Slashdot Mirror


Sleep Mailing

Doctors have reported the first case of someone using the internet while asleep, when a sleeping woman sent emails to people asking them over for drinks and caviar. The 44-year-old woman found out what she had done after a would be guest phoned her about it the next day. While asleep the woman turned on her computer, logged on by typing her username and password then composed and sent three emails. Each mail was in a random mix of upper and lower cases, unformatted and written in strange language. One read: "Come tomorrow and sort this hell hole out. Dinner and drinks, 4.pm,. Bring wine and caviar only." Another said simply, "What the......." If I had known that researchers were interested in unformatted, rambling email I would have let them read my inbox. They could start a whole new school of medicine.

14 of 195 comments (clear)

  1. Idle? by Kagura · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Wow. They even used a pic like Idle. Why is this filtering into my regular slashdot now?

    1. Re:Idle? by eln · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's all part of Slashdot's master plan to become just another digg/fark clone.

      Think about it: First they create the Politics section to get people used to the idea that they aren't just "News for Nerds" anymore, then they replace their perfectly good interface with a godawful Web 2.0 mess. Then, they introduce the "Idle" section for so-called "humorous" links (man, I was just thinking to myself: there just aren't enough sites out there dedicated to posting "funny" news stories). Now, content that should be in Idle starts bleeding out into other sections.

      Next steps: Creation of "Boobies" tag, site name change to "Rob Malda's Slashdot.org", removal of "Boobies" tag in effort to become a more "serious" funny links aggregator. I can hardly wait.

    2. Re:Idle? by Kagura · · Score: 5, Insightful

      replace their perfectly good interface with a godawful Web 2.0 mess.

      I didn't mind any changes they made in the least, except for the silly changes to the user page! Now it takes two clicks and page loads in between to get to my comment page, whereas before it was only one simple click from the main page. This is the only change I've minded, and I mind considerably.

      First they came for my easy-to-read Slashdot color scheme, but I did not speak out...

    3. Re:Idle? by eln · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm with you 100% on the user page. What we have now is uglier and provides less information than the old one. The only reason I go to my own user page is to see if anyone has replied to my comments, and now I have to navigate two (slower) pages to do it. I don't understand what they were thinking on that one. There seems to be no benefit at all to the new page.

    4. Re:Idle? by owlnation · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The best thing to do is not comment on this kind of article -- other than to register protest.

      I note the really lame article "The Year of 2008 In Cybercrime" from Networkworld got only 42 comments -- many of which were complaints about the low quality of Networkworld. That's the way to show the editors the failure of their new direction and their sell-out.

      The slow idle-creep has to stop. If they want to have a Digg-type site then let them create a new site altogether. Call it Idle and keep it off Slashdot. The audience for Idle is NOT the same as Slashdot. At this rate someone will have to create a new site to cater for the core Slashdot audience, because it seems that Taco and the boys have stopped caring about their regular readers.

    5. Re:Idle? by PCM2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Thirded. I don't even understand what the new user page is trying to achieve. Slashdot is the only site I know that keeps the same fugly color scheme and design but expends extra effort to mess up the UI on a regular basis. If I could roll back to the design from 2000, I would.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    6. Re:Idle? by Jesus_666 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I know. My brother used to do this occasionally, although only for short conversations á la: "Wake up, it's time for lunch." - "Yeah, I'll be there in five minutes." Of course he would then go back to seep and not even remember I ever woke him up. Quite annoying until it stopped at some point.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    7. Re:Idle? by freeweed · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Seriously folks, this is getting to the point of horseshit. I have yet to hear anyone actually DEFEND these changes; the best comes down to "it's not the end of the world". Akin to "hey, modern Windows is good, it doesn't crash very often anymore". ie: a backhanded compliment.

      Time for a new meme. I'm fucking sick of the trashing of Slashdot, and the user page was the last straw. Let's raise this issue on every single story thread. There ain't enough compliant mods to handle us, and we always talk about what the Slash community could do with its numbers...

      As this clearly isn't Rob et al's decision, let's fight fire with fire. Trash this site folks, because the site operators are doing it anyway. Let's make sure every single story has pointless offtopic threads like this until something fucking changes.

      Honestly, for a while I thought I was the only one. I'm not in the "Slash has gone downhill re: comment quality crowd", but for fuck's sake - STOP TURNING THIS INTO FARK.

      --
      Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
  2. not uncommon by ILuvRamen · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Now that there's ambien and those other zombie drugs, people are sleep driving, jogging, typing, cooking, and eating. I wish I was making those up but every single one has reportedly happened. Maybe drugs that screw with your brain that much that yo go into a semi-conscious zombie haze should be taken off the market. I'm not saying this lady necessarily took them, but that sort of thing has been known to happen on some sleep aids.

    --
    Google's Super Secret Search Algorithm: SELECT @search_results FROM internet WHERE @search_results = 'good'
  3. Missing something? by dexmachina · · Score: 4, Insightful

    From the summary and TFA, it sounds like she found out emails that she didn't recall writing had been sent from her computer, so she went to a doctor and they concluded she was sleep walking. No where does it say anything about observational studies being conducted, or anything that suggests anyone actually saw her do this. So...why exactly was the possibility of her account being hacked/pranked by a friend ruled out?

    1. Re:Missing something? by penguinbrat · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I can see some hacker out there laughing his off at this - for his new fangled virus randomly puts together jargon'ed sentences, and sends out emails (along with his virus) from the address book, and we intelligently come up with "Sleep Mailing"...

  4. Oh man, she was SLEEPING? by Gizzmonic · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Marisa? Does that mean the date is off?

    C'mon, I thought we were finally getting somewhere. I even went out and bought the finest wine and caviar, all for you, my 44-year-old somnambulist. Does this mean my robe and wizard hat will continue to collect dust?

    --
    (-1, Raw and Uncut is the only way to read)
  5. Re:Seems like a good excuse as any by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    It's rather shocking that there are several cases of rapists being acquitted because of this. If they had committed murder instead, you think they'd still succeed with this defense?

    You're still liable for your actions when you're extremely drunk or whacked out on drugs. I don't see why this would be substantially different. The woman was sexually assaulted. She can identify who did it. If there is substantial medical evidence that he was "asleep", that should be grounds for lighter sentencing or perhaps a lesser charge, not complete acquittal.

  6. Re:Amazing what happens when you're asleep by evanbd · · Score: 3, Insightful

    0.0005%? You've seen 200,000 patients? Impressive.