Slashdot Mirror


Slashback: Cradle, Indiscriminancy, Multiplicity

Slashback tonight with a few updates and reactions to recent Slashdot stories, including notes on Google News, eco-friendly architecture, and Kryptonite's vulnerable bike locks. Read on for the details, below.

Power the hot tub with compost, remember the soy insulation. andyrossmeissl writes "William McDonough's book Cradle to Cradle was reviewed favorably back in 2002, and now its theories about making things sustainably will be put into practice in the C2C Home design competition. The judges (McDonough is on the panel) will present 9 awards and actually build four of the projects on sites in Roanoke, Virginia. Wanna try your hand? Students and professionals should register by November 15."

About that blind-date opportunity ... Alex Salkever, Tech Editor of BusinessWeek online, wrote with a response to the recent story about the dilemma Google faces in trying to make money from its Google News service:

"There is another side to this that I think is equally important, namely, that Google is undermining the news business with its algorithm-based story selection.

It's clear to a journalist that this system was designed by someone who has no idea what's important in the news. While it may nail the top headlines, Google News can't do anything but that. There is no consideration of comprehensiveness of a story at one site over another. Often they cite bizarre news sources for stories way out of their specialty. Why else would we be seeing Al Jazeera as the top listing for a story on Kobe Bryant? The truth is, Web search in the Google model is a poor way to aggregate useful news. It's a great way to figure out what site posted news first but not much more than that.

All of which would be fine except that so many people go to Google for news that they have come to think its actually a really good source for news. It is, if you are searching for news. But if you are reading their home page it's wildly erratic. This ultimately hurts news outlets who work very hard to put together the best stories and draw traffic to their pages. Let me put it to you this way: Would you want the Google guys to set you up on a blind date? Guess what? They already did."

Fountain pens are still ineffective, at least. anomaly writes "I was quite displeased to see that the Kryptonite U locks were incredibly vulnerable to the venerable BIC pen.

I happened to be in the bike shop today and noticed that Kryptonite is sponsoring a lock replacement program. Now's the time to get that lock replaced with a more secure one - before the thieves make off with your bike. Kudos to Kryptonite for responding, and quickly."

Processor envy strikes hard. Adam writes "Orion Multisystems, the company which introduced two Linux-based multiprocessor supercomputers at the end of August, has begun selling the DT-12 Cluster Workstation online. The company claims that this 12-processor unit has a peak performance of 36 Gflops and is small enough to fit on a desk."

162 comments

  1. Cool by Moo+Moo+The+Cow · · Score: 1

    Neat stuff. Especially the lock thing. I am glad they are replacing the locks, because it would be so terrible if they just didn't care. How much do the locks cost BTW? Ooh! I want a hot tub!

    --
    l33t.
    1. Re:Cool by SportyGeek · · Score: 1

      I got my standard Krypto U-Lock with cable for about $30. The only problem I have is that I just put $800 into my mountain bike and now I can't use my U-Lock.....I'm restricted to a cable and padlock I had laying around. Kryptonite is supposed to contact us personally mid-October for the replacements. Until then, my bike is locked up for no more than 1 hour at a time and is usually within plain view of university police.

    2. Re:Cool by AvitarX · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The locks come with a thousand dollors of insurance, I would imagine it is in their best interests to replace them with working models.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    3. Re:Cool by modemboy · · Score: 1

      Except for the fact that the warranty only takes affect if the lock is damaged, so picking it would not qualify you for the money...

    4. Re:Cool by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 2, Interesting

      A forensic examination of the lock would probably indicate traces of bic pen shavings -- probably proof enough that the lock had failed. They'd be hard pressed to get a ruling in their favor uner those circumstances, I think.

      --
      Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
    5. Re:Cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course, that assumes that our would-be thief doesn't take the lock, too.

    6. Re:Cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      IANAL.

      If one is restricted to the warranty explicitly given by Kryptonite, lock-picking is not enough to active the insurance. The language they use even rules out cases where the lock's integrity was reduced by use of spray coolant before being broken. Just about the only case where the remedy would apply is if the thief either hacksaws or pinches through the bolt and then leaves the pieces at the scene.

      Useless.

  2. Google vs. Evening News by mind21_98 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I prefer Google News myself. At least I can get news from a variety of sources, not just the local TV station. It would be better though if it filtered out duplicate articles (i.e. ones copied straight from the Associated Press or other wire sources).

    1. Re:Google vs. Evening News by heptapod · · Score: 5, Funny

      It would be better though if it filtered out duplicate articles

      So would Slashdot.

    2. Re:Google vs. Evening News by plover · · Score: 2, Funny
      It would be better though if it filtered out duplicate articles

      Why? You read Slashdot, don't you?

      --
      John
    3. Re:Google vs. Evening News by AKAImBatman · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Actually, I've found CNN's site to be more useful for breaking news. Google News seems to have a niche in finding a specific story I want info on.

      For example, my wife came to me yesterday and said that she had heard a story on the TV in the gym about some guy's toliet exploding. I searched on Google News and found that some idiot in Salt Lake City had collected gasoline leaking from his car and poured it down his toilet. The gasoline came in contact with the water heater, blew up his bathroom, and set his house on fire. So much for Myth Busters disproving the exploding toilet, eh?

    4. Re:Google vs. Evening News by MavEtJu · · Score: 1

      my wife came to me yesterday and said that she had heard a story on the TV in the gym about some guy's toliet exploding.

      Now that's what I call news I can go without knowing unless it was happening in my neighbourhood.

      --
      bash$ :(){ :|:&};:
    5. Re:Google vs. Evening News by EMH_Mark3 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That's odd.. why would the toilet be plugged to the water heater?

      --
      Burn the land and boil the sea, you can't take the sky from me
    6. Re:Google vs. Evening News by ravenspear · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I agree with this. I like the ability to have hundreds of views on one story instantly accessible. It seems to me that the "stories from outside their specialty" peeve is a small one. Usually you can tell relatively quickly from glancing at a site what kind of stories it usually does. And Google usually doesn't link to sites that are too far out there with tabloid style news.

      I've gotten so sick of the mainstream media's useless regurgitation of political bias that I'll take anything over it. It's getting to the point where all the democrats watch CBS and all the Republicans watch Fox and because that's all they hear it just reinforces everyone's notion that all their own views are logical and correct and everyone else's are wrong. We need more news services that use a model like Google News.

    7. Re:Google vs. Evening News by compwizrd · · Score: 1

      well, if it was a japanese toilet, i'd half expect the bowl to have a water heater built in.

      if the gasoline didn't hit the seat warmer first...

    8. Re:Google vs. Evening News by AKAImBatman · · Score: 2, Informative

      The fumes apparently escaped the pipes, and the heater was nearby (a fairly common thing). The story (with a picture even!) is here. Other versions can be found by typing "toilet" into Google News.

    9. Re:Google vs. Evening News by js7a · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Google News Headlines does indeed have serious problems, but it forces a strict "fourth-party" perspective that I feel can often help the average news consumer.

      Take the Al-Jeezera on Kobe Bryant story example. There you have a perspective that nobody in the U.S. will otherwise be exposed to. Sure, they probably didn't do much in-depth reporting, but who needs in-depth stories on sports figure rape cases, anyway? That's the kind of thing that U.S. media has too much of as it is. I would rather learn what some nameless Al-Jeezera reporter thinks of Kobe Bryant's case than that of the whole cast and crew of Denver TV newsrooms put together.

      Anyway, Google News Search and Alerts are indeed superb. Much better than the MSN and Yahoo alternatives, and I've been reading side-by-side alerts on a variety of topics for several months now.

    10. Re:Google vs. Evening News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      So would Slashdot.

    11. Re:Google vs. Evening News by Peyna · · Score: 1

      I just wish CNN would have someone actually look over their articles before they publish them to their website. They're so full of spelling and other errors (that they obviously just sent through Word) that it's pathetic. A simple read over by one other person would solve that.

      For example, today there was the story about the Canadian sub that is stranded. They quoted someone's family member as stating that the sailor that died "died saving his country." That makes no sense. Obviously they said "serving his country." Either someone made a typo and Word didn't catch it for them (wrong word spelled right), or they had a horrible time understanding their accent.

      --
      What?
    12. Re:Google vs. Evening News by orangesquid · · Score: 1

      myth busters link?

      --
      --TheOrangeSquid Is it any wonder things seem so awry? We swim in a sea of confusion and don't have to think to survive
    13. Re:Google vs. Evening News by orkysoft · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Why was this modded redundant? The AC is trying to make a point by making a duplicate comment, instead of the frequent duplicate articles.

      Sure, it's not the best joke/point in the world, but I don't think it deserves to be modded down. I think the mod in question just didn't get it.

      --

      I suffer from attention surplus disorder.
    14. Re:Google vs. Evening News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The mods obviously didn't get this one. I thought it was funny, though.

    15. Re:Google vs. Evening News by AKAImBatman · · Score: 1

      It's a television show on Discovery Channel.

      Official Site

    16. Re:Google vs. Evening News by AKAImBatman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I just wish CNN would have someone actually look over their articles before they publish them to their website. They're so full of spelling and other errors (that they obviously just sent through Word) that it's pathetic.

      That's because CNN always breaks the story first. I've done some writing myself. Writing a good piece in fifteen minutes is hard. Writing a well edited piece in fifteen minutes is near impossible.

    17. Re:Google vs. Evening News by 1010011010 · · Score: 1
      "The worst Democrat is better at jobs and growth than the best Republican"

      I'm not sure I buy your analysis. I think the current president generally inherits the economic situation from the previous one, because change happens slowly. There's a fair amount of lag between policy change and upward or downward trends in the economy.

      Shifting your chart to attribute growth or loss to the previous administration, it comes out like this:

      Jobs Party
      -9.0 Democrat
      +0.6 Democrat
      +0.9 Democrat
      +1.1 Republican
      +1.1 Democrat
      +2.1 Republican
      +2.2 Republican
      +2.3 Democrat
      +2.4 Republican
      +2.5 Republican
      +3.1 Republican
      +3.8 Republican
      +5.3 Democrat


      ... which shows that it's not all "Republicans bad, Democrats good" although I'm sure that was the point of the 'analysis'.

      Because the economy is largely out of the control of any President, the revised chart is also more realistic. Congress, the Fed, business cycles, foreign issues (including wars), technological advances, scientific discoveries, etc. all factor into the economic situation. Blaming it all on a single man who does not evne have the power to make law strikes me as absurd.
      --
      Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
    18. Re:Google vs. Evening News by Peyna · · Score: 1

      Like I said, it wouldn't take more than having one other person read it before it was published. Instead they rely too heavily on things like Word to that for them. It takes 2 minutes to read an article, and usually having someone else read it, they will quickly pick out mistakes.

      --
      What?
    19. Re:Google vs. Evening News by orangesquid · · Score: 1

      Oh, yeah, but, I meant, is there actually a MythBusters episode about exploding toilets?

      --
      --TheOrangeSquid Is it any wonder things seem so awry? We swim in a sea of confusion and don't have to think to survive
    20. Re:Google vs. Evening News by AKAImBatman · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yeah, there was. Something about pouring gasoline and dropping a cigarette. Their conclusion was that the cigarette would flame out before it managed to ignite the toilet. Of course, I don't think they took the Water Heater into account as a possible ignition source. (i.e. The cigarette was possibly incidental.)

    21. Re:Google vs. Evening News by js7a · · Score: 1, Offtopic
      Lagging a full term? That's a bit much, given that most recessions last about a year or less.

      If you lag one year, things get better for the democrats, as the WaPo article linked from my sig page on the lower right column indicates.

      The president is a legislator, with the final say in signing or vetoing any proposed law. That gives him more power than half of the Congress.

    22. Re:Google vs. Evening News by Mistlefoot · · Score: 1

      The Prime Minister of Canada actually did say "died saving his country".

      Probably just a bit of a slip of the tongue but the quote was correct.

      <URL:http://www.google.ca/news?hl=en&ned=ca&q=sa vi ng+his+country/>

    23. Re:Google vs. Evening News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was probably modded redundant because that was more accurate than overrated. His point was fully made by the parent post. Even as a joke it deserved a "redundant", even though he was the first to post it in this thread. It was just way too obvious and played out a billion times before.

    24. Re:Google vs. Evening News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's because CNN always breaks the story first. I've done some writing myself. Writing a good piece in fifteen minutes is hard. Writing a well edited piece in fifteen minutes is near impossible.

      Given the number of people they could choose to employ, maybe those exceptional types who have the skills to do this could be at the top of their list?

    25. Re:Google vs. Evening News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What would be better is if they combined Google News with Search By Location to give you Google Local News.

    26. Re:Google vs. Evening News by Helmholtz+Coil · · Score: 1

      Especially their crawler-full of hilarity. I was watching their very early coverage of the Shuttle explosion, and the crawler said something like "Was travelling at twice the speed of light when it exploded" (wish I had a screen capture of it!).

    27. Re:Google vs. Evening News by Peyna · · Score: 1

      Were you there, or did you actually see it on the news? All those news sources just copy from each other, so mistakes tend to get replicated prety quickly.

      Either that, or maybe Canada is falling apart and we didn't know.

      --
      What?
    28. Re:Google vs. Evening News by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      How else are you going to blow up your house (and collect insurance money)?

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    29. Re:Google vs. Evening News by operagost · · Score: 1
      Does the president:

      Create legislation?

      Debate bills on the floor of the Senate or House?

      Sit on committees?

      No? Then he is not a legislator! If he signs pieces of paper, that makes him an executive - hence the name "executive branch".

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    30. Re:Google vs. Evening News by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      It seems they didn't escape the pipes, the gasoline just evaporated (the story doesn't even mention him flushing).

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    31. Re:Google vs. Evening News by Tackhead · · Score: 1
      > Especially their crawler-full of hilarity. I was watching their very early coverage of the Shuttle explosion, and the crawler said something like "Was travelling at twice the speed of light when it exploded" (wish I had a screen capture of it!).

      Only twice the speed of light? Maybe for that little dinky SpaceShip One contraption.

      When NASA does it, they go all-out. The Space Shuttle was doing nearly 18 times the speed of light.

      Thank you, CNN...

      ...for ensuring that Dan Rather will have a place to work after CBS shitcans him.

  3. He sounds jealous by extra+the+woos · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I never read that article (will go read it now) but he seems a little jealous of google news.. ... I rather LIKE having stuff just picked by a computer.. Eliminates bias AS LONG AS the news sites dont start learning how to make sure they are the ones that google news posts.

    --
    replacing it with NEW Folger's Crystals! (lets see if they notice the difference)
    1. Re:He sounds jealous by plover · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But Google News is showing bias. And it's starting to become intentional.

      --
      John
    2. Re:He sounds jealous by Bill_Royle · · Score: 1

      News bias? What's that?

      Thanks for confusing me - I was busy reading Dan Rather's book, and you completely messed it up!

    3. Re:He sounds jealous by dextroz · · Score: 1

      Like Xinhua Net? I thought news and communism are contradictory, eh? Especially when you consider that most of the news from Xinhua is about the West :-)

      --
      Where's my free iPod!? Until then, I'll settle for a kiss...
    4. Re:He sounds jealous by Jason1729 · · Score: 1

      You do know someone write the articles, don't you?

      Jason
      ProfQuotes

    5. Re:He sounds jealous by AltaMannen · · Score: 1

      Google News still has very low coverage of things that are very important to for example Los Angeles residents, based on what real live journalists and reporters on Los Angeles news stations decide is important.

      Where are the 2 hour car chases, where are the radio controlled cars 30 minute segment that I've seen 4 times now (I'm looking at you, fox 11). Where are the investigative reports into g-string related skin infections?

      I'm thinking of switching to the news with Kent Brockman and Arnie in the sky for all my news needs!

    6. Re:He sounds jealous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "And it's starting to become intentional."

      Ummmm, care to back this up? I love that you scream it is biased when it does not match your personal views. I ask you this: if the world were 75% liberal and 25% conservative and the majority of news was "liberal", and you were a liberal, would the news still be biased? Or what about 90%+ of Hollywood & musicians doing ANTI-BUSH songs/concerts/ads in the times. Is Hollywood being biased?

    7. Re:He sounds jealous by barawn · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Ummmm, care to back this up?

      Google's been told that there's a bias in the search (remember, you're supposed to be searching on -topics-, not words), and they've responded and said that there's no bias, because the algorithm doesn't care. Apparently no one at Google understands that an unbiased algorithm can generate a bias if there are biased assumptions founding the algorithm - namely, that phrases of interest are used equally throughout news sources, therefore news sources that contain more of the phrases are more of interest.

      By not doing anything about it, it's an intentional bias. It's not a liberal or conservative bias, but it is a bias.

    8. Re:He sounds jealous by plover · · Score: 1
      I'm sorry, I phrased my comment incorrectly.

      I meant to say that some news sources are starting to recognize the patterns that Google evaluates in order to float their stories to the top of Google's news page.

      I didn't mean to imply that Google was biased, I just meant to say that certain news organizations are discovering the joys of "googlebombing".

      (And if you felt I was in any way "screaming", I apologize for that, too.)

      --
      John
    9. Re:He sounds jealous by PabloJones · · Score: 1

      Showing bias towards which?

      In one case, they are filtering things for China... communist = extreme liberal.

      In the other, it is claimed that they are biased towards conservatives, who are at the other end of the spectrum.

      In my experience, from Google News being my home page, I have noticed no bias at all. Why, when according to the polls, Kerry won the first debate, it reflected that, along with stories saying that while he won, the race for president was still the same as before, even though a good majority of those articles also said a change has been traditionally unnoticeable until a week or so after the debate.

      Maybe the algorithm does show a slight bias towards one side or the other, but I can't honestly tell which side, and I consider myself rather moderate.

      Media bias works both ways if you look at it too much. I think it's bullshit.

    10. Re:He sounds jealous by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1
      communist = extreme liberal

      I'm not sure what you are saying here, but if I'm reading that statement correctly, then PabloJones = extremely ignorant. =) If your statement is correct, then Bush = Hitler is equally correct. If I misunderstand, forgive me.

      I don't find GoogleNews biased so much as occassionally off the wall. Sometimes this is refreshing. For example, at this moment there is a movie review in the entertainment section from The Times of India entitled, "Chadha's Ash-flick falls flat". The lead paragraph reads:

      If you thought that only Yash Chopraji had a thing for sarson-da-khet in sadda Punjab, you are mistaken. Cause Gurinder Chadha, true to her Punjabi roots has done the same in Balle Balle! Amritsar to LA (that's Bride and Prejudice dubbed in Hindi).


      I'm so used to popular culture coming out of Hollywood that it's a pleasant shock to read something out of Bollywood.
      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    11. Re:He sounds jealous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And all of my computer dates do as I say, and never talk back... unless I want them to talk nasty

    12. Re:He sounds jealous by identity0 · · Score: 1

      That reminds me of a anecdote in Steven Levy's Hackers, where Marvin Minsky is being shown a program a guy just wrote.

      At one point in the discussion, Sussman told Minsky that he was using a certain randomizing technique in his program because he didn't want the machine to have any preconceived notions. Minsky said, "Well, it has them, it's just that you don't know what they are."

      True wisdom - computers are not unbiased, they just precisely carry out the biases of the programmers. It doesn't nessecarily slant things based on the topic, but it can be affected by the way the media reports things. Some would say that giving Kobe Bryant equal importance to Iraq or other real news is bias, but Google makes the choice based on what the media reports. Garbage in, garbage out.

  4. A really insidious way for Google News to make mon by ShatteredDream · · Score: 3, Funny

    Parse the news stories for things like names, places and products and substitute on Google News those stories for Google search links. That way, Google can pull the readers to its paid services and can probably innocently say "but we're just providing readers with the ability to find out more information about the story."

  5. Compost-powered Hot Tub? by modest+miser · · Score: 3, Interesting

    From my past experience with compost, I know that it doesn't smell that great, among other things. It would be interesting to see how they deal with this problem. I doubt my friends would want to hang out in a tub with the smell of manure and decomposing material in the air.

    1. Re:Compost-powered Hot Tub? by rts008 · · Score: 1

      Or finally get "the hot chick" in the hottub finally, only to have the compost pile spontaneously combust, burn the house down, scare the chick off....there you stand-you, the fire dept., and a BUNCH of scorched flies.....

      --
      Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
    2. Re:Compost-powered Hot Tub? by Macgrrl · · Score: 1

      I wonder if you could use some kind of heat exchanger - you would need to insulate the pipes very well, but you could run the water pipes through the compost bin to heat water passing through them (similar to some solar water heaters) then run the water back to the pump. If you have the pipes mostly underground, provided the earth core temperature wasn't too low, you wouldn't need to have the compost heap right next to the hot tub...

      --
      Sara
      Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
    3. Re:Compost-powered Hot Tub? by mudshark · · Score: 2, Informative

      Nope, your compost experience was faulty.

      A compost pile that is working well enough to reach 150-160F isn't going to stink. It'll steam, and if you put your face into it you might get a little whiff of ammonia (assuming that there's a little surplus of nitrogen stoking the fire). All you should get from a properly balanced heap is the smell of rich dirt.

      Not the worst aroma to waft by the hot tub, although I'd want to augment it with a hearty red, cedar wood and pheromones.

      --
      In other news, astrophysicists have announced that they now know what all that dark matter is: it's stupidity.
    4. Re:Compost-powered Hot Tub? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hang out in a tub with the smell of manure

      You shit in your compost?

    5. Re:Compost-powered Hot Tub? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From my past experience with compost, I know that it doesn't smell that great, among other things. It would be interesting to see how they deal with this problem.

      Oh, probably that new-fangled invention called an air-tight seal. Commonly seen in products such as diaper disposal bins, Tupperware containers, etc. Or did you think they would have an open compost?

    6. Re:Compost-powered Hot Tub? by ocelotbob · · Score: 1

      So Build a wall. Put the hot tub on one side of the wall, the compost heap with the heat exchanger on the other, and you never have to worry about the smell.

      --

      Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

  6. Re:Wow... wordjoke,,, by Moo+Moo+The+Cow · · Score: 1

    The Slindies?

    --
    l33t.
  7. Re:Wow... wordjoke,,, by WhatAmIDoingHere · · Score: 0

    There have been slashbacks for a while..

    At least, that's what I think you're complaining about.. I'm having a hard time understanding your message.

    --
    Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
  8. Gun cabinet by SolemnDragon · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I know it's old news by now, but the gun cabinet maker denies that their locks are having this problem- but is offering free lock replacement.

    Old news link about the gun cabinet.

    1. Re:Gun cabinet by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 1

      Hang on,
      they admit the problem.
      They then go on to indicate anybody can obtain a replacement.

      Read the link you gave, it says:

      Our gun cabinets, however, do use a type of tubular lock and tests we conducted indicate that some of these locks are susceptible to being picked through certain manipulations.

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
    2. Re:Gun cabinet by Peyna · · Score: 1

      But right before that they say: We are pleased to report that all of our gun safes and fire resistant safes are not affected by the developments concerning tubular cylinder locks.

      It sounds like they couldn't do it with a fountain pen (maybe they weren't skilled enough), but could with other tools.

      --
      What?
    3. Re:Gun cabinet by Sqwubbsy · · Score: 2, Informative

      It sounds like they couldn't do it with a fountain pen (maybe they weren't skilled enough), but could with other tools.

      Small point: BICs are ballpoint pens, not fountain pens. There is a difference.

    4. Re:Gun cabinet by celery+stalk · · Score: 1

      They seem to be saying "Our locks aren't suceptible to BIC pens. If you're still worried, we'll replace it anyway. You're welcome."

      What's wrong with that?

      --
      aaaand...whee!
    5. Re:Gun cabinet by Peyna · · Score: 1

      The text above says fountain pen, that's where I took it from.

      --
      What?
    6. Re:Gun cabinet by nacturation · · Score: 1

      The text above says fountain pen, that's where I took it from.

      The text says that fountain pens are still ineffective -- as in, they never were effective because the tool used was a BIC [ballpoint] pen.

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    7. Re:Gun cabinet by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      Read it again. They claim that their gun safes and fire safes are free of this problem, but that some of their cabinets are susceptible.

      Have a look at their product lines. Their safes look quite a bit sturdier than their cabinets.

      It's pretty amazing, even on slashdot, when the link poster didn't RTFA.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    8. Re:Gun cabinet by SolemnDragon · · Score: 1

      I did read it. That's why i posted it... I read the article AND the web site; the web site claims that some of their cylindrical locks have a problem, but not the problem being touted in the media. The news article has a man claiming that he opened his gun cabinet lock with a pen.

      I posted it merely because i thought that people might want to read the article, and thought that the website deserved a mention for having a lock replacement program and are the cabinetmaker listed in the news article.

  9. G-oogle by rjamestaylor · · Score: 4, Funny
    • Would you want the Google guys to set you up on a blind date?
    What a great idea! Too bad Lotus Domino is squatting at gdate.com, but Blind Dating would put the oogle in Google.
    --
    -- @rjamestaylor on Ello
    1. Re:G-oogle by limber · · Score: 1

      Would you want the Google guys to set you up on a blind date?

      That's what the "I'm Feeling Lucky" button is for.

  10. Google News - See all the Lemmings by cthulhuology · · Score: 5, Insightful

    One of the things I have learned from reading Google News is just how few people are doing any acutal reporting. The vast majority of major new organizations are just repeating what they get off of the AP wire, which you might as well read directly. When Google really shines though, is when it finds those out of the way news sources that actually break a non-AP story. During the US military engagements in the middle east, Al-Jezera is often more intelligent than the regurgitated spin releases vomited from CBS/FOX/etc. Google also give you the opportunity to compare coverage on a wide range of sites, aggregating the gamut of viewpoints. I'm sorry, but Google is only "hurting" more established channels by providing more direct access to the fringe press. For the fringes, and those of us who enjoy the range of analysis, this is a huge boon.

    1. Re:Google News - See all the Lemmings by HotNeedleOfInquiry · · Score: 1

      I wished I could mod you up.

      Very, very true. There's way more parrots than reporters.

      --
      "Eve of Destruction", it's not just for old hippies anymore...
    2. Re:Google News - See all the Lemmings by plover · · Score: 1, Funny

      Me too!

      --
      John
    3. Re:Google News - See all the Lemmings by rfsayre · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You are correct, but it's worse than that.

      Consider this:

      Often they cite bizarre news sources for stories way out of their specialty. Why else would we be seeing Al Jazeera as the top listing for a story on Kobe Bryant?

      Maybe the (possibly inadvertant) statement Google is making is that "Journalism" is such garbage that it doesn't matter.

    4. Re:Google News - See all the Lemmings by Animats · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The great thing about Google News is that you can easily see what Reuters, Al-Jazeera, Haaretz, and Xinhua have to say about the same event. If they're all saying roughly the same thing, that probably reflects reality. If there's serious divergence, there's probably major spin control going on somewhere.

    5. Re:Google News - See all the Lemmings by Inthewire · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I believe you've got that backwards.

      --


      Writers imply. Readers infer.
    6. Re:Google News - See all the Lemmings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you think Al-Jezera is intelligent and lacks spin more than its American counterparts, I suggest you look again. Since when does "agreeing with me politically/telling me what I want to hear" == "intelligent and no spin"?

    7. Re:Google News - See all the Lemmings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since when does "agreeing with me politically/telling me what I want to hear" == "intelligent and no spin"?

      You must be new here.

    8. Re:Google News - See all the Lemmings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      LEAD, FOLLOW, OR GET OUT OF THE WAY!
      </testosterone>

    9. Re:Google News - See all the Lemmings by Saeger · · Score: 3, Funny

      I only get my information from trusted sources, such as the Ministry of Truth. In fact, I just checked, and my new MS Trusted Computing(TM) XBOX-ME didn't let me access the untrusted terrorist website you linked to. With dangerous attitudes like yours, how did you even get access to The Secure Internet, brother? You can tell me; I won't turn you in.

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
    10. Re:Google News - See all the Lemmings by boots@work · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Of couse not, but it has a different spin to American outlets. By comparing the stories from the two, you can get a kind of triangulation on the "true" events.

      Certainly reading Al-Jazeera is likely to get you a more different second perspective than watching two US commercial stations.

    11. Re:Google News - See all the Lemmings by nels_tomlinson · · Score: 1
      ... Reuters, Al-Jazeera, Haaretz, and Xinhua ... If they're all saying roughly the same thing, that probably reflects reality.

      Maybe. I suppose it's hard to imagine them all agreeing on the same lie? But maybe they all got their story from the same ``eyewitness'' (who happened to be shooting of his mouth in the bar where the reporters hang out), and maybe this eyewitness was lying.

      If there's serious divergence, there's probably major spin control going on somewhere.

      Yes, but where? Any one of them could lie, or all of them could be lying. When China is angry with the U.S., Xinhua will probably parrot any crap that Al-Jazeera spouted, as long as it is anti-U.S., so I wouldn't assume that the majority is always right.

      This is where Korean News comes in handy: they're so far out in la-la-land that you never have to wonder if they're telling the truth.

    12. Re:Google News - See all the Lemmings by Spy+Hunter · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Yeah, this guy's criticism of Google News is just sour grapes over lost viewers. News sites are so hungry for viewers that they use stupid tactics like not providing relevant links so you won't leave their site, even when the links are practically the whole point of the story (like stories about websites). The quality of the copy at smaller news sites may be slightly worse, but maybe Google News's success is showing that good copywriting isn't as important as journalists would like to think.

      This guy comes off sounding pretty arrogant: "It's clear to a journalist that this system was designed by someone who has no idea what's important in the news." If people are reading Google news, it's because it has the news they want to read. That's what's important in the news. Not some editor's idea of what's important, but what readers think is important.

      --
      main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
    13. Re:Google News - See all the Lemmings by siriuskase · · Score: 1

      I kinda like clicking on links to see how the Hindi Times or Al Jazeera covers an American news story. Sometimes, a nonamerican point of view is enlightening. But, to often, it will be the exact same text that appears in most American newspapers. When that happens, I'm left wondering why an Indian or an Arab would want to read that story, but I'm gyped out of the POV thing.

      --
      If you must moderate, please moderate as irrelevent, not something bad, because I'm sure someone will find this interest
    14. Re:Google News - See all the Lemmings by PhilHibbs · · Score: 1
      But maybe they all got their story from the same ``eyewitness'' (who happened to be shooting of his mouth in the bar where the reporters hang out), and maybe this eyewitness was lying.
      this isn't the Recon roleplaying game, where the only location that reporters can be encountered was in bars. Besides, I doubt that Al-Jazeera reporters are in the same booze-hound league as most western reporters, or if they are, I suspect they prop up the bars in different neighbourhoods.
    15. Re:Google News - See all the Lemmings by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      Or it's simply that Al Jazeera was the news source that had a story with Kobe Bryant in the headline that Google spidered last - which may just be the bit with the very latest news - or maybe not. When you're googleing you always have to check more than just the first hit, and the fact that the "journalist" didn't know probably reflects on his "journalism" - rather his articles created by googling for the facts.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    16. Re:Google News - See all the Lemmings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Reuters, Al-Jazeera, Haaretz, and Xinhua have to say about the same event. If they're all saying roughly the same thing, that probably reflects reality.

      The reality being that Xinhua, Haaretz, and AlJazeera all license Reuters content.

  11. Google news - algorithm selection == impartial? by francisew · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm not sure how impartial google news really is.

    Since results must be biased in some way by the number of sources reporting a story, and the majority of our sources are (arguably) biased, won't the results come out skewed anyways. Regardless of Google's impartiality, I wonder how much of a chance smaller and important stories really have of making it to the surface? A kitten stuck in a tree covered by several newspapers might be able to creep pretty high, but a massacre in some remote country may rank pretty low.

    Then again, Google is pure genius, so let's all not worry. ;)

    1. Re:Google news - algorithm selection == impartial? by lukewarmfusion · · Score: 1

      Or stuck in a disposal.

      It's amazing to me how popularity can overshadow authority on the web. Your site might be completely irrelevant, but if it's popular it will probably show up high in the search results. Google does an excellent job most of the time, but there are a few notable exceptions.

    2. Re:Google news - algorithm selection == impartial? by Keith+McClary · · Score: 1

      I've noticed that sometimes the links on Google News are not direct links to the news sites - they are links to google.com which are redirected to the news sites. It appears they are counting our clicks.

  12. Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If they're eco-friendly, then they're biodegradable.

    Then the lock's new weakness is... DIRT!

  13. so what if I WANT something different in news? by gambit3 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I already get the Dallas Morning News, USA Today and the NYTimes, electronically, in my inbox every morning. I KNOW what "the journalists" give me as what THEY think is "important in the news."

    What about those times when I DON'T want a journalist to decide for me what's "importantn"??

    I think Google provides an excellent service.

    1. Re:so what if I WANT something different in news? by gambit3 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Doh!

      Spelling is important. Sorry about that.

      Skool makes u sooper smart!

    2. Re:so what if I WANT something different in news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "What about those times when I DON'T want a journalist to decide for me what's "importantn"??"

      You seem to have forgotten that it's their job to tell you what's important. It's in all the manuals and high school journalism textbooks.

  14. Populist news by zaxios · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While it may nail the top headlines, Google News can't do anything but that. There is no consideration of comprehensiveness of a story at one site over another.

    What a silly point. Google News doesn't try to tell you what to read. It gathers the most commonly reported events into headlines and intends the user to sort through them. As a way of organizing news reports, it's unparalleled. Just like traditional Google Search, it doesn't make the choice of resource for you (that's what our discernment is for), it merely organizes your choices so they are accessible. Perhaps from the perspective of a traditional journalist, the idea of a broad range of news sources at the fingertips of the reader rather blind dependency on a few well-known outlets is worrying because it threatens the old way of doing things. Personally, I think more accessibility and more choice for the reader will only make online news more competitive and allow quality articles outside of the conventional vendors to show themselves more easily.

  15. The system is already being gamed by Infonaut · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Eliminates bias AS LONG AS the news sites dont start learning how to make sure they are the ones that google news posts.

    They already know how to do it. Linguistic anomalies and other factors can skew Google News results. When you're talking about human events, there's no way to remove bias.

    --
    Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
    1. Re:The system is already being gamed by idlemachine · · Score: 1
      When you're talking about human events, there's no way to remove bias.

      This, I think, is the real issue at stake here. It reminds me of the criticisms leveled at WikiPedia, that it somehow isn't an "authoritative" text in the way that a print encyclopedia is...

      People should never have been relying upon single points of access for information. The freedom with which subjective views can be expressed on the internet has only underscored this.

    2. Re:The system is already being gamed by Infonaut · · Score: 1
      People should never have been relying upon single points of access for information.

      So true. I don't know how many K-12 schools already do this, but I have this dream that someday every child's school education will incorporate instruction in how to engage multiple and varied sources of information in order to derive understanding of current events. It seems that we do ourselves a disservice by pretending that somehow people will learn critical thinking skills from an education system designed to make better factory workers.

      --
      Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
  16. Quit whining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This ultimately hurts news outlets who work very hard to put together the best stories and draw traffic to their pages.

    If Google News is that much worse than traditional news outlets "working very hard", then those traditional news outlets won't have anything to fear, will they? If Google News is so "erratic", then obviously readers will flock to the traditional news outlets, won't they? It's funny how these comments were made by somebody from the traditional news outlets, isn't it?

    Let me put it to you this way: Would you want the Google guys to set you up on a blind date? Guess what? They already did.

    >Looks around< err... no, I'm pretty sure they didn't. What a stupid thing to say.

    1. Re:Quit whining by dextroz · · Score: 1

      "obviously readers will flock to the traditional news outlets" People are two lazy - even if it means to eat s**t rather than walk 10 minutes. My point? The work/information ratio is not good enough to warrant going to different websites for news.

      --
      Where's my free iPod!? Until then, I'll settle for a kiss...
    2. Re:Quit whining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They can't have it both ways though. If it's unimportant to people, then Google being inefficient is unimportant. If it is important, then they will seek other outlets. The Businessweek bloke is trying to say that it is important to people, but if it is that important to people, then they are perfectly capable of finding other outlets.

  17. Google news by erick99 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    From TFA:

    Often they cite bizarre news sources for stories way out of their specialty. Why else would we be seeing Al Jazeera as the top listing for a story on Kobe Bryant?

    So? I am smart enough to click on the part that says, for example, "..and 650 more.." and look for sources that make more sense. I like having the option to read five or six or 50 different write-up's of the same story. I can tell when the first source or two are inappropriate and I can move on. I suspect the person who wrote in prefers the CNN or FOX, etc. format of deciding what should be the news for the day. Google dumps it all out there and in quantity. For a news junky, I think Google is great! I do read the CNN online news as well but sometimes I am astounded at the difference between CNN's version (which can lean left just as the Fox version can lean right) versus the BBC version or one of the India newspapers.

    --
    http://www.busyweather.com/
  18. Google isn't the only one by Kerhop · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Before they had their news aggregator there were several others such as NewsHub and even Yahoo had one for a little while (though recently NewsHub's server performance is much slower, it started when Lycos became more visible on the home page). I agree with others that more filtering features needs to be added or publicized at the Google one to search by region, by newswire, etc.

    1. Re:Google isn't the only one by Kerhop · · Score: 1

      replace -all "Lycos" "Tucows"

      I stand corrected, Tucows owns NewsHub.

  19. The public just can't think . . . by erick99 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    All of which would be fine except that so many people go to Google for news that they have come to think its actually a really good source for news.

    Does he have any idea how insulting that is? Why do so many journalists not only want to decide what the news is, they also want you to get it from certain sources only and they don't want you think critically about the news or the source. Well, that's how I feel, anyway. Bastards.

    --
    http://www.busyweather.com/
    1. Re:The public just can't think . . . by Kiryat+Malachi · · Score: 1

      Speaking for journalists (slash their employers), can you blame them for wanting people to understand that the news is actually coming from reporters, and that Google just aggregates it?

      --

      ---
      Mod me down, you fucking twits. Go ahead. I dare you.
      (I read with sigs off.)
    2. Re:The public just can't think . . . by erick99 · · Score: 1

      I already understood that and assume others do as well. I don't see any stories attributed to Google. If it's the BBC then it's attributed to the BBC, who, in turn, attributes it to the writer. Is that what you meant?

      --
      http://www.busyweather.com/
    3. Re:The public just can't think . . . by Kiryat+Malachi · · Score: 1

      You assume too quickly. I know a few people (not many, but I assume they're the sort who the original person had to be referring to) who assume that Google is the one producing the news, despite the very obvious credit saying who did.

      People are dumb, what can I say?

      --

      ---
      Mod me down, you fucking twits. Go ahead. I dare you.
      (I read with sigs off.)
    4. Re:The public just can't think . . . by BenEnglishAtHome · · Score: 1

      Bastards.

      That's the same way I feel about idiots who actually try to tell me that the New York Times is a good newspaper. Yes, that's right, there are actually people who think the New York Times is a good newspaper. Can you believe it?

      Amazing.

      Idiots.

      Bastards.

  20. This Salkever Guy Is a Shmuck by LuYu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    While I understand his point, is that not the reason people go to Google for news (eg: to avoid or distribute human bias)? This just sounds to me like he is angry that people are not reading the news the way he wants them to.

    This is what Salkever's statements sound like to me.

    Quote:

    It's clear to a journalist that this system was designed by someone who has no idea what's important in the news.
    Translation:
    It's clear to a journalist that this system was designed by someone who has no idea how to properly slant the news.

    Quote:

    There is no consideration of comprehensiveness of a story at one site over another.
    Translation:
    There is no consistent consideration of comprehensiveness of what we in the industry have decided to include.

    Quote:

    This ultimately hurts news outlets who work very hard to put together the best stories and draw traffic to their pages.
    Translation:
    They are not playing by our rules... Boohoo!

    I do not use Google News, but at least on the surface, it is a system that appears to be unfriendly to the obvious and harmful bias of US news sources. It also seems to me that reading a bunch of news from totally random websites might actually contribute to more open mindedness (something I, for one, would like to see more of in the US and in the rest of the world).

    I think the simple point is: Readers are responsible for picking and choosing what they believe out of the news. While this has always been true, Google News is making it more obvious by sprinkling, sometimes very liberally, the news with opinions that are not standard within the news industry (and some opinions that are just downright absurd). This is probably a good thing.

    --
    All data is speech. All speech is Free.
    1. Re:This Salkever Guy Is a Shmuck by dont_think_twice · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I think his point is somewhat valid - I really don't feel that Google News does a very good job of picking the best articles on a subject to make the front page. Quite often, I will want to read about a story, and the couple of sources listed on the front page will all be two paragraph summaries that provide absolutely no detail. I often have to search through the list of sources to find a decent story.

      I really don't know why this is. Maybe it is just really hard to properly organize news. Considering how good of a job Google did with web search, I would expect more out of them. Maybe we just need some startup with brand new ideas to revolutionize the news aggregration business.

      All that said, the article submitter (Salkever) did sound like a whiny jerk. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with computer aggregrated search results - Google has just been doing a pretty poor job of it so far.

    2. Re:This Salkever Guy Is a Shmuck by jerometremblay · · Score: 1

      The problem when readers are responsible for picking and choosing what they believe out of the news is that appearances of truth becomes easier to achieve than truth itself.

      Sure human selection can be abused and biased, but done correctly it can provides a much deeper insight into whatever is concerned.

      Collaborative information management systems such as /. could perhaps be merged with Google-News in some useful way to mend for it's shortcomings.

    3. Re:This Salkever Guy Is a Shmuck by julesh · · Score: 1

      Quite often, I will want to read about a story, and the couple of sources listed on the front page will all be two paragraph summaries that provide absolutely no detail. I often have to search through the list of sources to find a decent story.

      I don't know how Google News works, but I would guess it used similar principles to Google Search -- that is, link popularity is an important factor.

      This would explain a bias toward shorter stories -- the ones most likely to get a link are the ones who break the story first, which means they probably have fewer details than the stories which come later.

    4. Re:This Salkever Guy Is a Shmuck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Absolutely right. What most people believe or what is common knowledge is usually wrong. Only a few historians or researches and experts actually have useful information. Put another way; You don't have a committee design anything; you get the best engineer. A million monkeys do not make one Einstein.

      Large groups of people are good to decide the common good. But opinion polls on news are a good way to decide what the most "comfortable ideas" are. The US citizens didn't want to hear about bad things the troops did during the mess that was the Vietnam war. Perhaps it might have been better not to know. But would we have ever pulled out? Would more people undergo physical and psychological damage? Yes. So learning things you don't want to know, but that are true, can lead to growth.

      One thing we learned from Vietnam is not to blame the troops. We should always blame the person making the orders. I understand personal accountability, but we need to punish those issuing bad commands -- first.

      I am a pluralist for opportunity, but an elitist on discovery.

  21. Cradle, Indiscriminancy, Multiplicity. by hunterx11 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Concordantly. Ergo. Vis-à-vis.

    --
    English is easier said than done.
    1. Re:Cradle, Indiscriminancy, Multiplicity. by Sarcastic+Assassin · · Score: 0

      Mod parent up. Even if The Matrix Reloaded was a craptastic sci-fi flick, the joke isn't that bad.

  22. Damn Google news! by chaffed · · Score: 1

    Trying to confuse us all with unexpected and possibly illuminating news sources!

    Shame on them for providing a portal for world views and domestic issues.

    --
    What could possibly go wrong?
  23. as discussed elsewhere... by WormholeFiend · · Score: 5, Informative

    Kudos to Kryptonite for responding, and quickly

    Considering that the U lock pen opening technique was discovered circa 1992, I wouldn't call Kryptonite's response quick, exactly.

    Nice of them, yes, but quick, no.

    1. Re:as discussed elsewhere... by barc0001 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Or that it took a major media blitz and a class-action suit to get them off their asses? Sounds rather like the old "Hmm.. which one of these will cost us more?" discussion was had around the boardroom table. If this could have been swept under the rug, it would have been. Trust me.

    2. Re:as discussed elsewhere... by armb · · Score: 1

      Bikebiz article confirming that 1992 date.

      --
      rant
  24. Seconding the questioning of impartiality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    "It gathers the most COMMONLY REPORTED events into headlines..." Jeezus!! I thought slashdotters were above-average thinking folk. This entire thread is rife with people who think it's just peachy that things are so "convenient." Does it NOT occur to anyone here that if an ideological group can purchase up a bunch of "news sources"/media outlets, they can control what is "most commonly reported"? Sound familiar? It should. I get it, it's great for YOU (and all of the other posters who seem offended by the questioning of their right to a 'media-teat'), but do you ever leave your computer and go outside? There's a plethora of people who employ absolutely NO "discernment" when it comes to "news stories." How else do you explain the current US Administration's ability to (at least up to now) virtually will things into existence (or non-existence) by simply repeating them over, and over, and over, and over....? I'm not suggesting it should be stopped or outlawed, but let's engage a little more critical thinking about the overall consequences of our use of technology before we blindly throw-in behind it because WE think it's "cool." I think the overall point is solid and well taken--add this sort of mainstream news aggregation to a list of things we shouldn't necessarily do just because we "can."

    1. Re:Seconding the questioning of impartiality by zaxios · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Does it NOT occur to anyone here that if an ideological group can purchase up a bunch of "news sources"/media outlets, they can control what is "most commonly reported"?

      It occured to me, but I dismissed it. The fact is that no single ideological group controls what is commonly reported across the globe. Maybe in the U.S., but not across the world. There is incredible diversity in news coverage, in levels of bias, and in ideologies driving that bias. In Google, al-Jazeera and CNN offer competing takes on issues. Sans Google News and fall back on "sources you trust" and dissenting views are harder to find. That's because in a single country, or a single neighbourhood, a single ideological group certainly can control news. Hence if, as the author suggested, we depend on so-called "reliable sources," we can expect far more one-sidedness and single-outlook control over the news than we would encounter in Google News.

      You suggest that a single ideological group has the power to ignore events and hence determine what constitutes news and what is "most commonly reported" and as such what appears on Google's headlines. It's a serious issue, but you seem to be whinging in the wrong direction. Google News is part of the solution, not part of the problem of conventional outlets' stranglehold. It submerges any given country's conventional regional sources in a great variety of alternative perspectives. (The Internet gets credit for all that variety, of course, but Google makes it actually available. Say what you like, but "convenience" is crucial to whether information can actually be digested or whether it just overwhelms and is ignored.) It's not perfect, but it's better.

      Now if Google News made some attempt to integrate blogs, then we'd have a lot of variety...

  25. Re:to think i went to college for this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It must take amazing brainpower to be able to spell 'inane' properly in only two tries.

  26. Ummm.... by bgalehouse · · Score: 5, Interesting
    The problem is that kryptonite bought POS cores for their locks. A lock core made with close manufacturing tolerances is hard to pick, whether or not a BIC pen happens to fit around the center post.

    Without studying locksmithing, how can we know Kyptonite has changed lock core vendors? How do you know that they have solved the root problem? A $50 lock should be good against far more specialized tools than a Bic pen - how can you be sure that they have done a real security audit, when they didn't find this themselves? How can you believe that they even have the capability?

    You are waiting for a patch from Microsoft for a buffer overflow in an obvious location. You can wait for a patch, and hope that the next flaw is sufficiently less obvious, or you can install OpenBSD. That is, buy a big sold steel padlock from a vendor which at least tries for real security. Something that you'll actually see on the streets of NYC - Medico, Multilock, etc.

    1. Re:Ummm.... by Elequin · · Score: 1

      The new key cylinders are not designed for tubular keys, but flat keys, so that pretty much solves the BIC pen problem. As to whether or not the new ones are easy to pick, we don't know yet.

      BTW, it's Medeco, not Medico. But yeah, they seem to make nice locks. I can't find that they make any big U locks, though. The padlocks could be put in the disc brakes of a motorcycle, but that doesn't help bicyclists, unless they're willing to use a chain.

      Also, Multilock only seems to make door/gate locks.

  27. only 9990 clams for the... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...cheap Orion. The "cheap" one.. uh huh

    I *need* one, make the intarweb much faster. Uhh, could play a game better.... I mean, do serious research and discover antigravity water on mars which would solve world hunger and cure dandruff and stuff... umm, I could..... welll....

    WAHHHHHHHH! /me schemes late into the night for legit reason to buy one...

    Got it!

    This is the perfect machine to read all of google news 567 duplicate articles on every late breaking story!

  28. Headline on Google News Right Now by xant · · Score: 1
    "Asshat blasts Google News for Not Playing Ball with Big Media"

    A curmudgeonly newsjerk today blasted the cutting edge and 21st-century-thinking Google News today, saying that they were "meanies" or something like that. Industry experts agree that this person is not to be taken seriously. He will probably be rounded up for the nuthouse before day's end [. . .]
    --
    It's rare that you're presented with a knob whose only two positions are Make History and Flee Your Glorious Destiny.
  29. picking? by mblase · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I really don't feel that Google News does a very good job of picking the best articles on a subject to make the front page.

    This argument is applicable to any Google search. Google doesn't "pick" the best news articles or search results, it basically sorts them by popularity. If a lot of organizations report on a particular subject, those articles rise to the top of the page. If an article discusses a particular search result more deeply, that article rises to the top of its search results.

    Maybe it is just really hard to properly organize news.

    When you can give us a workable definition of "properly", I'll consider your arguments. As it is, even longtime news editors often have trouble deciding which articles deserve headline-page-one status and which ones ought to be bumped to the bottom. It's ultimately a matter of what one person considers important--except for Google, which considers what several hundred people consider to be important. It may not be better, but it's certainly no worse.

    1. Re:picking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I don't see the popularity argument with Google News at all.

      For example, right now there's an AP story about Mt St Helens ... from the San Diego Union Tribune. The Seattle Times story is buried in the green links.

    2. Re:picking? by dont_think_twice · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Google doesn't "pick" the best news articles or search results, it basically sorts them by popularity.

      Semantics. The articles that make the front page are "picked", whether it is by a human or a computer. I realize that Mr. Google is not personally reading every news source and deciding what to highlight.

      If an article discusses a particular search result more deeply, that article rises to the top of its search results.

      Maybe this is the intent, but currently, Google News does a terrible job of putting the in-depth articles at the top.

      When you can give us a workable definition of "properly", I'll consider your arguments

      Working Definition of Properly (In the Context of Orginization of News Stories): The organization of news stories is considered to be properly done when the most informative and thorough articles are ranked highest.

      Working Definiton of Informative and Thorough: The most informative and thorough news articles are those which cover the most aspects of a story, and provide the most detail. In general, this implies that a longer article will be more informative and thorough, although exceptions are possible. In addition, providing insight into a story from multiple ideological viewpoints will contribute to the thoroughness of a story, and illogical and poorly formed arguments will detract from the informativeness of an article.

      Now will you consider my arguments? All I am saying is that quite often, I find that Google sucks at picking good articles to present. You don't need any intellectual arguments about absolute criteria for determining the value of an article to understand that simple concept.

    3. Re:picking? by siriuskase · · Score: 1

      Google News articles are "picked" by a wide base of news editors all over the world. These are editors doing their job the old-fashioned way, determining for their readership what news to cover. The difference is that the reader now has a choice to see what storys are considered newsworthy by thousands of editors all over the world, and then possibly, read various points of view. All these articles are considered newsworthy by some editor somewhere in the world, just not the same much smaller group that controlled the news before Google started its Beta Test.

      --
      If you must moderate, please moderate as irrelevent, not something bad, because I'm sure someone will find this interest
    4. Re:picking? by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The most informative and thorough news articles are those which cover the most aspects of a story, and provide the most detail. In general, this implies that a longer article will be more informative and thorough, although exceptions are possible. In addition, providing insight into a story from multiple ideological viewpoints will contribute to the thoroughness of a story, and illogical and poorly formed arguments will detract from the informativeness of an article.

      How exactly can a program decide what is informative and what isn't? How can it decide what is thorough, and what is not?

      For regular Google searches Google can rely on links and averages. For news, especially live news, there isn't any sort of weight by popularity, unless Google starts weighing hosting sites based on past articles and applying those towards current articles.

      Of course then they will have to be able to separate stories into categories and figure out what is relevant and what isn't. How can a program know what aspects of a site are relevant and not? You're asking for a piece a software to do something most people can't?

    5. Re:picking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How exactly can a program decide what is informative and what isn't? How can it decide what is thorough, and what is not?

      There are a number of simple tricks that could help.

      As already explained, longer stories tend to have more information. I hate following a link and then finding 2 little paragraphs that hardly tell more than the headline. If google learned to strip away the boilerplate and text ads that surround each story, it could sort them by length.

      Additionally, distinctiveness can help: most newspapers are just reprinting Reuters and AP for stories. An algorithm to filter out highly-similar articles could help.

      Finally, for most newsworthy topics there exist articles by both reporters and editors. You basically just want to read one story from a reporter (the best, most thorough one), but might enjoy seeing the opinions of many editorialists. Opinion pieces should have a separate link, under the story they relate to.

    6. Re:picking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the point is that a PROGRAM can't decide what is a GOOD story.

      The upside to random news; that people are given points of view that they might not know.

      The downside; no moderation of the accuracy of content. You can see how much noise can occur on an unmoderated site. I also have problems with watching debates or interviews and there is not anyone to check the facts. I don't want slanted news, but many times we are given talking points that are often forms of stealth advertising. A reporter just spitting out a story, without some intervention towards credibility just means that our heads get filled with noise. You can't be sure what to believe. I feel cynical and unimpowered enough as it is.

      I lament the absense of a great news verifier like "Brille's Content". They did a great job of fact checking the hyperbolic news stories.

      We are getting more information these days (like a fire hose), but there is little fact-checking going on. All information is not equal.

  30. How (un-)generous of Kryptonite... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Kryptonite is willing to replace all the old locks except for their most popular model

    Like many, many, many other bike owners, I have the Evolution 2000 lock. This is likely the best-selling bike lock in the world.
    Yet when I try to register in Kryptonite's lock-swap program, their on-line form lets me select any model that they make, except for the Evolution 2000.

    Maybe one of the dozens of other locks listed is same as the Evolution 2000. Hopefully this is so. But they sure aren't making it easy for a lot of their customers to get a replacement lock.

  31. Google News and metamoderation by jfengel · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I read Google News for the same reason I metamoderate slashdot. It gives me a random glimpse of some things I wouldn't read otherwise.

    It's not the best view, but it's an interestingly quirky one. But I also read other sources for a more consistent view, the same way I read the Slashdot homepage.

  32. the REAL problem with google news by h4ter · · Score: 1

    Is that it can't distinguish between news and humor on a news site. Just before the first presidential debate, one of the major stories on google news was quoted as saying that the Bush administration revealed that Bush's IQ was 65. Of course, it was a humor piece from (um...) Newsweek (I think). I took a screenshot, which is held up at work. But there was a brief moment when I thought that politics had taken a turn for the better

    Some people, btw, just read the headlines and the excerpt. Something like that might just swing the election.

    1. Re:the REAL problem with google news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would be sweet if they started indexing The Onion and LandoverBaptist with the rest of the news organizations.

      Michael

  33. Re:A really insidious way for Google News to make by PabloJones · · Score: 1

    This is very unlikely to happen. If they made links that seemed like actual news items actually lead to advertisers' sites, then people would lose trust in them very quickly. This would lead to fewer hits to the news page, which would lead to fewer people using their search engine, which generates money via advertising dollars.

    Google News seems more of a loss-leader, in that people use it for convenience, and are therefore more inclined to use their search engine.

  34. Orion is news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So you can get a "cluster" in a small form factor on your desk that uses relatively slow Transmeta processors. How is that newsworthy? If you don't need the purty little box, you can build a system that's probably a bit gutsier in terms of rendering performance for not a lot more money, no?

    Anyone seen actual performance deltas on real world tasks between the Efficeon and AMD64/P4 chips?

    Cheers,

    1. Re:Orion is news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah yeah...But will it increase my Quake fps? :)

  35. meaning by carlcmc · · Score: 1

    gives a whole new meaning to the button, "I feel lucky"

  36. No: Go Ogle by sapped · · Score: 1

    When google launched their image search I emailed them the suggestion to name this search Go Ogle. I think it might be even more appropriate for blind date searching.

  37. Pheromones? by Aumaden · · Score: 1
    Pheromones?

    You're talking to /.'ers here. The only pheromones around that hottub are their own!

  38. President as Legislator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    The White House creates proposed legislation all the time, and much of it gets intorduced as-is by members of the president's party. The White House press office is usually fairly active on the topics of bills that they care about while they are being debated.

    This is not a radical notion.

  39. How can we know? by crucini · · Score: 1

    There is actually a possible answer. If Kryptonite adopted a core that met the UL 437 standard, we'd know they were reasonably resistant to picking, impressioning and forced entry. Medeco is the best known maker of such cylinders, and Medeco offers a huge array of OEM cylinders for such applications. But they are more expensive.

  40. Warped cliches? by crucini · · Score: 1
    Or maybe the family member reached for the cliche and got it wrong, and the reporter perversely reported just what he heard.

    Maybe CNN should have a special keyboard with a button for each news cliche. That would avoid such errors. You could have:
    • denied the allegations
    • suspected terrorist safehouse
    • protect the environment
    • protestors gathered
    • a court ruled
    • violated the pact
    • under the terms of the settlement
    etc.
  41. Brand names by bgalehouse · · Score: 1

    Argh. Teach me to be lazy when citing companies. I meant Medeco , purveyer of lock cores to the DOD. And mul-t-lock, which seems to be at least a tad harder to pick than a conventional lock.

  42. Hot running sewage? by SWestrup · · Score: 1

    I don't think the Myth Busters folks ever figured that anyone would plumb a toilet so that its drain went through a water heater...

    I know *I* sure wouldn't have suspected it!