Slashdot Mirror

theodp writes "Following up on an earlier Slashdot story, software engineer Maher "Mike" Hawash pleaded guilty Wednesday to conspiring to provide services to the Taliban, agreeing to testify against other suspects in exchange for the dropping of other terrorism charges. He will serve at least seven years in federal prison under the deal. In March, federal agents seized Hawash from a parking lot outside Intel Corp., where he worked, and held him as a material witness until charges were filed five weeks later."

joesao writes "The new iPods released last week seem to have a problem that causes an audible 'electrostatic pop' between all tracks played on it. The effect is not imaginary, as it has been witnessed by many users over at the Apple discussion forums. Now, one user has actually published a sound sample recorded the iPod's playback and the verdict is in: it's real. I hope this is a firmware issue and that it's quickly fixed ..." I just ordered a new iPod. I wonder if I should cancel my order.

Sayten241 writes "MSNBC reports that on the night of May 15-16 skywatchers in the U.S., Europe and Africa will be able to witness the moon be completely eclipsed by the Earth's shadow. The show starts at 9:45 pm ET but starts getting good around 10:03 pm ET. The next Lunar eclipse will be on Nov 8-9 this year."

pmodern writes "Wired has this story about Maher "Mike" Hawash a former Intel programmer who is being held by the DOJ for suspected terrorism. Anyone familiar with the Kevin Mitnick saga will not be surprised that he hasn't been charged and has been locked away in solitary. 'For nearly two weeks, he has been held as a so-called "material witness" in solitary confinement in a federal lockup in Sheridan, Oregon. The designation allows authorities to hold him indefinitely without charging him with a crime.'" See also a NYT article and the Free Mike Hawash website.

FWMiller asks: "Yea, about 5 years I was skilled at a wonderful network game called Netrek. This game was really a sport, requiring not only arcade skills but strategic thinking and extremely well developed team play. Today I was thinking of trying to play again and to my dismay, the entire sport, which used to encompass hundreds of simultaneous players and games has all but disappeared! Does anyone out there have any idea if we witnessed the extinction of one of my favorite graduate school pastimes?" It seems that the home site of Netrek is alive and well, but the metaserver, which showed current active games, is not. Is anyone still playing? Will the Metaserver be replaced or is there some current or future alternative?

Ursus Maximus writes "Scripting Language City is for folks who want to learn more about the future of this increasingly important subset of the programming universe. Scripting languages are not just for odd jobs anymore ;-))). Special attention is paid to four languages in Python City, Ruby City, Perl City, and JavaScript Expert Systems which includes a Scripting Language Chooser Program as well as a Basketball Expert Ssystem and a Football Expert System that are certainly something different from the usual same old mouse-over scripts usually found on JavaScript sites. There is also a web spider program that scrapes the web daily and provides updated lists of new web articles on scripting languages, with seperates outputs for each of the featured languages. as added bonuses, there is a page of essays and resources on open source and the free software movement called Farnham's Freehold and a page called The Linux Chronicles that follows the experiences of a Linux newbie with wit and humor. Not a slick professional web site, Scripting Language City is a work of love by a paramour of everything connected with scripting languages, open source, and the programming of free software."

ShadowLight writes ""In December vast hordes of eager filmgoers will mob cineplexes across the land and witness, at the climax of The Two Towers, one of the most anticipated scenes in recent movie history: the great Battle of Helm's Deep." This article talks about the software, named Massive, used to create this 50,000 creature battle."

Bobson writes "It took 89 people 8 weeks to set up 4000000(4e6) domino pieces for an attempted World Record. The last piece was set at 21:00 CET(Central European Time) by a Backstreet Boy. Jim somebody... Anyhow said piece started of over 90 minutes of an amazing domino avalanche show. It is one of the top hacking feats I've had the privilege to witness. This time Live on TV. I hope tapes (dvds) of it become available. They even had time delays of more than 5min each, built into the system to allow for advertising intermissions. Some parts of the installation didn't quite work, but overall it was worth seeing. The final tally came to 3847295 pieces fallen. It ended less than an hour ago and you should have seen it."

Stella Daily writes "When the cool kids make fun of the geeks, the results are often lacking in wit ('Hey, Four-Eyes!') or simply inaccurate. We've all heard the joke about the computer programmer who, when given the choice of transforming a frog into a beautiful princess with a kiss, declines, saying he has no need for a beautiful woman, 'but a talking frog is REALLY cool!'" Read on for the rest of Stella's brief review of Science Askew to find out whether insiders can do a better job. Science Askew: A Light-Hearted Look at the Scientific World author Donald E. Simanek and John C. Holden pages 310 publisher Institute of Physics Publishing rating 7 reviewer Stella Daily ISBN 0750307145 summary Geeks poking fun at themselves, with mixed success.

Whoever came up with that joke definitely doesn't know geeks, or he'd know that they most certainly do appreciate the opposite sex and that that programmer would have been all over the frog in a second. But when geeks make fun of themselves? Now that's something to see -- and Science Askew is a collection of just such humor. The jokes run the gamut from one-liner to extended essay, and almost every major branch of science is represented.

The great strength of Science Askew is that, unlike so many collections of humor about a particular group of people, these aren't just blonde jokes with "chemist" or "computer programmer" or "mathematician" substituted for the word "blonde." It's subject-specific humor -- and at its best, it's good for some serious belly laughs. (An example: "Never lend a geologist money. They consider a million years ago to be recent.") Most of the time, a specialized knowledge of a particular branch of science isn't necessary to get the jokes -- merely being a generalist geek is more than enough.

You'll find many old chestnuts gathered here, such as the "Ban Dihydrogen Monoxide!" essay, mixed in with original material by Donald Simanek and lesser-known pieces plucked from magazines. John Holden's illustrations, which range from the brilliantly funny to the incomprehensible, are sprinkled throughout.

Why does Science Askew rate only a 7? While it's nice to have so many science jokes gathered in one place, you're likely to have heard a good number of them before -- and even if you haven't, you can find them (and many more) for free here. While there is a significant amount of original and hard-to-find material, it tends to be of lesser quality than the stuff you can find on the Web. Thus, it's hard to justify the $30 price tag. Plus, as a chemist, I can't help but be miffed that there's no section for chemistry (though there are a few chemistry jokes scattered in other parts of the book). There's an entire 23-page chapter devoted to the life and times of a single fictitious scientist, so why not a chapter for the chemists?

When geeks lampoon each other, the results can be dangerously funny. Unfortunately, as Science Askew shows, the jokes can also fall flat -- but there's enough good material inside to make it worth a look.

You can purchase Science Askew from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.

mao che minh writes "For those of us around the world planning on stepping out and witnessing the Leonid meteor showers next week (November 19th), NASA is running an article that will help you maximize your meteor shower viewing enjoyment, straight from the experts' mouths."

spamacon writes "Periodically, the Space Shuttle Main Engines (SSMEs) get tested, and sometimes the public is invited to witness the event. Well, now they've gone and done it right: this Friday, they are going to broadcast the test over the internet (with audio, so go out and buy that big subwoofer you've had your eye one). The webcast link is here, and a little history of the SSME is located here. If you are in southern Mississississ(stop me!)ippi on Friday, go have a peek. Should be a blast (ugh)."

A 24-year-old South Korean man died after playing computer games nonstop for 86 hours, police said yesterday. The jobless man, identified by police only by his last name Kim, was found dead at an Internet cafe in Kwangju, 260 kilometres southwest of Seoul, they said. Quoting witnesses, police detective Oh Myong-sik in Kwangju said the man had been virtually glued to the computer since late last Friday and had no decent sleep and meals. The man collapsed in front of the counter early yesterday but soon regained consciousness. He then went to the toilet where he later was found dead, the police officer said. Initial investigation ruled out the possibility of murder, police said. An autopsy was planned. Source Article can be found in The Sydney Morning Herald In related gaming news: sam_handelman writes "In an article on the front page of the online edition, (free reg required) the new york times takes a rather negative look at the rise of broadband gaming in South Korea. The author, Howard W French, is a Times staff writer, with a background in staggering human tragedy, which may help to explain why he thinks my hobby is an epidemic. There was a wired article about Korean broadband (summary: they have lots), which we already discussed."

symbolic writes "This article on the Register explains their experience with Creative's first attempt at supporting DRM, and also reviews a sneaky little technique for 'easing' DRM into peoples' lives via a free Costello preview CD. Two of the tracks are free from any DRM, but for the two that are DRM-enabled, you have to activate the right to listen to them (up to four times), by accessing a central server via the net. For those in the know, the doublespeak used to inform users of any actions they need to take to enable their DRM rights might be quite amusing. To wit: 'The content you are accessing requires an additional level of security. In order to play it, you will need to update your Digital Rights Management Installation.' Others, however, will think they're getting something, when they're actually having something taken away from them. It's a matter of time to see if consumers will flat-out reject this new 'enabling' technology, or let it seep into and infect their lives like the disease that it is."

kanad writes: "RIAA seeks summary judgement against Musiccity , Kazaa and Grokster. In other words they want the above to be banned even before the trial. RIAA accuses them as Napster clones. Read the official statement here BTW does anybody knows of 'Leonard Kleinrock' described as "one of the original founders of the Internet" in the article and an expert witness ?" I wonder whether the mimeograph machine would survive if it was invented today.

Jamie Zawinski writes "Mark your calendars: on Thursday, August 22nd, we're throwing a benefit party for the EFF at DNA Lounge in San Francisco! In addition to great music from DDR, Kid606, and many others, you can also witness the carnage of the first ever Wil Wheaton versus Barney Celebrity Boxing Match! Can Wil, with his backing from the EFF, protect free speech and parody on the Internet and defeat Barney and his team of corporate lawyers? You can also join us earlier in the evening and meet Wil at a special VIP party: see the DNA Lounge announcement or the EFF press release for more details." Even if you can't attend, isn't now a good time to renew your membership?

maetenloch writes: "Last week Falun Gong hackers in China were able to briefly take over the Sinosat-1 satellite and broadcast a banner for several minutes on all channels of China Central Television. This was apparently repeated several time on different channels on Sunday but so far the Chinese government has imposed a news blackout on the incident. However thanks to the Internet and the millions of witnesses, word has leaked out. Surprisingly, security on satellites can be very weak - often transponders are left on when not active and will continue to rebroadcast whatever is beamed at them. It's believed that Falun Gong used a 3 meter dish antenna mounted on a vehicle to overpower the government's uplink signal. This is not the only time that satellite signals have been hacked - there was the famous 'Captain Midnight' incident in 1986 and it's believed that Iraq has been attacking Kurdish satellite tv channels for several years. Hackers have even (discreetly) made use of the U.S. Navy's FleetSatCom satellites."

animys asks: "In the last few years, we have begun to witness the inevitable shift from 35mm cameras to high resolution, cheap, consumer oriented digital cameras; with this, the move away from a tangible photo album has also ensued. This change has obviously left many families with huge amounts of developed pictures and albums. For reasons of preservation and usability, some families would like to convert their previously taken pictures to a digital medium - yet many have hundreds or even thousands of pictures. What type of tools can the DIY'er use to make this process easier? Beyond the obvious scanner and graphics package, is there any good quality software that can augment this arduous and possibly over-daunting task?" What about folks looking to do the opposite? Most people take decent care of their albums, and the pictures are always viewable regardless of the changes in technology. What options are there for those folks looking to make near-picture-quality hardcopies of their digital photos for inclusion in their albums?

The House Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet held a hearing in my home town yesterday: "Chatting On-Line: A Dangerous Proposition for Children." Six witnesses came to Kalamazoo, Michigan and described the perils of on-line chat to Rep. Fred Upton (R-Michigan) and Rep. Charles Bass (R-New Hampshire). The most surprising and welcome news of the afternoon was that, despite the alarmist title, there was not a panicked call for additional legislation.

The hearing launched with Congressman Upton touting his internet record -- notably the .kids domain, now .kids.us. Personally, I like the idea of .kids.us, though some disagree.

The witnesses were Katie Tarbox, who in 1995, at age 13, had been inadequately briefed on the "rules of the net" and disasterously agreed to meet a child predator she'd chatted with online; two local law enforcement personnel, John Karraker and Jim Gregart; Ruben Rodriguez, the Director of the Exploited Child Unit for the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children; Caroline Curtin, the Director of Children's Policy for AOL; and Kathleen Tucker, the Director of Curriculum Development for I-Safe America.

Everyone was concerned about keeping children safe online. It goes without saying that this is a desirable goal, as long as it's done in accordance with the Constitution and doesn't interfere with everyone else's legal use of the internet.

The problem is a serious one. Real kids are being lured into dangerous relationships over the internet; charges were filed in one more case here in Kalamazoo County just last week.

The preferred pickup method for child molesters nowadays is the internet: chat, instant-messaging, and email. The old tricks of "would you like some candy?" and "your parents were in an accident, I'll drive you to the hospital" -- those are yesterday's news. Kids growing up now need to be aware of different dangers, ones involving formation of long-term relationships, questions about online identity, and trust.

I wasn't able to find any reliable statistics on how often children are victimized using the internet. The best numbers I found were from a phone survey of 1,501 children, ages 10 to 17, who used the internet regularly. Of them, 19% had "received an unwanted sexual solicitation" (imprecisely defined) but only 3% had been solicited with "attempts or requests for offline contact" or actual offline contact.

And precisely 0 of the 1,501 children said they had been sexually contacted or assaulted due to online solicitations. This seems significant to me, given that 21% of all children -- statistically, hundreds of the children in the phone survey -- are sexually abused (by some definition of the term) before age 18. Unfortunately, 0 is not a number that extrapolates well to estimate how many of the United States's 70 million children will be physically victimized with help from the internet. But if I understand the numbers, it seems the internet is not the most likely source of danger.

A study called JOVIS is in the works and should provide some concrete numbers. According to Mr. Rodriguez, we can expect data from it in four to five months.

In any case, the message our lawmakers heard yesterday was not that we need more laws.

All six witnesses said, using almost the same words, that there is no substitute for parental involvement. Three called for more money and training for law enforcement, to give existing laws teeth. It sounds like law enforcement, especially at the state and local level, is still coming up to speed on this issue. And Ms. Curtin, for AOL, emphasized that ISPs were already taking steps, and suggested patience to allow them to develop an industry standard.

The testimony and discussion was so removed from proposing new legislation, in fact, that Rep. Bass seemed a little bored and annoyed. He had to remind everyone twice that he and his colleague were lawmakers: "As a member of Congress, I would like to hear what recommendations you have for what we might do -- I haven't heard anything about that so far. ... If I could reiterate: we make policy. This is a very interesting problem, but precisely what suggestions would you have for us as policymakers? If you could draft the bill, what would it say?"

Proposals were hesitant. Our local prosecutor suggested mandated inclusion of a CD with every new computer sale, which would explain how to keep children safe online. I'm not sure why existing explanations (here's one) are insufficient; why not just link? And Kathleen Tucker of I-Safe suggested standardizing on "digital certificates," client-side certs issued by an authority which confirms your identity using proof ranging from photo ID up to DNA (!) -- thus allowing children to verify that screen name BritneyRulez333 does not actually belong to a 45-year-old man.

That excepted, Ms. Tucker's testimony was refreshingly sound. She squarely faced the problem of child predators, and quoted Judith Krug of the American Library Association's Office of Intellectual Freedom: children "need to be taught the skills to cope in the virtual world just as they are taught skills to cope in the physical world."

Parents aren't there to watch over kids every minute. Just as they learn to cross the street without holding an adult's hand, so they need to learn how to wander the internet safely. "The value of empowering our children, through education," she concluded, "with the knowledge and critical-thinking skills that they need to be able to independently assess the every-day situations they will encounter while online cannot be overstressed... Education and empowerment are key."

In my opinion, that's exactly right.

But I wonder how effectively government will be able to help alleviate the problem. Knowledge is key, but kids are, as usual, embracing and understanding change, while bored Congressmen sit behind tables and listen to prepared speeches. Last week, I contacted three students, ages 14 to 17, and asked them about their experiences chatting online.

What they thought, and what they reported their friends thought, was pretty savvy. They understand the dangers, are well aware of the internet's advantages, and know how to stay safe. One student reported:

If kids know not to give out their personal information, and what could happen if they do, then there is really no danger. I would feel like I was missing out on a lot if I didn't have the opportunities to communicate online. It gives me a chance to stay in touch with my current friends, make new friends, meet interesting people, and find a group where I feel like I belong.

Another student reported:

I chat to other people almost every night, or whenever I get the chance to. I do not see chatting on-line as being dangerous, or otherwise harmful. Sure you always hear those stories about 12 year old girls chatting with 45 year old men, but I see online chatting as a way for people with similar interests to discuss and debate interesting topics. ...I strongly believe that if you chat online with people that you do not know personally, you should figure out what this person is really like, and if you can trust them or not.

Finally, I traded several emails with one girl who had chatted online extensively for years, and has met in person "at least 10 or so" other kids whom she first found on AOL -- including a meeting with some boys from another state.

This might seem like a recipe for disaster. But, not only was her protocol for establishing trust detailed and thorough -- paranoid even -- but she readily explained to me her reasoning for each step along the way. She's a poster child for "education and empowerment." And I doubt she's unique:

How did I know to be careful about creeps on the internet? It would be hard not to know nowadays. With an Oprah special about it practically every week, and news documentaries and polls, the facts are pretty much right out there for you. It's like taking candy from a stranger, it's common sense I guess... The types who would fall prey to an online creep would just as easily be a victim to a creep in real life... If the topic of internet chat comes up in school, teachers will almost always preach about safety and weirdos and such. So pretty much the topic of internet safety is inescapable -- it just depends on how well you listen to it.

I hope that's true for every young person.

parking_god writes "MIT prof Stuart Madnick, testifying on MS's behalf, was caught out twice when a government attorney asked him to name an OS (other than one made by Microsoft) where the browser couldn't be removed. Madnick also faltered on several other questions." Basically he doesn't understand what GNOME and KDE are, and since we're all holier-than-thou know-it-alls around here, we might as well laugh at Microsoft's expense ;)

i8msft writes "CIO published a guide on How To Cut Through Vendor Hype. While light, the article did prompt me to wonder what is the most outrageous lie ever told by a vendor? I mean, in person, face to face, preferably with witnesses (boss, coworkers, someone on your side of the fence). Forget press releases, trade show presentations and the like, where they lie like dogs! Specific examples only, please."