It's hard to know if this is censorship or if they just violated the terms of service and hatebois are flying off the handle. There are still lotsofpostsabouttheconsumerreportsunrecommendation on discussions.apple.com:
The animus toward Apple on Slashdot is striking. It doesn't matter what it is, how useful it is or how big or small the market share is: haters love to hate.
Also, anyone who uses an Apple anything is obviously a "fan-boy" (haters' favorite slur), who's just falling victim to marketing hype. They couldn't possibly find any simplicity, support or use for their Apple product. If only they knew how stupid they were to be spending their money on X electronic item.
Apple's done a lot of dumb things (refusing the run Flash on the iPhone/iPad, the App Store lock-in, proprietary display/data ports) but credit where credit is due: they embraced Unix, open web standards and H.264. Maybe instead of flying off the handle every time Apple is mentioned, you could RTFA and assess the thing on its merits and faults.
The thing is, Apple's enigmatic frontman doesn't turn up to these geeky WWDC shindigs unless he has something to announce which will get the hyped-up gang of Apple fanboys and girls a-whoopin' and a-hollerin'.
I like my iPhone a lot, but Apple runs a ridiculously closed, proprietary system. So Steve's criticism of Flash as being closed and proprietary is so obscene as to be ridiculous.
Saying Apple supports open "web standards" is just splitting hairs. They support open standards when it's in their interest (trying to lure users away from competitors) but otherwise they are one of the biggest offenders when it comes to pushing lock-down, proprietary, our-way-or-the-highway systems.
The only reason Apple gets away with it is because of their small market share. If they had the size or influence of Microsoft they'd get their ass slapped with an antitrust suit just the same.
You'd think this would be well known by now. In order for the network to know how to reach you with a call, your cellphone has to tell the tower where you are. It's just common sense, if you're getting a signal, your whereabouts can be easily determined.
The only way to protect your privacy with a cellphone is to turn it off.
Wait. You mean Google is taking the data I'm storing for free on their servers mining it for information to use in contextual advertising just like I agreed to in the terms and conditions when I signed up?
That is so ironic, considering the goal of the XO laptop...
The XO wasn't meant to be a "poor man's laptop", it was meant to be a learning computer that was also inexpensive. Something that promoted education and collaboration which could also work in a low-power, low-connectivity, intemperate environment.
It wasn't until they agreed to put Windows on it that it became another "poor man's laptop." Now it's just a crappy cheap toy that doesn't promote learning but does run Windows applications (very slowly and underpowered).
A "Do Not Track" registry is an especially dumb idea. Aside from the obvious ideological inconsistency -- registering yourself with every advertiser so they know not to track you, there's also the fact that most people dislike ads because they are irrelevant to what they're looking for (i.e. not targeted). "I don't care how much you think I can lower my mortgage -- I already have a good rate."
Instead, why not have a law that says you can collect and track all you want, but you can't resell that info? I think that's what everyone's concerned about (i.e. privacy). You're already passively giving this information away to a web page when you visit and interact with it -- so there's nothing magic/evil about them using that info to serve you relevant / targeted ads. What is unethical is for them to take that information they know about you and sell it to someone else. I think that's where the real privacy concern comes in, because all it takes is for someone to pay "teh Goog" a shedload of money and they can buy the personal info of millions of people. Make selling the info illegal, not using the information internally.
As long as you have 'reverse discrimination' (which is what affirmative action effectively is), you cannot and should not complain that you're not evaluated on your own merits.
Imagine you're running a marathon, and one group of people get a 300 year head start. Now we let the rest of the people start running and we try to call it a fair race? It's not enough that we're all running, the people who were held back need an opportunity to catch up.
That's what affirmative action is. It's much harder to change economic classes than it is to stay where you are in them. Affirmative action is about letting people catch up so they can advance beyond their parents' social and economic class.
And if you think your parents' socio-economic status has nothing to do with your own, I've got a bridge I'd like to sell you.
I think you misunderstand. Robbery is when you steal directly from a person. i.e. Take something from them in their presense. Burglary is when you steal from them without their being present. Both are illegal, but robbery is considered much more heinous (and the punishments are much more severe) because there is an implied (and often real) act of assault.
What's so inflammatory about NBC saying piracy is more serious crime than robbery is that copyright infringement doesn't involve ANY physical harm. Victims of robbery suffer physical and emotional trauma — on top of their financial loss. That's the difference. That's why statements like that are so callous.
As others have pointed out Seamonkey is more Netscape than Firefox. Why not give the name "Netscape" to the open source project Seamonkey? I was a little disappointed in the Mozilla Foundation for taking the name Mozilla away from the browser-suite, but I think naming the Seamonkey Project "Netscape" would be a nice gesture on AOL's part.
I didn't contribute to G1G1 to buy a laptop. Getting an XO was the bonus. The reason I contributed was because it's a charity, it was x-mas and I was feeling charitable.
If the story was that OLPC lost all of their money backing a player in Texas Hold 'Em, I'd be pissed off. Instead, they're focusing on delivering laptops to the third-world and giving the gift laptop to the first world ran into some troubles.
Yep, I got several e-mails. First a few in December telling me I wouldn't get my laptop by x-mas. Then early in January saying it was coming Jan 15th. Then later saying it wasn't coming yet. No biggie. When I get it, it'll be a fun toy. But it gets here when it gets here.
In the mean time, OLPC should focus on the mission of getting computers to 3rd world kids -- that's what's important.
I try to think of myself as an environmentally conscious person (I don't drive to work -- I take the bus, I buy local and organic foods, I only buy recycled paper products, etc) but I don't agree with mandating CFLs. IMHO, CFLs have a number of problems that make them unacceptable substitutes for Tungsten based bulbs.
CFLs can't be dimmed: it's either on or off with these bulbs, so dimmer switches are worthless
CFL's have a warm-up time: unlike Tungsten-based bulbs, CFLs take between 5-60 seconds to reach "full brightness", so don't plan on seeing much immediately after turning it on
CFLs can't be used with a solar control: Solar indicators (seats for type-A bulbs which turn on when the sun goes down) provide variable power and so they can't be used to control CFL's
CFLs contain mercury: I know the common counter-argument to this is that it is only a small amount of mercury and it doesn't pollute the environment if properly recycled, but there's just something odd about a so-called green bulb containing a known carcinogen and toxin. Especially when we're getting rid of mercury-based thermometers, it seems the wrong time to be mandating a new mercury based product
CFLs give off harsh light: this is an aesthetic reason, which is why I'm listing it last, but it's still pretty significant. In all the CFL's I've tried, the light tends to be too-white, kind of glaring compared to the warm/soft light of Tungsten bulbs. You'd think this would be the easiest one to solve, but in the half-dozen or so different models of CFLs I've tried, the light they produce is always too harsh.
Maybe LEDs can do better. Or maybe there's another lighting filament that can offer the same energy savings of CFLs but without all the florescent drawbacks. But in the mean time, I'll stick with my Tungsten bulbs and just try to limit how many I have on at a time.
Microsoft does the same thing with the Zune Music Store. You don't get to buy an individual song (like you do with iTunes), instead you buy a block of points for $5 and use those points (in non-round numbers) to buy songs. MS is trying to minimize the bite of cc transaction fees buy forcing you into a minimum $5 purchase. The explanation for the non-round number of points needed to buy songs is that MS allows the RIAA to use variable pricing for their songs (unlike Apple which prices all songs at $0.99). It just "happens" to work out that you're always stuck with some leftover points that can't buy you anything.
If the OLPC project succeeds, it shifts from being a competitor to kill to a platform to run on.
Help the OLPC project succeed by participating in the Give 1 Get 1 Program. The G1G1 program is exactly the sort of thing that gives us nerds entry-level access to philanthropy.
Hey, remember when it was revealed that Karl Rove leaked the name of a covert CIA operative and jeopardized our foreign intelligence service? Didn't the FBI swoop in, seize all his computers and haul is national security endangering ass to jail?
No?
Well at least they got Scooter Libby, right? I mean he revealed that agent's name and he went to jail for it!
Hm, he didn't you say? He was only convicted because he lied to a grand jury about it?
Well that's something isn't it? At least he's going to jail for breaking a law -- even if it's not for the treason he actually committed.
Oh wait, he's not going to jail now?
Hm... I guess the problem is that they were actually breaking the law to advance their own interests whereas this guy is whistle-blowing to defend the constitution -- we won't stand for that!
Data jumped from the Enterprise to the Predator without a suit (or anything other than momentum to carry him), but of course being an android he could probably better sustain the lack of air pressure, oxygen and severe UV exposure no problem. His big problem was the self-propulsion.
</big_nerd_moment>
What percentage of Slashdot users are blocking the ads on Slashdot? 80%?
Um, why would someone block ads on slashdot when they can buy a subscription and get no ads? Or are they really that cheap?
Personally (as you can tell) I don't have a subscription, but OTOH, I don't block the ads either. I don't understand why someone who doesn't want to see the ads wouldn't take the no-ad option that doesn't hurt nerd-friendly sites like/.
I really don't understand why people are opposed to copyright. I'm opposed to the Scalia definition of copyright length (i.e. anything less than infinite is copyright for a "limited" term as required by the Constitution), but I'm not opposed to the idea of copyright in general. I think if you write a story, or a song or even a software application you're entitled to control ownership rights of it. Why shouldn't you be? I'm generally curious why authors shouldn't be allowed to have ownership of their works.
Software patents are something else entirely. To me, software is like math or music -- you can own the representation but not the process. I can't claim ownership to Mickey Mouse, but I can still make a cartoon about a mouse. I can't make a web store look like Amazon, but I should be able to offer 1-click checkout. The claim for the need for patent law is to promote innovation. But I think the open-source movement has shown that software innovation doesn't need patent protection to flourish. Quite the contrary, innovation is often stifled by patent squatters.
I also agree with Bulmash's premise that the GPL cannot exist without copyright -- it can't. I'm no lawyer, but as far as I know there's no legal framework that can support GPL style software freedom absent copyright law. It's not just about being "free as in beer" and decompiling a program is certainly not the same thing. Compulsary redistribution of modified sources helps free software thrive. Without copyright law, there could be no GPL. And without the GPL where would the GNU tools be? Where would Linux be? Where would software innovation be?
It seems tricky to me. On the one hand, it is clear that some people are making income selling on ebay. On the other hand, it isn't income every time you sell something. If you have a garage sale and sell off your extra junk it isn't income.
Technically, it is. It's the same as any capital gain (or loss). If sell something, you have to report the difference between the amount you acquired it for and the amount you sold it for as a capital gain (or loss). If its a gain, you owe tax on it. If its a loss, you get to deduct it from your earned income. The IRS won't go chasing you down for every garage sale (unless you're selling Picassos) because it's not worth it -- also I believe there is a certain minimum you need to make before you're required to report it (disclaimer: IANAA).
If someone gives you a gift which you turn around and sell, that doesn't make a gift income. It is still a gift. Who's to say what you are selling on ebay were not gifts that didn't work out?
Actually, you're required to report the fair market value of any gifts you receive as income. You may (or may not) remember that Oprah Winfrey gave away a free car to everyone in her studio audience a while back. Many of these people were shocked to learn that they had to pay tax for the "gift" of the free car -- some couldn't afford the tax.
For small $ stuff, most people get away with not reporting the value of the gifts they receive (birthday, x-mas presents, etc). But larger gifts get more attention and are almost always reported for tax purposes (paycheck bonuses, sweepstakes winnings, etc). So a "gift loophole" doesn't really exist.
It's like getting an extra hour in my evening. Especially when the weather warms up and it's nice outside. I can do more after work thanks to the longer daylight.
Plus, I'll be interested to see if the claim of fewer children getting hit by cars in Halloweeen holds up -- now that DST ends after Halloween and not before.
"For example, after a car bomb detonates, one would have the ability to play high-resolution data backward in time to follows the vehicle back to the source, and then use that knowledge to focus collection and gain additional information by organizing and searching through archived data."
No more "Hooveristic" than a camera at the local Quickie Mart. An action is filmed, the data trail is followed backwards until something useful is found.
Wow, that would be cool -- a bomb goes off somewhere and all the FBI has to do is rewind the tape to find out where the car came from that had the bomb. Ha! That'll show those terrorists!
You know what would be even cooler?
Stopping the terrorists before they detonated the bomb in the first place. It can be done. Without violating people's civil rights. But we don't want to spend time or money on human intelligence because that takes effort.
Slashdot Mirror
1. Geological
2. Meteorological
3. Biological
It's hard to know if this is censorship or if they just violated the terms of service and hatebois are flying off the handle. There are still lots of posts about the consumer reports unrecommendation on discussions.apple.com:
http://discussions.apple.com/search.jspa?search=Go&q=consumer+reports
Still, if it's true it wouldn't be the first time Apple flew off the handle with the censorship (remember the Ulysses app flap?).
Hard working designers like Gloria Vanderbilt and Antoine Bugleboy. These are the people who saw an overcrowded marketplace and said, "Me too!"
The animus toward Apple on Slashdot is striking. It doesn't matter what it is, how useful it is or how big or small the market share is: haters love to hate.
Haters are always looking for the "Apple killer." Whether it's the iPod-killer, Mac Mini-killer, iPhone-killer, Mac Book Air-killer or now iPad-killers. They want to see them all killed.
Also, anyone who uses an Apple anything is obviously a "fan-boy" (haters' favorite slur), who's just falling victim to marketing hype. They couldn't possibly find any simplicity, support or use for their Apple product. If only they knew how stupid they were to be spending their money on X electronic item.
Apple's done a lot of dumb things (refusing the run Flash on the iPhone/iPad, the App Store lock-in, proprietary display/data ports) but credit where credit is due: they embraced Unix, open web standards and H.264. Maybe instead of flying off the handle every time Apple is mentioned, you could RTFA and assess the thing on its merits and faults.
Keep trollin' on, haters.
I like my iPhone a lot, but Apple runs a ridiculously closed, proprietary system. So Steve's criticism of Flash as being closed and proprietary is so obscene as to be ridiculous.
Saying Apple supports open "web standards" is just splitting hairs. They support open standards when it's in their interest (trying to lure users away from competitors) but otherwise they are one of the biggest offenders when it comes to pushing lock-down, proprietary, our-way-or-the-highway systems.
The only reason Apple gets away with it is because of their small market share. If they had the size or influence of Microsoft they'd get their ass slapped with an antitrust suit just the same.
You'd think this would be well known by now. In order for the network to know how to reach you with a call, your cellphone has to tell the tower where you are. It's just common sense, if you're getting a signal, your whereabouts can be easily determined.
The only way to protect your privacy with a cellphone is to turn it off.
Really, I want to know. I know it's the "American Pasttime" but is the metaphor of "three strikes" even used there?
Wait. You mean Google is taking the data I'm storing for free on their servers mining it for information to use in contextual advertising just like I agreed to in the terms and conditions when I signed up?
And also, I want a pony.
Seriously. If anything it would be Linux that might save Palm.
The XO wasn't meant to be a "poor man's laptop", it was meant to be a learning computer that was also inexpensive. Something that promoted education and collaboration which could also work in a low-power, low-connectivity, intemperate environment.
It wasn't until they agreed to put Windows on it that it became another "poor man's laptop." Now it's just a crappy cheap toy that doesn't promote learning but does run Windows applications (very slowly and underpowered).
A "Do Not Track" registry is an especially dumb idea. Aside from the obvious ideological inconsistency -- registering yourself with every advertiser so they know not to track you, there's also the fact that most people dislike ads because they are irrelevant to what they're looking for (i.e. not targeted). "I don't care how much you think I can lower my mortgage -- I already have a good rate."
Instead, why not have a law that says you can collect and track all you want, but you can't resell that info? I think that's what everyone's concerned about (i.e. privacy). You're already passively giving this information away to a web page when you visit and interact with it -- so there's nothing magic/evil about them using that info to serve you relevant / targeted ads. What is unethical is for them to take that information they know about you and sell it to someone else. I think that's where the real privacy concern comes in, because all it takes is for someone to pay "teh Goog" a shedload of money and they can buy the personal info of millions of people. Make selling the info illegal, not using the information internally.
Imagine you're running a marathon, and one group of people get a 300 year head start. Now we let the rest of the people start running and we try to call it a fair race? It's not enough that we're all running, the people who were held back need an opportunity to catch up.
That's what affirmative action is. It's much harder to change economic classes than it is to stay where you are in them. Affirmative action is about letting people catch up so they can advance beyond their parents' social and economic class.
And if you think your parents' socio-economic status has nothing to do with your own, I've got a bridge I'd like to sell you.
I think you misunderstand. Robbery is when you steal directly from a person. i.e. Take something from them in their presense. Burglary is when you steal from them without their being present. Both are illegal, but robbery is considered much more heinous (and the punishments are much more severe) because there is an implied (and often real) act of assault.
What's so inflammatory about NBC saying piracy is more serious crime than robbery is that copyright infringement doesn't involve ANY physical harm. Victims of robbery suffer physical and emotional trauma — on top of their financial loss. That's the difference. That's why statements like that are so callous.
As others have pointed out Seamonkey is more Netscape than Firefox. Why not give the name "Netscape" to the open source project Seamonkey? I was a little disappointed in the Mozilla Foundation for taking the name Mozilla away from the browser-suite, but I think naming the Seamonkey Project "Netscape" would be a nice gesture on AOL's part.
I didn't contribute to G1G1 to buy a laptop. Getting an XO was the bonus. The reason I contributed was because it's a charity, it was x-mas and I was feeling charitable.
If the story was that OLPC lost all of their money backing a player in Texas Hold 'Em, I'd be pissed off. Instead, they're focusing on delivering laptops to the third-world and giving the gift laptop to the first world ran into some troubles.
Yep, I got several e-mails. First a few in December telling me I wouldn't get my laptop by x-mas. Then early in January saying it was coming Jan 15th. Then later saying it wasn't coming yet. No biggie. When I get it, it'll be a fun toy. But it gets here when it gets here.
In the mean time, OLPC should focus on the mission of getting computers to 3rd world kids -- that's what's important.
- CFLs can't be dimmed: it's either on or off with these bulbs, so dimmer switches are worthless
- CFL's have a warm-up time: unlike Tungsten-based bulbs, CFLs take between 5-60 seconds to reach "full brightness", so don't plan on seeing much immediately after turning it on
- CFLs can't be used with a solar control: Solar indicators (seats for type-A bulbs which turn on when the sun goes down) provide variable power and so they can't be used to control CFL's
- CFLs contain mercury: I know the common counter-argument to this is that it is only a small amount of mercury and it doesn't pollute the environment if properly recycled, but there's just something odd about a so-called green bulb containing a known carcinogen and toxin. Especially when we're getting rid of mercury-based thermometers, it seems the wrong time to be mandating a new mercury based product
- CFLs give off harsh light: this is an aesthetic reason, which is why I'm listing it last, but it's still pretty significant. In all the CFL's I've tried, the light tends to be too-white, kind of glaring compared to the warm/soft light of Tungsten bulbs. You'd think this would be the easiest one to solve, but in the half-dozen or so different models of CFLs I've tried, the light they produce is always too harsh.
Maybe LEDs can do better. Or maybe there's another lighting filament that can offer the same energy savings of CFLs but without all the florescent drawbacks. But in the mean time, I'll stick with my Tungsten bulbs and just try to limit how many I have on at a time.Microsoft does the same thing with the Zune Music Store. You don't get to buy an individual song (like you do with iTunes), instead you buy a block of points for $5 and use those points (in non-round numbers) to buy songs. MS is trying to minimize the bite of cc transaction fees buy forcing you into a minimum $5 purchase. The explanation for the non-round number of points needed to buy songs is that MS allows the RIAA to use variable pricing for their songs (unlike Apple which prices all songs at $0.99). It just "happens" to work out that you're always stuck with some leftover points that can't buy you anything.
Hey, remember when it was revealed that Karl Rove leaked the name of a covert CIA operative and jeopardized our foreign intelligence service? Didn't the FBI swoop in, seize all his computers and haul is national security endangering ass to jail?
No?
Well at least they got Scooter Libby, right? I mean he revealed that agent's name and he went to jail for it!
Hm, he didn't you say? He was only convicted because he lied to a grand jury about it?
Well that's something isn't it? At least he's going to jail for breaking a law -- even if it's not for the treason he actually committed.
Oh wait, he's not going to jail now?
Hm... I guess the problem is that they were actually breaking the law to advance their own interests whereas this guy is whistle-blowing to defend the constitution -- we won't stand for that!
Data jumped from the Enterprise to the Predator without a suit (or anything other than momentum to carry him), but of course being an android he could probably better sustain the lack of air pressure, oxygen and severe UV exposure no problem. His big problem was the self-propulsion.
</big_nerd_moment>
Personally (as you can tell) I don't have a subscription, but OTOH, I don't block the ads either. I don't understand why someone who doesn't want to see the ads wouldn't take the no-ad option that doesn't hurt nerd-friendly sites like /.
I really don't understand why people are opposed to copyright. I'm opposed to the Scalia definition of copyright length (i.e. anything less than infinite is copyright for a "limited" term as required by the Constitution), but I'm not opposed to the idea of copyright in general. I think if you write a story, or a song or even a software application you're entitled to control ownership rights of it. Why shouldn't you be? I'm generally curious why authors shouldn't be allowed to have ownership of their works.
Software patents are something else entirely. To me, software is like math or music -- you can own the representation but not the process. I can't claim ownership to Mickey Mouse, but I can still make a cartoon about a mouse. I can't make a web store look like Amazon, but I should be able to offer 1-click checkout. The claim for the need for patent law is to promote innovation. But I think the open-source movement has shown that software innovation doesn't need patent protection to flourish. Quite the contrary, innovation is often stifled by patent squatters.
I also agree with Bulmash's premise that the GPL cannot exist without copyright -- it can't. I'm no lawyer, but as far as I know there's no legal framework that can support GPL style software freedom absent copyright law. It's not just about being "free as in beer" and decompiling a program is certainly not the same thing. Compulsary redistribution of modified sources helps free software thrive. Without copyright law, there could be no GPL. And without the GPL where would the GNU tools be? Where would Linux be? Where would software innovation be?
Actually, you're required to report the fair market value of any gifts you receive as income. You may (or may not) remember that Oprah Winfrey gave away a free car to everyone in her studio audience a while back. Many of these people were shocked to learn that they had to pay tax for the "gift" of the free car -- some couldn't afford the tax.
For small $ stuff, most people get away with not reporting the value of the gifts they receive (birthday, x-mas presents, etc). But larger gifts get more attention and are almost always reported for tax purposes (paycheck bonuses, sweepstakes winnings, etc). So a "gift loophole" doesn't really exist.
It's like getting an extra hour in my evening. Especially when the weather warms up and it's nice outside. I can do more after work thanks to the longer daylight.
Plus, I'll be interested to see if the claim of fewer children getting hit by cars in Halloweeen holds up -- now that DST ends after Halloween and not before.
Wow, that would be cool -- a bomb goes off somewhere and all the FBI has to do is rewind the tape to find out where the car came from that had the bomb. Ha! That'll show those terrorists!
You know what would be even cooler?
Stopping the terrorists before they detonated the bomb in the first place. It can be done. Without violating people's civil rights. But we don't want to spend time or money on human intelligence because that takes effort.