Slashdot Mirror
Slashback: ASIMO History, CSIRO WiFi, Net Neutrality
A Short history of Honda's ASIMO. Ant writes to tell us that Honda has posted a short overview of the evolution leading up to the ASIMO. The history showcases the progress Honda has made in robotics over the last 20 years. It contains drawings, photographs, specifications, and other information about each prototype.
Intel bows out of the embedded processor market. markrages writes "Embedded.com is reporting Intel is withdrawing from the embedded processor market. From the article: 'The company will stop producing the 8051, 251, 8096/196, 188/186, i960, all versions of the 386 (including the 386EX) and 486.'" The product change notification is also available from Intel's site.
Microsoft USB giveaway fizzles. An anonymous reader writes "If you thought you could get something for nothing from Microsoft. Think again. NetworkWorld is reporting that Microsoft is backing down from the free USB drive marketing promotion they launched last February."
CSIRO close to WiFi win. Trapped Database Adm writes "Australian IT reports that Leonard Davis of the U.S. District Court for the eastern district of Texas issued a Markman opinion, providing 'strong support for CSIRO's position in its patent infringement test case.'" From the article: "The CSIRO claims its patent relates to several wireless standards, and the technology covered by its patent is a standard feature of most notebook computers and many other devices. Many technology companies are refusing to pay up, however."
Lawmakers target MySpace again. ardyng writes "It appears Congressman Michael G. Fitzpatrick,(R-Penn) has introduced a bill to the U.S. House of Representatives that would ban minors from accessing social networking websites such as Myspace, as well as any site that 'allows users to create web pages or profiles that provide information about themselves and are available to other users; and offers a mechanism for communication with other users, such as a forum, chat room, email, or instant messenger. The Bill, H.R. 5319, also known as the 'Deleting Online Predators Act of 2006', is still in its infancy, but in its current form, would forbid libraries from allowing access to such sites as well." (That description would also include the site you're reading now.)
New York Times weighs in on net neutrality. KarmaOverDogma writes "The New York Times' Adam Cohen provides an argument in favor of neutrality on the World Wide Web. Cohen succinctly provides a brief history of the World Wide Web, its creator Tim Berners-Lee's vision of how it should operate, why he designed that way, and the forces moving to create a tiered pricing system of access. From stifling creativity and competition to free speech and innovation, Cohen shows why strange bedfellows have come to favor enforcing the 'Democratic Ethic' of the internet by Legislation."
"The Bill, H.R. 5319, also known as the 'Deleting Online Predators Act of 2006', is still in its infancy, but in its current form, would forbid libraries from allowing access to such sites as well."
The solution is to force these politians to take vacation 360 out of 365 days of the year to limit the damage and stupidity caused.
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
If minors are prohibited, how does one prove one is an adult, and perhaps more importantly, does the information required to prove one is an adult provide yet more ways for one's online activity to be tracked?
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
"That's not what we call Internet at all," says Sir Tim. "That's what we call cable TV."
Beautiful line, and summed up so even a politco could understand it.
Infiltrated dot Net
'Deleting Online Predators Act of 2006' are you kidding me? How about just 'Deleting everything Online Act of 2006' This bill is FAR too broad? How many websites have a forum? Just about all.
As far as that bill goes, before deciding that material obscene to minors should be banned, how about we decide _what_ is obscene to minors. Isn't this really a morality issue up to the _parents_ not Big Brother? Material described as obscene and harmful to minors is so disgustingly vague, that anyone can come on and say Microsoft.com is harmful to minors. Let's ban that (yay). I don't want legislators in congress deciding what is and isn't obscene for me.
Stoned4Life
gen = new Random
As a Canadian it appears that Americans are getting all the stick and no carrot. While being gagged and bound by unenforcable laws and taxed to support humongous government the American people go without the social programs and safety nets that coutries like Canada enjoy as a consequence of being over governed.
In the beginning was Adam Smith and things were OK; then came J.M. Keynes, government programs and a chicken in every pot, followed by J.K. Galbraith and the military industrial complex. What you've got going now I haven't got words for, but, better you than me.
"Academicians are more likely to share each other's toothbrush than each other's nomenclature."
Cohen
What a mediocre article. He could've at least brought up the "double-dipping" nature of the tiered system.
At least do some better research:
The blogging phenomenon is possible because individuals can create Web sites with the World Wide Web prefix, www, that can be seen by anyone with Internet access.
No wonder my site isn't working: I forgot to add the www prefix!!
Did you ever notice that *nix doesn't even cover Linux?
I could see banning under-13's (who already require parental supervision), but minors? What does a sixteen-year-old have to fear from a pedophile? Even if this passes (oh, Canada!), it's an absurd smoke-and-mirrors measure.
Myspace is to today as AOL Chatrooms were to the 90's. All the hip pedophiles use MySpace.
You are absolutely correct. Pedophiles definately use MySpace. They also use the carpool lane, the grocery store, a knife every time they want to chop lettuce and even a voting booth from time to time. The sooner we ban all these things the safer our precious children will be.
TW
Huh? The guy who does the DNS records gets to decide which hosts are allowed to send mail for a particular domain. S/he can break email for that domain in plenty of ways without SPF. And I fail to see how my saying you can't send mail for my domain is breaking the end-to-end model. If you were talking about port 25 blocking, I could agree.
"It doesn't cost enough, and it makes too much sense."
Subject line aside, the (rough) equivalents of this using your examples would be:
No driving in the carpool lane when you have a child in the car, as pedophiles may see them.
Children may not go to the grocery store where pedophiles may see them.
No using a knife when there is a child in the room. (a bit harder as a knife is not a place).
Children may not be in tow when going to vote as pedophiles might see them.