate of the technology, but I've heard very little about it since.

> It's not exactly commonplace for people to steal such things.

Oh, some of us are fairly sure that the past behavior of the record labels, when they controlled music publicity almost exclusively (and quite probably illegally) so that artists didn't feel they had much choice other than to sign their copyrights away, could very easily be called "copyright theft".

In the US, at least, the artist in some cases is able to take his copyright back.

I have found that Bing is much more accurate that Google.

Interesting. One big complaint about Google's mapping is that the street number data is usually a linear interpolation of the number range for the block. There are better data sources available for some areas. USC has an experimental geocoder which uses parcel map data; when you put in an address, you get the centroid of the parcel from land ownership records. They have full coverage for Los Angeles, and are adding other areas.

(Incidentally, how is geocoding for Japan coming along? Japan tends to assign house numbers as serial numbers, not by position, so interpolation won't work. Somebody must have collected that data for at least Tokyo and Osaka by now.)

NASA recommends (almost requires) the COCOMO model. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COCOMO I think the COCOMO model is used by the Software Engineering Institute (SEI) at Carnegie Mellon University as part of the Capability Maturity Model (CMM). As said in MANY of these posts, proper specifications/requirements are needed to estimate anything. My company uses it exclusively and we have been proven quite accurate over the course of many projects. http://sunset.usc.edu/csse/research/COCOMOII/cocomo_main.html

If anything, the RIAA members should have all their copyrights revoked for abuse, and rights should be restored to the people who created the original works, bypassing the old "work for hire" provisions that Hollywood snuck in.

Musical recordings, at least up to now, haven't been accepted as belonging to the enumerated list of types of works which are automatically works for hire if produced for compensation. Except for a very short period of time between Congress messing things up (1999) and its later pressing the "reset button" (2000).

In most cases the artist(s) assign their copyrights to the labels, and this means that soon, starting around 2013, there will be an interesting battle in the Federal courts whether or not the artists can terminate these assignments as stipulated in the 1976 Copyright Act.

See also http://yro.slashdot.org/story/09/11/15/2119230/Copyright-Time-Bomb-Set-To-Go-Off .

Holovizio is 3D with different perspective based on viewpoint, but you CANNOT walk behind the monitor and see the backside of the image

This display allows you to walk 360 degrees around it and see 3D.

Is there some wicked cool technology that's going to work on my existing (brand new) TV without glasses?

This is under development, but the challenge is that non-glasses based 3D systems need to code a large number of views - you may need to be able to generate 100 views so that everyone in the room can view 3D properly. Rather than code and transmit ~50 views, it is likely that you will have to code and transmit 3D model (think: Quake model) and render the views at the display device.

The different views can be steered in different directions using lenticular arrays, a matrix of small mirrors or other beam steering devices on the display surface, or computer-generated holograms (aka electronically controlled diffraction-grating matrix).

I've seen some 12-view lenticular displays based on a quad-HD resolution 2D LCD panel that begins to be acceptable - but I've also seen a small ~200-view, 360-degree display based on a single spinning mirror that was awesome, but wouldn't scale to a 50" screen.

USC is trying. Here's their GamePipe curriculum. It's education for entry-level programmers at EA.

It's kind of like film school courses that prepare people to be production assistants, then assistant directors, which USC also offers. That's not a path to becoming a director. It's more like a career in field logistics.

A predicted 6 degrees Celsius rise in a century? Oh, how scary! Let's introduce onerous carbon-curbing measures.

But wait, the models that make these predictions all have CO2 as the driving factor behind climate change. The historical record shows, however, that the atmospheric CO2 concentration follows changes in global temperature instead of leads it. Not surprising: higher temperature -> oceans heat up -> less dissolved CO2.

Moreover, there is a perfectly plausible alternative explanation for what is causing the rapid climate fluctuations (historically going both up and down on a fairly short timescale): the sun. If you include the EUV and X-Ray bands of the spectrum, it becomes obvious that the sun's output changes much more than it is being given credit for: http://www.usc.edu/dept/space_science/sem_data/SEM%20Data%20Graphs/SEM_1996-2009.jpg

If it was successful it's because it carried freight almost exclusively. No passenger railway in the world has ever been profitable. For examples given like Springfield's power company, only its operating expenses are profitable; the initial investment and systems upgrades will not be paid back.

It may only be conventional wisdom and have some exceptions today but the saying goes "Infrastructure is never profitable." Check out the 1996 dollar figures (add approx 40% for inflation) for some highway costs. I don't care how great or how northern you are, you cannot make a billion-dollar-per-mile highway profitable. Infrastructure, is, never, profitable.

Though there is little variation at visible and near UV wavelengths, the solar flux has a huge (factor of three) variation with the solar cycle in the extreme UV: http://www.usc.edu/dept/space_science/sem_data/SEM%20Data%20Graphs/SEM_1996-2009.jpg.

EUV and X-ray photons constitute a marked fraction of the total solar output. A much larger fraction than you would expect from the short-wavelength tail of the black-body spectrum of the solar surface. Indeed, these emissions are mostly from the corona, not the surface: EUV at 171A http://www.lmsal.com/YPOP/ProjectionRoom/latest_TRACE_171.html, and an X-ray image http://www.lmsal.com/YPOP/ProjectionRoom/latest/sxt/full/sxtdag_512.gif.

Such high-frequency photons are absorbed in the very upper layers of the atmosphere. However, roughly 50% of the secondary energetic effects (heating, fluorescence, ionization-recombination emission, etc.) will reach ground level instead of going back out into space.

If something here on earth is varying with the solar cycle, the first cause to consider is therefore the solar EUV and X-ray flux.

Endgagdet story from 2007
Siggraph 2007 video
Siggraph 2009 demo

A rather discredited expert.

If you cannot argue with the science attack the person, eh?

I want a model, skeptics. I want a scientifically valid atmospheric dynamics model that shows that increasing the amount of CO2 does not impact global climate and yet still explains our observational data.

Ah yes, shift the burden of evidence. The fact of the matter is that the climate models that favor CO2-induced anthropogenic global warming are woefully incomplete and as such not scientifically valid.

To see that that is so, take for example this observation: http://www.usc.edu/dept/space_science/sem_data/SEM%20Data%20Graphs/SEM_1996-2009.jpg. That's our Sun changing its EUV output in a broad wavelength band by a factor of three on a timescale of five or so years. That graph makes obvious that any reasonable model for global climate change will have to include the EUV part of the solar spectrum. Guess what: current models ignore the short-wavelength range of the solar spectrum.

That refers to those who attack Muslims first. The Quran explicitly states that any unbeliever who has made any agreement of peace with Muslims is immune from any form of aggression. But don't take my word for it, read the first line of chapter 9 from which you quoted:

http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/quran/009.qmt.html

There are three translations there, all say pretty much the same thing.

The Islamic rules of warfare starts off with the rule that Muslims are disallowed from casting the first stone, regardless of circumstance. There is no such thing as a "prevantative war" or "pre-emptive strike" in Islam.

Funny, you'll find both of those engaged in repeatedly by the US and Israel.

Musical recordings, at least up to now, haven't been accepted as belonging to the enumerated list of types of works which are automatically works for hire if produced for compensation.

In most cases the artist(s) assign their copyrights to the labels, and this means that soon, starting around 2013, there will be an interesting battle in the Federal courts whether or not the artists can terminate these assignments as stipulated in the 1976 Copyright Act.

According to the Coming Home page:

Possible journey activities can be based on these types of well known journey metaphors:

The labyrinth, Stations of the Cross (non-relgious), TAO, The Artist's Way, Healing walks and paths

How exactly does one have "non-religious" Stations of the Cross? Taoism, at least, can be approached as a philosophy rather than a religion, but I can't think of any approach to venerating the torture and execution of some ancient rabbi that doesn't involve a belief that the poor guy was some sort of religious sacrifice.

If the idea is that religious imagery can be useful in treating PTSD, well, fine, let's discuss if that's true, and how we can balance that against First Amendment concerns in a government-funded treatment program. But "non-religious" Stations of the Cross rings about as true as the disclaimer in those ads in the back of local free paper: "Busty Blond Will Make All Your Fantasies Come True! $100/hr. Non-sexual".

I guess part of the confusion lies in that we use a different meaning for "global warming". What I mean is an increase in the average global atmospheric temperature, something which can have many causes. I think you mean something more narrow: anthropogenic greenhouse-gas driven global warming.

Then look at the solar output over the last 50 years.

That cannot be done. We do not have that data. A lot of the solar output is in the EUV. It has only recently started to be measured: http://www.usc.edu/dept/space_science/missions/SEH-3/SEH-3.html. However, within the context of that limited data you may discern a tentative correlation between the recent decrease in global temperature, the current occurrence of noctilucent clouds, and this graph: http://www.usc.edu/dept/space_science/sem_data/SEM%20Data%20Graphs/SEM_1996-2009.jpg

Obviously, there are more factors to be considered. For example, that the decrease in global temperatures started a bit earlier than the maximum in that graph is likely because 1997-1998 were El Niño years.

Also, given how politicized climate science has become, I do not have much confidence in the accuracy of the global temperature data sets being foisted on us: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/07/24/uk-met-office-and-dr-phil-jones-pay-no-attention-to-that-man-behind-the-curtain/

I guess part of the confusion lies in that we use a different meaning for "global warming". What I mean is an increase in the average global atmospheric temperature, something which can have many causes. I think you mean something more narrow: anthropogenic greenhouse-gas driven global warming.

Then look at the solar output over the last 50 years.

That cannot be done. We do not have that data. A lot of the solar output is in the EUV. It has only recently started to be measured: http://www.usc.edu/dept/space_science/missions/SEH-3/SEH-3.html. However, within the context of that limited data you may discern a tentative correlation between the recent decrease in global temperature, the current occurrence of noctilucent clouds, and this graph: http://www.usc.edu/dept/space_science/sem_data/SEM%20Data%20Graphs/SEM_1996-2009.jpg

Obviously, there are more factors to be considered. For example, that the decrease in global temperatures started a bit earlier than the maximum in that graph is likely because 1997-1998 were El Niño years.

Also, given how politicized climate science has become, I do not have much confidence in the accuracy of the global temperature data sets being foisted on us: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/07/24/uk-met-office-and-dr-phil-jones-pay-no-attention-to-that-man-behind-the-curtain/

And unless you can provide evidence that said flux has shown an increasing trend over the last 50 years (okay, let's say the last 20 or so, since we've had reliable satellite data), your supposition that those bands are linked to GW is baseless.

I am sure you can agree that simple physics dictates that variations in the solar flux must drive global average temperatures. After all, the energy present in the solar radiation reaching the earth is mostly absorbed by the earth's atmosphere, surface, and sea. This heats the earth's atmosphere directly and indirectly on a global scale. An increase or decrease in the solar output will therefore cause a matching increase or decrease in atmospheric heating and hence warm or cool the earth.

What you must be doubting, therefore, is whether changes in the solar flux are the main factor in increasing or (as is the case currently) decreasing global average temperatures.

You can answer this question for yourself by seeing what fraction of the total solar energy output lies in the variable UV/EUV/X-ray part of the spectrum.

Hint #1: it is a much larger number than you may suspect from the black-body spectrum derived from the solar surface temperature. The corona is excessively hot and responsible for most of the EUV and X-ray emissions.

Here is a good place to start http://www.usc.edu/dept/space_science/missions/SEH-3/SEH-3.html. Quoting:

The full disk extreme ultraviolet (EUV) solar radiation is a major energy source, whose magnitude is required in modeling the scattering, ionization, and heating of planetary atmospheres, moons, comets, and the inflowing interplanetary/instellar medium.

They don't have to charge less.

Hell, if all the government insurance did was let us pay the same rate as insured people, it would cut the cost of drugs and procedures by over 50%.

http://www.allbusiness.com/health-care-social-assistance/3910880-1.html
"Much of the bad press has focused on the uninsured being charged high prices for services while managed care plans, Medicaid, and Medicare receive deep discounts. "

"Some have speculated that the vast majority of items on the chargemaster have no identifiable basis, certainly not actual costs, and that changes to the chargemaster have evolved over time to hurt the uninsured. "

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MTA2YmZmODhiOTE3ZDg2NjE0NjgzMDU1ZDUxN2U1MzY=
"In case you're wondering what I mean by "extremely expensive," here's one example: The rack rate, so to speak, for my week at Cedars-Sinai last month was about $47,000; the Blue Cross negotiated rate was around $20,000. So that's yet another reason to have health insurance: to avoid paying rates inflated to protect against all the people out there who can't or won't pay -- including those who consider mandatory insurance socialism."

Of course, then there are the problems with private health insurance...
"Blue Cross was recently fined $200,000 for improperly voiding members' policies years after they'd been written, apparently just because they got sick and began making claims."

On top of insurance discounts, the existing national health care system Medicare is half the price for uninsured.
http://www.usc.edu/schools/sppd/research/healthresearch/images/pdf_reportspapers/Professor_Melnick_Congressional_Testimony.pdf
Appendectomy (exhibit 1). Uninsured: $8,143, Insured: $6,100-- get sick when you are insured. Medicare: $4,165!-- get sick when you are old.

---

Here is how insurance should work.
Acute conditions should be treated up to a certain dollar level and above that requires insurance or private cash.
Chronic conditions should be covered at a very low rate ($500-$1000 a year max).
You should be able to save a certain amount of your income tax free and use that for medical expenses. It should never expire like the current HSA's.

We can't afford $million treatments for everyone- but we can afford to fix broken legs, heart attacks, and a wide variety of surgeries.

While your comment meets the current "fashion" for anti-Americanism and anti-Bushism, what you say is false.

They hate Americans, and all westerners because they've been told for generations that we are "infidels", non-believers, and it is therefore their duty by Allah to cleanse the Earth of these non-belivers. This is despite the Qur'an specifically recognizing Christians and Jews (People of the Book) and, believe it or not, even atheists. Mohammed himself also stated, "He who wrongs a Jew or a Christian will have myself as his accuser on the day of judgment." Alos, Qur'an 109:6(http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/quran/109.qmt.html) says "Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion."

Oh, and Bush/Cheney aren't in office anymore, the Country has moved on, maybe you should too.

It would be like saying, "Wearing a leather coat makes you part cow."

What if the leather coat is sewn inside your body, and without it you die? For instance, there are people who get heart valves transplanted from cows or pigs.

I think these people could be called hybrids. They have functioning body parts from other animals in their bodies.

What definition of "hybrid" would allow for a centaur, for instance, but not for someone who has a pig's heart valve?

I've heard of a UC Santa Barbara and a USC, but I've never heard of a USC Santa Barbara.

Google's proposal. (Warning! .pdf, stab their eyes)

Here's Google's citation to the numbers. (Another .pdf, damn them)

In this study, we traced the use of the Section 512 takedown process and considered how the usage patterns we found were likely to affect expression or other activities on the Internet. The second level of analysis grew out of the fact that we observed a surprisingly high incidence of flawed takedowns:

• Thirty percent of notices demanded takedown for claims that presented an obvious question for a court (a clear fair use argument, complaints about uncopyrightable material, and the like);
• Notices to traditional ISP's included a substantial number of demands to remove files from peer-to-peer networks (which are not actually covered under the takedown statute, and which an OSP can only honor by terminating the target's Internet access entirely); and
• One out of 11 included significant statutory flaws that render the notice unusable (for example, failing to adequately identify infringing material).

In addition, we found some interesting patterns that do not, by themselves, indicate concern, but which are of concern when combined with the fact that one third of the notices depended on questionable claims:

• Over half--57%--of notices sent to Google to demand removal of links in the index were sent by businesses targeting apparent competitors;
• Over a third--37%--of the notices sent to Google targeted sites apparently outside the United States.

[bold added]

I work kind of in this area as a researcher, so maybe I have a rosy-glass view, but the arguments seem a bit dated to me. Sure, in say 1999 this was a problem, and not that many people took games seriously. But in 2009? Yeah, people still like to kvetch ("games are rarely taken seriously blah blah and we aim to change that" is a standard opening move if you're writing a paper), and maybe the average person on the street doesn't, but there are plenty of inroads:

There are journals and academic conferences on games, in both the humanities and computer science.

MIT Press has an entire division of books about videogames. I'm currently reading one about the Atari 2600, which, yes, even covers its role as a cultural and artistic platform.

There are initiatives and companies to use games for "serious" purposes. The U.S. Army in particular takes them seriously and funds development.

Braid sold over $1m, despite being a kind of weird arty game made by a single guy. You can even get an MFA doing fine-arts stuff related to games.

Heck, Gamasutra itself frequently publishes about games as art, and it's semi-high-profile (at least to the extent that getting linked at Slashdot once a week counts as semi-high-profile).

I mean yeah, I'll agree that far more people respect, say, film than respect games. But it's not as if this is some novel argument and nobody has ever thought about taking games seriously before. Also, to some extent, it's the fault of people not making more interesting games: Hollywood may be crap, but there are a lot more innovative indie films out there than innovative indie games.

Quite an amusing game if you haven't tried it

Wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_(game)
Download site: http://intihuatani.usc.edu/cloud/

Basically you fly around and you make clouds. And if your clouds collide with evil clouds, then they produce rain.

Oops, forgot to refresh the page after logging in

Quite an amusing game if you haven't tried it

Wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_(game)
Download site: http://intihuatani.usc.edu/cloud/

Basically you fly around and you make clouds. And if your clouds collide with evil clouds, then they produce rain.

You make a thousand excuses.

Not really. I don't even like Islam (or any religion, really) - but I don't like people saying misleading things about it due to a lack of perspective either.

You claim that certain details are insufficiently provided (such as the age of that girl involved, which really was 9, some sources say 6 and some very, very far fetched sources say 11, but none of those ages make me feel comfortable).

Again, you're missing the point. She wasn't 9 for the whole of the marriage - and she damn well wasn't 9 when the marriage was consumated, or when the quote you were talking about occured. (A girl starting menstruation at 9 is possible in western countries now, but back then? No way.)

Indeed. She was SIX, seven and eight in the marriage before she turned nine, when the marriage was indeed consummated :

(this hadith is considered authentic, and at times "in practice only" overrides the quran in authority (e.g. in death by stoning), so let's not hear about how this is not considered reliable :

http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/058.sbt.html#005.058.234

Narrated Aisha:

The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became Allright, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, "Best wishes and Allah's Blessing and a good luck." Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah's Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age.

Given that this comes from the source where most (if not all) of sharia comes from, I feel fully justified in calling muslims "paedophile worshippers".

That is a 100% true statement. Not in the least more offensive than something like "murderers have killed people" : you are saying a negative, but 100% true, fact about a group of people.

Why do you feel you need to make excuses for these paeophile worshippers ? Do you seriously think it's a coincidence that girls of age six (and even younger in Iran) STILL get sold into marriage in most muslim countries ?

Why even younger in Iran ? Well ayatollah khomeini, the person who founded the current government was a baby fucker. I don't know any other term for the vile acts of this imam, who is still defended by most shi'as. He actually fucked a girl of 2 yearls old, then had her locked away, literally ripped apart.

Of course he did so with the full support of the paedophile religion.

All muslim sources, including the quran, are oral tradition of dubious reliability. They frequently massively contradict eachother.

Take the issue of alcohol for example. The quran states twice that it's okay and once that it's not. It also claims heaven is filled with rivers of wine.

In the other sources you will learn that the paedophile prophet did drink alcohol, but frequently forbade others to do so.

So exactly how you arrive at the conclusion that as a muslim alcohol is a no-go is a riddle I do not have the answer to.

All religious texts are contradictory (yes, that includes the Bible). As I understand it, there's an entire branch of Islamic study dedicated to issues like this. At least the forbidding of alcohol is actually in there and didn't spring into existence after the fact, like certain important Christian beliefs.

Also, I suggest you stop calling him the paedophile prophet, at least until you take a look at the history of marriage, and at what was actually involved in his marriage. (Hint: it doesn't support such a claim.)

Whether the sources are trustworthy, or even contradictory doesn't matter however. If people believe they're true, their contents will influence the behavior of people.

Oh, of course. There's the same problem with Christians and some of the more interesting bits of the Old Testament and Revelations.

If you want despicable behavior of the paedophile prophet from a "reliable" source, just read the quran. Or here's a few

Stone any accused women, and stone anyone trying to protect her too

Errm... that does not appear to say what you claim it does. That involves two Jews being stoned to death for having sex, as prescribed in the Torah. (Yes, that's right - the Jewish holy book gives stoning as the punishment for adultery, and that's where Islam got it from. This shouldn't be too surprising, given Islam's origins and nature.)

Here's how to deal with 9 year old girls if they have their period

Somehow, I don't think she was 9 when that happened. You're also missing the real significance of it. The Torah is really quite unpleasant to women on their periods - they are unclean for 7 days, anyone that touches them is unclean till the evening, any chairs or beds they lie on are unclean, etc. (Islam has something similar, but much less strict.) This hadith permits contact with women who are menstruating. Another one allows sleeping in the same bed.

What to do with defenseless enemies (ie. massacre them, then sell their women and property)

These are considered "reliable" (that's the meaning of "sahih") and are the most used source of shariah judgements. They're contradictory in the extreme obviously, but hey ...

Not sure if that last one even counts as a valid part of Islamic law or not, as it wasn't Muhammed who ordered the killing. Still nasty, of course.

Tell me, are these the actions of a good, kind man, or are they the actions of a monster. Why don't you go out and ask a muslim whether or not these actions are to be imitated.

Pick your most moderate muslim ever, and ask. Do tell me what the response is.

I suspect the answer would either be "no" or "yes, but..." with a limitation to some situation that would never actually happen. (Well, aside from the second one, which doesn't actually say anything controversial.) Old way of dealing with inconvenient religious pronouncements.

The first

All muslim sources, including the quran, are oral tradition of dubious reliability. They frequently massively contradict eachother.

Take the issue of alcohol for example. The quran states twice that it's okay and once that it's not. It also claims heaven is filled with rivers of wine.

In the other sources you will learn that the paedophile prophet did drink alcohol, but frequently forbade others to do so.

So exactly how you arrive at the conclusion that as a muslim alcohol is a no-go is a riddle I do not have the answer to.

All religious texts are contradictory (yes, that includes the Bible). As I understand it, there's an entire branch of Islamic study dedicated to issues like this. At least the forbidding of alcohol is actually in there and didn't spring into existence after the fact, like certain important Christian beliefs.

Also, I suggest you stop calling him the paedophile prophet, at least until you take a look at the history of marriage, and at what was actually involved in his marriage. (Hint: it doesn't support such a claim.)

Whether the sources are trustworthy, or even contradictory doesn't matter however. If people believe they're true, their contents will influence the behavior of people.

Oh, of course. There's the same problem with Christians and some of the more interesting bits of the Old Testament and Revelations.

If you want despicable behavior of the paedophile prophet from a "reliable" source, just read the quran. Or here's a few

Stone any accused women, and stone anyone trying to protect her too

Errm... that does not appear to say what you claim it does. That involves two Jews being stoned to death for having sex, as prescribed in the Torah. (Yes, that's right - the Jewish holy book gives stoning as the punishment for adultery, and that's where Islam got it from. This shouldn't be too surprising, given Islam's origins and nature.)

Here's how to deal with 9 year old girls if they have their period

Somehow, I don't think she was 9 when that happened. You're also missing the real significance of it. The Torah is really quite unpleasant to women on their periods - they are unclean for 7 days, anyone that touches them is unclean till the evening, any chairs or beds they lie on are unclean, etc. (Islam has something similar, but much less strict.) This hadith permits contact with women who are menstruating. Another one allows sleeping in the same bed.

What to do with defenseless enemies (ie. massacre them, then sell their women and property)

These are considered "reliable" (that's the meaning of "sahih") and are the most used source of shariah judgements. They're contradictory in the extreme obviously, but hey ...

Not sure if that last one even counts as a valid part of Islamic law or not, as it wasn't Muhammed who ordered the killing. Still nasty, of course.

Tell me, are these the actions of a good, kind man, or are they the actions of a monster. Why don't you go out and ask a muslim whether or not these actions are to be imitated.

Pick your most moderate muslim ever, and ask. Do tell me what the response is.

I suspect the answer would either be "no" or "yes, but..." with a limitation to some situation that would never actually happen. (Well, aside from the second one, which doesn't actually say anything controversial.) Old way of dealing with inconvenient religious pronouncements.

The first

All muslim sources, including the quran, are oral tradition of dubious reliability. They frequently massively contradict eachother.

Take the issue of alcohol for example. The quran states twice that it's okay and once that it's not. It also claims heaven is filled with rivers of wine.

In the other sources you will learn that the paedophile prophet did drink alcohol, but frequently forbade others to do so.

So exactly how you arrive at the conclusion that as a muslim alcohol is a no-go is a riddle I do not have the answer to.

All religious texts are contradictory (yes, that includes the Bible). As I understand it, there's an entire branch of Islamic study dedicated to issues like this. At least the forbidding of alcohol is actually in there and didn't spring into existence after the fact, like certain important Christian beliefs.

Also, I suggest you stop calling him the paedophile prophet, at least until you take a look at the history of marriage, and at what was actually involved in his marriage. (Hint: it doesn't support such a claim.)

Whether the sources are trustworthy, or even contradictory doesn't matter however. If people believe they're true, their contents will influence the behavior of people.

Oh, of course. There's the same problem with Christians and some of the more interesting bits of the Old Testament and Revelations.

If you want despicable behavior of the paedophile prophet from a "reliable" source, just read the quran. Or here's a few

Stone any accused women, and stone anyone trying to protect her too

Errm... that does not appear to say what you claim it does. That involves two Jews being stoned to death for having sex, as prescribed in the Torah. (Yes, that's right - the Jewish holy book gives stoning as the punishment for adultery, and that's where Islam got it from. This shouldn't be too surprising, given Islam's origins and nature.)

Here's how to deal with 9 year old girls if they have their period

Somehow, I don't think she was 9 when that happened. You're also missing the real significance of it. The Torah is really quite unpleasant to women on their periods - they are unclean for 7 days, anyone that touches them is unclean till the evening, any chairs or beds they lie on are unclean, etc. (Islam has something similar, but much less strict.) This hadith permits contact with women who are menstruating. Another one allows sleeping in the same bed.

What to do with defenseless enemies (ie. massacre them, then sell their women and property)

These are considered "reliable" (that's the meaning of "sahih") and are the most used source of shariah judgements. They're contradictory in the extreme obviously, but hey ...

Not sure if that last one even counts as a valid part of Islamic law or not, as it wasn't Muhammed who ordered the killing. Still nasty, of course.

Tell me, are these the actions of a good, kind man, or are they the actions of a monster. Why don't you go out and ask a muslim whether or not these actions are to be imitated.

Pick your most moderate muslim ever, and ask. Do tell me what the response is.

I suspect the answer would either be "no" or "yes, but..." with a limitation to some situation that would never actually happen. (Well, aside from the second one, which doesn't actually say anything controversial.) Old way of dealing with inconvenient religious pronouncements.

The first

All muslim sources, including the quran, are oral tradition of dubious reliability. They frequently massively contradict eachother.

Take the issue of alcohol for example. The quran states twice that it's okay and once that it's not. It also claims heaven is filled with rivers of wine.

In the other sources you will learn that the paedophile prophet did drink alcohol, but frequently forbade others to do so.

So exactly how you arrive at the conclusion that as a muslim alcohol is a no-go is a riddle I do not have the answer to.

Whether the sources are trustworthy, or even contradictory doesn't matter however. If people believe they're true, their contents will influence the behavior of people.

If you want despicable behavior of the paedophile prophet from a "reliable" source, just read the quran. Or here's a few

Stone any accused women, and stone anyone trying to protect her too

Here's how to deal with 9 year old girls if they have their period

What to do with defenseless enemies (ie. massacre them, then sell their women and property)

These are considered "reliable" (that's the meaning of "sahih") and are the most used source of shariah judgements. They're contradictory in the extreme obviously, but hey ...

Tell me, are these the actions of a good, kind man, or are they the actions of a monster. Why don't you go out and ask a muslim whether or not these actions are to be imitated.

Pick your most moderate muslim ever, and ask. Do tell me what the response is.

The first of these examples is a doubly good example, since Jesus was confronted with the exact same situation, allowing an easy comparison point between these 2 religions.

All muslim sources, including the quran, are oral tradition of dubious reliability. They frequently massively contradict eachother.

Take the issue of alcohol for example. The quran states twice that it's okay and once that it's not. It also claims heaven is filled with rivers of wine.

In the other sources you will learn that the paedophile prophet did drink alcohol, but frequently forbade others to do so.

So exactly how you arrive at the conclusion that as a muslim alcohol is a no-go is a riddle I do not have the answer to.

Whether the sources are trustworthy, or even contradictory doesn't matter however. If people believe they're true, their contents will influence the behavior of people.

If you want despicable behavior of the paedophile prophet from a "reliable" source, just read the quran. Or here's a few

Stone any accused women, and stone anyone trying to protect her too

Here's how to deal with 9 year old girls if they have their period

What to do with defenseless enemies (ie. massacre them, then sell their women and property)

These are considered "reliable" (that's the meaning of "sahih") and are the most used source of shariah judgements. They're contradictory in the extreme obviously, but hey ...

Tell me, are these the actions of a good, kind man, or are they the actions of a monster. Why don't you go out and ask a muslim whether or not these actions are to be imitated.

Pick your most moderate muslim ever, and ask. Do tell me what the response is.

The first of these examples is a doubly good example, since Jesus was confronted with the exact same situation, allowing an easy comparison point between these 2 religions.

All muslim sources, including the quran, are oral tradition of dubious reliability. They frequently massively contradict eachother.

Take the issue of alcohol for example. The quran states twice that it's okay and once that it's not. It also claims heaven is filled with rivers of wine.

In the other sources you will learn that the paedophile prophet did drink alcohol, but frequently forbade others to do so.

So exactly how you arrive at the conclusion that as a muslim alcohol is a no-go is a riddle I do not have the answer to.

Whether the sources are trustworthy, or even contradictory doesn't matter however. If people believe they're true, their contents will influence the behavior of people.

If you want despicable behavior of the paedophile prophet from a "reliable" source, just read the quran. Or here's a few

Stone any accused women, and stone anyone trying to protect her too

Here's how to deal with 9 year old girls if they have their period

What to do with defenseless enemies (ie. massacre them, then sell their women and property)

These are considered "reliable" (that's the meaning of "sahih") and are the most used source of shariah judgements. They're contradictory in the extreme obviously, but hey ...

Tell me, are these the actions of a good, kind man, or are they the actions of a monster. Why don't you go out and ask a muslim whether or not these actions are to be imitated.

Pick your most moderate muslim ever, and ask. Do tell me what the response is.

The first of these examples is a doubly good example, since Jesus was confronted with the exact same situation, allowing an easy comparison point between these 2 religions.

So where is the paper/thesis/documentation of any type whatsoever that describes their p2p solution?

Collaborative p2p worm containment has been around for ever, what does Senthil Cheetancheri's proposal has to offer over previous work?

a small subset of prior work that does exactly what the clueless article sais they do.

http://gridsec.usc.edu/wormshield/
http://research.microsoft.com/apps/pubs/default.aspx?id=66830

PS: I doubt Senthil's research reinvents the wheel but I would appreciate an actual link to his work from the /. story.

> The music company usually retains the copyright

Not exactly, in most cases the artist(s) assign their copyrights to the labels, and this means that soon, starting around 2013, there will be an interesting battle in the Federal courts whether or not the artists can terminate these assignments as stipulated in the 1976 Copyright Act.

I do not blame muslims for everything. I merely state facts.

Does islam encourage the rape of children ? Well here's the description of what the paedophile prophet did to a 9 year old he had bought :

http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/006.sbt.html#001.006.298

You know that islam actually has content. It's not just a name. Being a muslim means considering this a virtue. This act is as influential on muslims as Jesus' not throwing stones was on christians. Of course the paedophile prophet has his opinion on the matter.

Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) came to the Jews and said: What do you find in Torah for one who commits adultery? They said: We darken their faces and make them ride on the donkey with their faces turned to the opposite direction (and their backs touching each other), and then they are taken round (the city). He said: Bring Torah if you are truthful. They brought it and recited it until when they came to the verse pertaining to stoning, the person who was reading placed his hand on the verse pertaining to stoning, and read (only that which was) between his hands and what was subsequent to that. Abdullah b. Salim who was at that time with the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: Command him (the reciter) to lift his hand. He lifted it and there was, underneath that, the verse pertaining to stoning. Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) pronounced judgment about both of them and they were stoned. Abdullah b. 'Umar said: I was one of those who stoned them, and I saw him (the Jew) protecting her (the Jewess) with his body.

http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/muslim/017.smt.html#017.4211

But don't take that from me, the one about paedophilia in islam, after all Carter's best friend, ayatollah khomeini, put it so much better :

http://www.shariati.com/messages/1608.html

He is, after "Hitler's mufti" (google it) of course, the most influential 20th century imam.

Please explain how any of this lays "blame for everything" at the feet of muslims. I merely state a few facts of their moral system, nothing more.

That you are afraid of the truth is your problem, not mine. Facts are facts. These facts don't change (that was, after all, the purpose of writing them down). That they're "inconvenient truths" and quickly end any discussion about whether muslims should be allowed to carry out "religious duties", even among muslims themselves*, does not change them.

* many muslims, obviously, want out. But that carries the death penalty in the paedophilic religion.

I do not blame muslims for everything. I merely state facts.

Does islam encourage the rape of children ? Well here's the description of what the paedophile prophet did to a 9 year old he had bought :

http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/006.sbt.html#001.006.298

You know that islam actually has content. It's not just a name. Being a muslim means considering this a virtue. This act is as influential on muslims as Jesus' not throwing stones was on christians. Of course the paedophile prophet has his opinion on the matter.

Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) came to the Jews and said: What do you find in Torah for one who commits adultery? They said: We darken their faces and make them ride on the donkey with their faces turned to the opposite direction (and their backs touching each other), and then they are taken round (the city). He said: Bring Torah if you are truthful. They brought it and recited it until when they came to the verse pertaining to stoning, the person who was reading placed his hand on the verse pertaining to stoning, and read (only that which was) between his hands and what was subsequent to that. Abdullah b. Salim who was at that time with the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: Command him (the reciter) to lift his hand. He lifted it and there was, underneath that, the verse pertaining to stoning. Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) pronounced judgment about both of them and they were stoned. Abdullah b. 'Umar said: I was one of those who stoned them, and I saw him (the Jew) protecting her (the Jewess) with his body.

http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/muslim/017.smt.html#017.4211

But don't take that from me, the one about paedophilia in islam, after all Carter's best friend, ayatollah khomeini, put it so much better :

http://www.shariati.com/messages/1608.html

He is, after "Hitler's mufti" (google it) of course, the most influential 20th century imam.

Please explain how any of this lays "blame for everything" at the feet of muslims. I merely state a few facts of their moral system, nothing more.

That you are afraid of the truth is your problem, not mine. Facts are facts. These facts don't change (that was, after all, the purpose of writing them down). That they're "inconvenient truths" and quickly end any discussion about whether muslims should be allowed to carry out "religious duties", even among muslims themselves*, does not change them.

* many muslims, obviously, want out. But that carries the death penalty in the paedophilic religion.

old games that are now in the public domain

and then...

Maniac Mansion, Dune 2, Battle Chess, Secret of Monkey Island,

You are dreaming right? None of those are in public domain, not with copyright laws 90 years after death of the creator. They're abandonware at best, and that most certainly isn't legal.

I though of fl0w and Plasma Pong. However Plasma Pong seems to be down :-(

This simply isn't true. Islam was founded by a paedophile, who fucked a 9 year old "because allah told him to". He also comitted genocide. As a result children are being sold "into marriage", subsequently forced into sex, in a few dozen of those oppresive regimes, including iran, saudi arabia, egypt ...

And nobody gives a fuck. Even thinking this makes islam an unacceptable ideology, thinking advocating childrape should carry consequences, and is a crime by itself, is considered thoughtcrime, even by many slashdot posters.

So let's not pretend "progressive" slashdot is for childporn censorship. As soon as you dress up child abuse as a religion, it's given a free pass. Muslims get to advocate child rape, even publish manuals on the subject in the united states (search for the book by khomeini, or the muslim "holy books" which have a number of tips on having sex with underage girls). Nor does google censor either the hadith (with the childporn and jewkilling tips) or ideology.

All these helpful islamic "holy" child abuse tips and jew-killing hints were found using google. Clearly child rape and jewkilling is perfectly acceptable ... just say it's a "religion" that's not being "tolerated".

So don't forget islamic childrape and islamic jewhatred is good. After all, going against islamic childrape and islamic jewhatred is "intolerant".

Are we insane or what ?

This simply isn't true. Islam was founded by a paedophile, who fucked a 9 year old "because allah told him to". He also comitted genocide. As a result children are being sold "into marriage", subsequently forced into sex, in a few dozen of those oppresive regimes, including iran, saudi arabia, egypt ...

And nobody gives a fuck. Even thinking this makes islam an unacceptable ideology, thinking advocating childrape should carry consequences, and is a crime by itself, is considered thoughtcrime, even by many slashdot posters.

So let's not pretend "progressive" slashdot is for childporn censorship. As soon as you dress up child abuse as a religion, it's given a free pass. Muslims get to advocate child rape, even publish manuals on the subject in the united states (search for the book by khomeini, or the muslim "holy books" which have a number of tips on having sex with underage girls). Nor does google censor either the hadith (with the childporn and jewkilling tips) or ideology.

All these helpful islamic "holy" child abuse tips and jew-killing hints were found using google. Clearly child rape and jewkilling is perfectly acceptable ... just say it's a "religion" that's not being "tolerated".

So don't forget islamic childrape and islamic jewhatred is good. After all, going against islamic childrape and islamic jewhatred is "intolerant".

Are we insane or what ?

Eh? Cancer is a disease of the elderly who are about 10 times more likely to get cancer than younger people. Cancer has very little impact on rates of reproduction and so it's obvious that it's not any kind of serious brake on population growth. Finding more successful treatments for cancer will have almost no impact on population growth.

[c]omputer science can be fun.

I can't say he raped and murdered thousands, but the historical record generally indicates that he was not the nicest guy in the world who loved puppy dogs.

Attempting to limit the slave trade to the Europeans for all those centuries is just counterproductive to your argument. While some African slaves were bought from tribes who sold them after capturing them in warfare, the vast majority were taken by Muslims.

No compulsion in religion? What about apotasy? What about jizya? Etc.

I believe that the list of main problems you listed with islam today are actually at its core and until the overwhelmingly majority mainstream Muslims repudiate them, as has happened in other Abrahamic religions, they will remain problems.

For instance your point a. Islam, to my understanding, means submission. In fact in paradise (as stated in 23:101), there is no "neither will they question one another". So if you're taught that the most enjoyable existence that you can expect is filled with gently accepting what is taught to you, why would you strive to improve your education level? Furthermore, to try and assert that only the poor ignorant people commit the terrorist acts ignores the fact that . And while I don't consider all Muslims to be terrorists, I do believe that it is enshrined in their religion. The G.P. who cared for my brother, sister, and myself when I was a child was an Indian immigrant who happened to be Muslim. If I was still living in the same area, he would still be my doctor; especially considering his considerable skill at suturing.

Your point b is interesting because of the fact of abrogation, as permitted in Surahs 16:101 and 2:106. So, without being a full-time Qurinic scholar, how is the average lay-person to know which Surah is correct and which has been overturned?

I also strongly disagree with your assertion about the Quran being a good set of rules in the 6th Century and ALSO being a good set of rules today. It's taught my Islamic jurisprudence that there is no other law that Allah's law, which has been interpreted, and withstood the test of time/inquiry, as Sharia. A harsh and brutal system that leaves little room for innovation or critical thinking.

Let me refute what you wrote:

You mentioned:(Sura 2:191-193) "...and fight them until persecution is no more..."

You ignored the sentence that comes just before that one:

Sura 2:190: Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loveth not aggressors.

Which gives it a whole new meaning along the lines of:

be peaceful, do not begin hostilities, but you have to defend yourself if needed... (may allah forgive me for rephrasing this differently in order to simplify it in english...)

Advice: go read the Quran yourself to have a first-hand account of what is written, and do not rely on second-hand quotations, especially in these times of cheap shots against muslims & islam

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/002.qmt.html

Let me refute what you wrote:

You mentioned:(Sura 2:191-193) "...and fight them until persecution is no more..."

You ignored the sentence that comes just before that one:

Sura 2:190: Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loveth not aggressors.

Which gives it a whole new meaning along the lines of:

be peaceful, do not begin hostilities, but you have to defend yourself if needed... (may allah forgive me for rephrasing this differently in order to simplify it in english...)

Advice: go read the Quran yourself to have a first-hand account of what is written, and do not rely on second-hand quotations, especially in these times of cheap shots against muslims & islam

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/002.qmt.html

Really ? In islam it is the prophet that commits paedophilic rape (forces a 9 year old girl to have sex with him).

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/058.sbt.html#005.058.236

Please point out in the bible where Jesus rapes a 9-year old girl "because God tells him to" ... After all I've shown you the equivalent in islam ("repression" in English).

Please show me the christian states where rape of minor girls is STILL practiced because limiting such would be "illegal". Please show me the christians demanding the right to rape underage girls, please show me christians murdering their children because they try to run from these marriages ...

After all "it's all the same", isn't it ? Let's see it.