Not only is this fairly worthless research, but the fact that $28,000 was spent solving this problem is pathetic given how obvious the answer is. Anyone who's ever taken a shower before has almost certainly noticed that the flowing water causes the air inside the shower to move.
After that simple observation, figuring out that the moving air creates a low-pressure zone that sucks in the shower curtain is but a trivial task.
Remind me to never donate any money to research projects at U. Mass.
WTF people?! This question has been asked about a gajillion times on/. It's a website. They'll post whatever stories they think are interesting! Get over it!
You never mentioned what exactly they've charged you with, but I assume that it has to do with the "threats" sent from your (spoofed) address. Provided they cannot prove that said threats actually were sent by you, they cannot successfully prosecute you and probably also cannot expel you from the university (I'm also assuming the expulsion and restraining orders are based on the criminal charges).
Which leaves you with the question over IP. Since you are not employed by the university and they didn't pay for the creation of the SOS content, it seems like one hell of a stretch for them to claim ownership of said content.
I think you have a very strong case against the university and you could probably sue them big time for violation of yours and other students' First Amemndment rights (by wiping the disks they've effectively irrevesibly censored you and/or the students who posted -- not to mention that they also destroyed your property).
Go get 'em dude. We're all (well most of us anyway) behind ya'.
Uh, and I guess I shouldn't forget the obligatory IANAL.
What I can't understand is why Congress and the courts are so blind to their hypocracy.
It's called MONEY. And lots of it.
What happens when artists try to do engineering
on
Clear Computer Cases
·
· Score: 2
No gounding and no EMI sheilding. These people obviously have zero engineering background.
Re:Enough speed. Where are massively parallel CPUs
on
Nanotube Transistors
·
· Score: 1
I'm actually very surprised that no one has mentioned this here, but to me it's not just the increased speed of these that is interesting. What most people apparently aren't aware of is that these same tubes are what are responsible for passing current through the synapses in brain cells.
Seems to me these types of materials could lead to new breeds of computers that have the type of power that our brains have. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if the first REAL steps toward developing AI involve the use of nanotubes.
If you read the article, really the whole point of it is that the IBM researches have devised a NEW process by which these nanotubes can be mass-produced.
Chinese Prime Minister Jiang Zemin, avid Microsoft enthusiast and regular user of Microsoft Passport, was said to have been greatly angered by the recent uncovering of the oppressive Microsoft Passport license agreement. The official Xinhua news agency quoted him as saying, "All your top-secret spy plane are belong to us."
That's not even something that would be within ICANN's power to do. The set of valid characters for domain names, hostnames, and TLDs is part of the DNS specification.
So, the IETF would need to change the DNS spec to allow ICANN to engage in such silliness.
As if Microsoft is the only company that plays "hardball".
As if there's something wrong with playing "hardball".
As if anti-trust laws have anything to do with "hardball" tactics.
The author of the article obviously has already been indoctrinated into the anti-Microsoft dogma.
He complains too much about Microsoft's "hardball" tactics and not enough about the *real* issue, which is these goddamn non-compete clauses.
I think it's these clauses (which seem pretty standard amongst software companies) that are a violation of anti-trust law because they actually do artificially hamper competition.
That's debatable. They both sucked ass, but 9x was probably more stable considering it had a real kernel with genuine protected mode support instead of that bullshit 386-enhanced layer on top of a shell layer on top of DOS.
Re:I'm sure I'll get flamed for this, but...
on
Alan Cox on a Chip
·
· Score: 1
Huh?? Did you even look at the page?
They took a *photograph* of a monitor (at a bus-terminal or some damned thing) with a supposed "Windows 2000" bluescreen.
If you look at it from Blizzard's perspective, you can see why they are concerned -- especially if New Line's movie is released before Blizzard's is.
They've obviously invested a lot in the production of this movie and New Line's movie will likely impact ticket sales in a negative way. It would be difficult for Blizzard to change the name of *their* movie considering their game has been out for a few years now.
Not to say that I think they have a good legal basis for the suit, but if it were me, I'd be riled up and ready for a fight. Are you other folks saying that if you were in Blizzard's shoes you'd just roll over and die without even trying???
Some lines from the movie "Gladiator" seem appropriate:
General:People should know when they're conquered.
Thanks for solidfying my point so nicely. You are right, my local government does not impede my free-thinking, nor does the President (except that they don't want me taking LSD, but that's a whole different can of worms).
The LDS church on the other hand, disapproves of protest against them from members, questioning of their authority, AND the consumption of LSD. I mean honestly, if you were to seriously protest, say, Hinckley's stance on gays you'd likely be excommunicated. But I don't see the government revoking anyone's citizenship for that reason.
Like I said, *nobody* claimed it was stable. (Read: tooting ones own horn doesn't count as being somebody)
Re:I'm sure I'll get flamed for this, but...
on
Alan Cox on a Chip
·
· Score: 1
How does falsifying evidence de-stabilize Windows 2000? I don't follow your logic.
Re:I'm sure I'll get flamed for this, but...
on
Alan Cox on a Chip
·
· Score: 1
I never claimed that Windows 2000 is immune to crashes. Hell, even Linux will core dump if you run it with shitty drivers. All I'm saying is: that particular picture is not of a Windows 2000 box.
I'm sorry to hear about your computer problems. Have tried calling technical support?:p
Slashdot Mirror
Who says Microsoft has to allow ANYONE to develop ANY software for Windows?
Sad to say boys, but you've all forgotten that Windows BELONGS to Microsoft and they have every right to make it as closed a platform as they'd like.
Not only is this fairly worthless research, but the fact that $28,000 was spent solving this problem is pathetic given how obvious the answer is. Anyone who's ever taken a shower before has almost certainly noticed that the flowing water causes the air inside the shower to move.
After that simple observation, figuring out that the moving air creates a low-pressure zone that sucks in the shower curtain is but a trivial task.
Remind me to never donate any money to research projects at U. Mass.
WTF people?! This question has been asked about a gajillion times on /. It's a website. They'll post whatever stories they think are interesting! Get over it!
I think his point is that no one is going to DIE if they don't get to use Microsoft Word.
World of difference.
Which leaves you with the question over IP. Since you are not employed by the university and they didn't pay for the creation of the SOS content, it seems like one hell of a stretch for them to claim ownership of said content.
I think you have a very strong case against the university and you could probably sue them big time for violation of yours and other students' First Amemndment rights (by wiping the disks they've effectively irrevesibly censored you and/or the students who posted -- not to mention that they also destroyed your property).
Go get 'em dude. We're all (well most of us anyway) behind ya'.
Uh, and I guess I shouldn't forget the obligatory IANAL.
It's called MONEY. And lots of it.
No gounding and no EMI sheilding. These people obviously have zero engineering background.
Seems to me these types of materials could lead to new breeds of computers that have the type of power that our brains have. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if the first REAL steps toward developing AI involve the use of nanotubes.
If you read the article, really the whole point of it is that the IBM researches have devised a NEW process by which these nanotubes can be mass-produced.
Chinese Prime Minister Jiang Zemin, avid Microsoft enthusiast and regular user of Microsoft Passport, was said to have been greatly angered by the recent uncovering of the oppressive Microsoft Passport license agreement. The official Xinhua news agency quoted him as saying, "All your top-secret spy plane are belong to us."
That's not even something that would be within ICANN's power to do. The set of valid characters for domain names, hostnames, and TLDs is part of the DNS specification.
So, the IETF would need to change the DNS spec to allow ICANN to engage in such silliness.
www.minidisco.com Alive and well baby. Come to think of it, I should get myself a new MD player soon. My current player is a bit out-of-date.
It's about time that someone examined this issue using logic rather than emotion and personal bias. A downright heroic essay. Hats off to Mr. Katz.
As if Microsoft is the only company that plays "hardball".
As if there's something wrong with playing "hardball".
As if anti-trust laws have anything to do with "hardball" tactics.
The author of the article obviously has already been indoctrinated into the anti-Microsoft dogma. He complains too much about Microsoft's "hardball" tactics and not enough about the *real* issue, which is these goddamn non-compete clauses.
I think it's these clauses (which seem pretty standard amongst software companies) that are a violation of anti-trust law because they actually do artificially hamper competition.
That's debatable. They both sucked ass, but 9x was probably more stable considering it had a real kernel with genuine protected mode support instead of that bullshit 386-enhanced layer on top of a shell layer on top of DOS.
Huh?? Did you even look at the page?
They took a *photograph* of a monitor (at a bus-terminal or some damned thing) with a supposed "Windows 2000" bluescreen.
If you look at it from Blizzard's perspective, you can see why they are concerned -- especially if New Line's movie is released before Blizzard's is.
They've obviously invested a lot in the production of this movie and New Line's movie will likely impact ticket sales in a negative way. It would be difficult for Blizzard to change the name of *their* movie considering their game has been out for a few years now.
Not to say that I think they have a good legal basis for the suit, but if it were me, I'd be riled up and ready for a fight. Are you other folks saying that if you were in Blizzard's shoes you'd just roll over and die without even trying???
Some lines from the movie "Gladiator" seem appropriate:
General: People should know when they're conquered.
Maximus: Would you give up? ... Would I?
Sounds like a Spanish word to me... don't you think???
Diablo... not Diabolo.
Thanks for solidfying my point so nicely. You are right, my local government does not impede my free-thinking, nor does the President (except that they don't want me taking LSD, but that's a whole different can of worms).
The LDS church on the other hand, disapproves of protest against them from members, questioning of their authority, AND the consumption of LSD. I mean honestly, if you were to seriously protest, say, Hinckley's stance on gays you'd likely be excommunicated. But I don't see the government revoking anyone's citizenship for that reason.
Do you see the difference?
... and besides, they never claimed it was stable in the same sense that NT or UN*X was stable... just that it was more stable than Win3.x
Like I said, *nobody* claimed it was stable. (Read: tooting ones own horn doesn't count as being somebody)
How does falsifying evidence de-stabilize Windows 2000? I don't follow your logic.
I never claimed that Windows 2000 is immune to crashes. Hell, even Linux will core dump if you run it with shitty drivers. All I'm saying is: that particular picture is not of a Windows 2000 box.
I'm sorry to hear about your computer problems. Have tried calling technical support? :p
I believe 0E can be any number of general failures, not necessarily hardware failure.
But it's a Win9x bluescreen anyway, and nobody ever claimed that was stable.