Slashdot Mirror

Oh, and if anyone thinks RMS has crazy writings, you really must read the Luddite rants of Bill Joy

But here's the most expansive article i've read about him online. Really connecting and interesting: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.11/

There's an article on Wired that confirms this guy's story that they are legit: http://www.wired.com/news/mac/0,2125,64614,00.html

Actually, a study or three demonstrating a statistically significant link between nonionizing radiation and cancer is exactly what I would expect, even in the absence of real harmful effects.

This is epidemiology--hardcore statistics. When determining the risk associated with some factor, you can never be entirely certain that the effects you see are 'real', and not just due to random clustering. Toss a coin ten times--you'd expect to get heads five or so times, but occasionally (1 time in about a thousand) you'll see ten heads in a row.

By making (generally reasonable) assumptions about the nature of the randomness in the data, scientists and epidemiologists tend to come up with one or more measures of how likely an apparent result is to be genuinely significant. Generally, a result is taken to be 'real' if there is less than a 5% chance that the result is the result of noise (a P value of less than 0.05). Alternately, a study may state an odds ratio and 95% confidence interval ("If you take drug foostatin you are 1.7 times more likely to have symptom bar (95% CI 1.4 to 1.95)") denoting that the relative risk is 95% likely to fall in the stated interval.

Under those circumstances, if the scientists do everything correctly, and account for every possible confounding factor, and do all their math correctly...that still leaves as many as one study in every twenty potentially reaching the incorrect conclusion.

The journal in question here--The International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health--isn't exactly a top-flight journal, either. I'm not at work at the moment so I can't check their archives, but their impact factor is fairly low. (Down to 0.924 in 2002, declining steadily since 1997.) Yes, impact factor is by no means the only criterion by which a journal should be judged--but Nature they are not. Unfortunately, the Wired article refers to an 'upcoming' paper, so I can't get at the publication cited.

Looking at the other paper mentioned in the Wired article demonstrates that Wired can't be trusted to accurately report the findings of scientific papers, either. Wired says:

Two years ago an Italian study found death rates from leukemia increased dramatically for residents living within two miles of Vatican Radio's powerful array of transmitters in Rome.

The abstract of the original paper in the American Journal of Epidemiology says: (in part, emphasis added)

...In the 10-km area around the station, with 49,656 residents (in 1991), leukemia mortality among adults (aged >14 years; 40 cases) in 1987-1998 and childhood leukemia incidence (

eight cases) in 1987-1999 were evaluated. The risk of childhood leukemia was higher than expected for the distance up to 6 km from the radio station (standardized incidence rate = 2.2, 95% confidence interval: 1.0, 4.1), and there was a significant decline in risk with increasing distance both for male mortality (p = 0.03) and for childhood leukemia (p = 0.036). The study has limitations because of the small number of cases and the lack of exposure data. Although the study adds evidence of an excess of leukemia in a population living near high-power radio transmitters, no causal implication can be drawn. There is still insufficient scientific knowledge, and new epidemiologic studies are needed to c

I think we should all send them feedback about that story.
Do they honestly think they can create new rules for the English language? I'm supposed to called the Web the "web" now? What's to differentiate that from a spider web? Idiotic.

• "vey vey vey" - said in Austrian accent
• "triple-dub dot"
• "w-cube"
• "wubble-u"
• "web dot"
• "dub dub dub dot"
• "wubba dot"
• "wibble"
• "trip-dub"
• "dubya"
• "we-three"
• "wawawa"
• "sextuple u" or just "sex u"
• "wah wah wah"
• "wuhwuhwuhdot"
• "wubba wubba wubba"

Who the fsck does this guy think he is? He writes an article in October, 2000 declaring that e-mail is now officially (by him) designated 'e-mail'? Everyone I know of has always referred to electronic mail as 'e-mail'.

Also, the OP here claims that Tony Snow eliminated the hyphen in e-mail. In fact, it's just the opposite. He claims that he added it.

"Sharp-eyed readers of our service, particularly those who have been with us for awhile, will notice some stylistic changes beginning with today's post.

Foremost among them is the insertion of the hyphen into "e-mail."

Is this the next logical step after ditching 'e-mail' in favor of 'email'

Al Gore invented the "Internet" so shouldn't we ask his permission before we change any names?

Reference: http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,18655,00 .html

Wired published an article suggesting that the rise in autism and Asperger's syndrome in Silicon Valley resulted from a concentration of math-and-tech genes.

I think it is grossly unfair to make everybody pay for wiretapping when the majority of people will themselves never be wiretapped. Kind of like paying the private copying levy on blank CDs when all you are doing is backing up your data.

To be fair, they should only add the levy to the phone bills of people who are being wiretapped.

"Power Corrupts. PowerPoint Corrupts Absolutely."

Though I'm sure I won't be last to reference this, Yale's professor emeritus Edward Tufte has been writing about PowerPoint for a while. This piece in Wired helps explain how the cognative processes encouraged by PP presentations are subtly (and not-so-subtly) corrupting the way we perceive data. And you can purchase his whole essay here.

Whether or not you agree with all of Tufte's work, he is among the seminal thinkers about how we disseminate information. And having sat through too many years worth of PP presentations, I think he's dead right about this. I fact, I do my presentations from notes, using nothing more than dry-erase markers and a whiteboard. It never fails to impart an order of magnitude more information than a static bullet-point presentation ever could.

As the cost of mass storage and processing are approaching zero, various people are predicting that soon hardware will be free. Only the software and content will cost money. But the shift towards content being the only source of profit will make copyright enforcement more and more important. This will mean tighter copyright laws and ever more draconian restrictions on consumer use of technology.

But there's a much deeper shift going on. It's a transition from paying for things because we can't do them ourselves to paying because we aren't allowed to do them. Supply used to be the other side of Demand. With a limitless supply of copies easily available, Supply will be replaced by Permission. Keeping this system going requires much more granular regulation of individual behavior.

I try to put it in a historical context. Not long ago, North America was a land where if you wanted to you could walk out into the wilds with some tools, build a cabin, put up a fence and start farming. Nowadays every square inch of land is owned by somebody or something, and usually not by the people who live on it. We borrow and pay. Even after your house is paid for you still don't really "own" it, because if you don't keep paying your property taxes you can get kicked out. Sounds like rent to me.

But we've gotten used to all that. We will probably also get used to the notion that other people own everything we see and hear. Within our lifetimes most information and media content will probably be on a pay-per-view basis. It will be editable or removable at any time by the owners. History will disappear unless individual people choose to privately write things down -- paraphrasing of course, not quoting. I think people will tolerate restrictions and loss of privacy for the sake of copyright protection just as we have accepted the authority of planning commissions and building inspectors for the sake of public safety. That's what I think will happen anyway, but somehow I still don't like it.

The guys at Interact-TV are great. Their device has a lot of potential. Not only that, but when I had issues, they were more than happy to address them.

I bought the MC1000 last year November. I was so excited to get it. I am not surprised that the Wired article said the Telly was buggy. I eventually had to return mine. I really wanted this to work, and it kind of. But it crashed so often and didn't do what it was suppose to well. At first, it didn't record, rip CDs, didn't play DVDs as it should, tune in some channels, and a few other minor things. I returned it for some work and they fixed many of those problems. When I got it back, it still didn't rip cds properly. There were gaps in the audio, the names for album and song title were corrupt.

There were several minor annoyances that I just got tired of this thing not working as it should. I didn't mind that it wasn't super quiet, I knew it was computer and not the best. I think the price was fair for no monthly fee and basically having an open platform and open source. I think they will or could make a really good device if they just make it work without crashing and simply do what it is suppose to. If it is going to rip CDs, well I want to know when I put a CD in it will rip.

Even thought I returned the one I bought last year, I am still monitoring their product releases to see when they might have something solid for me.

Wired Magazine PVR Test

California Bans E-Vote Machines.

TMYK,
-bZj

They tried this here in Massachusetts. Microsoft lobbists came into town and Eric Kriss (the state finance guy) was forced to recant.

Once again, rumours of Apple's demise are greatly exaggerated.

This story from Wired basically claims that the PCs that are sold with Linux that are driving up the percentage are immediately being wiped and reinstalled with a pirated version of Windows. According to Google's stats, only about 1% of searches are done from Linux machines, compared with about 3% for Macs.

Wired Mag (pro-Mac even before Slashdot jumped on the bandwagon :)

The US president owns neither his words nor his image - at least not when he speaks in public on important matters. Anyone is free to use what he says, and the way he says it, to criticize or to praise. The president, in this sense, is free. But what happens when the commander in chief uses private venues to deliver public messages, holding fewer press conferences and making more talk-show appearances? Who controls his words and images then?

Disclaimers: My PhD advisor was a member of JASON and one of my girlfriends in college was there at the very beginning of the Iowa Electronic Market.

GW Bush is censoring free speech because NBC won't let Michael Moore use a clip from Meet the Press.

BZZT! Sorry, but that is incorrect. It is not Micheal Moore, but another Iraqi War documentary maker: Robert Greenwald, who is trying to use the clip.

Source: This editorial from Wired about, not-ironically, big media and copyrights suppressing democracy.
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.08/view.html ?pg=5?tw=wn_tophead_6

The data ports are typically located under the dashboard on the driver's side. Stick your head down where your brake and accelerator are, and look up, you should see it. Unfortunately, from what I've read before, most of the data coming out of the port is in codes which are not published by the manufacturers. This keeps your local, independent mechanic from being able to easily diagnose what's wrong with your car and forces you to go to the dealership's more costly repair shop. There's a whole lot of concern over whether hacking these codes would be a violation of the DMCA. I think there was even mention of a bill in Congress to force manufacturers to publish their codes. Also, see this earlier Slashdot post.

The Free iPod thing is a scam.

Yes, it's an outrage, and there's far more than medical safety at stake here.

Lest we forget, the Navy "Smart Ship" USS Yorktown was "dead in the water" for two hours, due to their reliance on a Windows NT application.

This was done by an art museum in Pittsburgh: see this article at Wired for details.

Ummm..... you have to understand the context of the joke. A while back, there was a slashdot article about Sony touting its new high tech copy protection stuff for its CDs. Ironically, this copy protection was circumvented by a humble felt marker pen. So, there was a joke on slashdot that Sony would use the DMCA's anti-circumvention clause to ban felt markers. My comments above is to poke fun at these cases.

Loosen up dude! It's funny... laugh.

Perpetual motion has been disproven beyond a reasonable doubt. I don't have a clue what the Time Cube guy is talking about. Regarding cold fusion, here's an interesting article from a few years ago on Wired. Free energy is generally considered to be in the same boat with perpetual motion, so we can fairly say that's been disproven beyond a reasonable doubt as well.

Contrary to this, creationism has not been disproven beyond a reasonable doubt, nor has evolution/big bang been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. So, as I mentioned in a reply to the other poster who replied to me, I see no problem with a brief mention that there are people who believe the universe was created. Like you said, the classroom is for real science. And real science teaches us to not disregard any idea until it has been disproven, or until another idea has been proven. And until evolution is proven, real science tells us not to teach it at the expense of all other ideas.

This article shows how the press only has a one-month attention span. In 1999 people were writing nearly identical articles about Salon's auction IPO.

Maybe you don't hear about it as much, but it's still there! I heard an interview with some folks at Wood's Hole regarding Alvin's retirement (which they view as a logical step towards an upgrade, not necessarily a loss) and they sounded pretty fired up about it. And let's not forget these folks, who are finding all kinds of cool stuff.

I think it's a little less exciting now because it requires more infrastructure to do anything new. Unlike the days when you could discover something new with little more equipment than a scuba, nowadays it requires quite an investment.

I think he might be referring to the issues discussed in this wired article. No idea if it is actually fixed in SP2 or not

I'm hoping the kids think this is bullshit...

Netherlands - NOS offers 4 channels of preprogramed content and 1 live feed.
UK - live video simulcast from television
Sweden - live video simulcast from television
USA - NBC offers only highlights

Sources: Wired, Paid Content, Kamera

As long as the e-voting system prints out a piece of paper to keep track of the vote e-voting will work. If no paper trail is kept problems like this will occur and more 2000 Florida debacles will occur.

First of all I haven't had a chance to scan all the comments so sorry if this is redundant. Apparently from what I have pieced together from the variou articles over the last 2 days, Katie T. is doing something with Wired, some sort of joint venture type thingie or whatever (I quite frankly don't give a fuck what it is if she's involved). However, I think we should all write http://www.wired.com/news/feedback/Wired: and let them know how we feel. I mean of all publishers/magazines in the world you would think Wired would give a fuck about this. Hit 'em where it hurts.. the pocketbook.

If so, do not use the BlueSniper in NYC..

Toothing is why you leave it on. I would have figured that /. of all places would be all over this one.

Is there really any need to have bluetooth turned on all the time?

Only if you live in the UK.

Here's a reference to a Palm Virus from 4 years ago!

So what do we learn from the fact that the first handheld-worm was releases for Windows CE and not for PalmOS?

We learn that you're some kind of crazy zealot, or perhaps one of the folks Apple hires to spread lies in blog sites!

Futures markets are attractive mostly because the perception of the group is so often accurate. This reminds me of something I heard on NPR a few weeks back. Here's the link

They were interviewing the author of this book about how the average of guesses made by a crowd of normal people compared favorably to those made by lone geniuses.

I imagine that there was similar reasoning behind the Pentagon's recent terrorism futures market. Of course what they didn't predict was that most people would find it disgusting and they would have to shut it down as a result.

SharkJumper

"You can't patent a gene sequence just because you know it," he pointed out. "The sequence has to be novel, useful, and you have to teach somebody how to use it. Those patents will always be available." --William Haseltine, president of Human Genome Sciences

"No other sector of the economy depends as much on strong patent protection or on the flow of information from academic science as pharmaceuticals and biotechnology," the authors wrote. [Refering to Dr. Robert Cook-Deegan, director of the National Cancer Policy Board and Stephen McCormack, president and CEO of AlleCure]

I think they used an Orinoco Gold Card

http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,64440,00. html

It should be pretty easy to devise a hand crank generator and just give it a few cranks when you need more juice. I remember reading that Freeplay was going to sell such a device -- they talked about it in this Wired article, but the closest they've got on their web site is a hand-cranked mobile phone charger. Kind of a disappointment.

I can't seem to find a straight answer

Wired carried a much more detailed story about the purchase.

http://wired.com/news/business/0,1367,64431,00.htm l?tw=wn_tophead_9

Will be be seeing wired in Korean next? Christ NNNNNOOOOOOOO!

Yyyyeeaaaahhhhhhhh!

Buck Fush !

The real "disincentive" to diabetes research, at least with stem cells, is political. If you vote for Bush this November, you're basically voting against science and medical research.

Scientists: Bush Distorts Science

Scientists: Bush administration distorts research

New pesticide rules let EPA skip wildlife agency reviews is the latest story of the Bush administration removing scientists from the loop when scientific findings might go against Bush's policies.

Right about Aspen, CO, but wrong about the year and the provider. It was in the early 00's. I can't find the actual date, but a 2003 Wired article says "several years ago." The network, engineered by Jim Selby covers 120 square miles in Aspen and the ski resorts around it. I saw something on TechTV about it a few years ago, but I can't find anything on their website. Here are some links I found:

A quick Google for aspen wireless jim selby returns 268 results.

Half Moon Bay? I don't beleive it. The place is filled with some of California's finest tractor tugging rednecks. The place gets most of their money from pumpkins and christmas trees. I live about 30 minutes south of there, and only visit for the beaches.
/flamebait

anyways, here's an article. It seems to only be talking about a 5 block area of the downtown area, unlike the place this article is about, Grand Haven, Michigan, where the WiFi is city-wide.

Service. Microchips embedded in fasteners respond only to encrypted signals, restricting access to service procedures Nice... this reminds me of encrypted printer cartridges (http://www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,57907,0 0.html) and encrypted garage door openers (http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,60383 ,00.html) used as anti-competitive devices.