Slashdot has devolved to news about moronic fan boys sitting around in a non-line waiting for a product that doesn't exist. Maybe you guys could start a separate stupiddot.org and put this kind of useless info there.
Dude made a rookie mistake. Never work without a contract and never give your work away for free. He kind of screwed himself. A judge may rule compensation and copyright violation but he will likely not get enough to cover his legal fees.
The scenario created by these researchers does not take into account information that is received yet purposefully ignored, information lost and rediscovered, or how information can be received more than once, in multiple formats and/or revisions, as well as their flawed case where a node can only transmit once. There is nothing real world about this study and the few correct points the article makes is merely common sense that any average person could have concluded by a few moments of simple thought on the topic. This research is flawed by its own sterilized environment and merely reaches an elementary assumption at best. They could conceive a more accurate understanding of the dissemination of data by simply going to the public library and studying the history of religious text and how any particularly well known piece of 'data' has spread over time, yet still has not been dispensed completely to all potential 'nodes' in its original form.
And finally, the term 'dark corners of the internet' is ridiculous, especially considering all of their charts indicate that they assume the internet and everything "inside of it" is round. Looks to me like someone is just milking some grant money on this one until maybe they get lucky and stumble upon some idea that is actually concrete.
Slashdot Mirror
Slashdot has devolved to news about moronic fan boys sitting around in a non-line waiting for a product that doesn't exist. Maybe you guys could start a separate stupiddot.org and put this kind of useless info there.
Dude made a rookie mistake. Never work without a contract and never give your work away for free. He kind of screwed himself. A judge may rule compensation and copyright violation but he will likely not get enough to cover his legal fees.
The scenario created by these researchers does not take into account information that is received yet purposefully ignored, information lost and rediscovered, or how information can be received more than once, in multiple formats and/or revisions, as well as their flawed case where a node can only transmit once. There is nothing real world about this study and the few correct points the article makes is merely common sense that any average person could have concluded by a few moments of simple thought on the topic. This research is flawed by its own sterilized environment and merely reaches an elementary assumption at best. They could conceive a more accurate understanding of the dissemination of data by simply going to the public library and studying the history of religious text and how any particularly well known piece of 'data' has spread over time, yet still has not been dispensed completely to all potential 'nodes' in its original form. And finally, the term 'dark corners of the internet' is ridiculous, especially considering all of their charts indicate that they assume the internet and everything "inside of it" is round. Looks to me like someone is just milking some grant money on this one until maybe they get lucky and stumble upon some idea that is actually concrete.