One of the major points of a free society is the openness of courts. The reason is that it's a lot harder to engage in shenanigans if you know that the public has the ability to attend the proceedings or view the record.
Yes, but the important thing is that any member of the public may observe a court in action to determine that it is being run according to a fair process. For this purpose, the way a case is dealt with and any precedents the ruling sets are very important, but the participants in the particular case are not.
"An anonymous reader" wrote a clueless summary, completely unaware about privacy. So far, so bad. samzenpus, a/. editor who should know what privacy means in the digital era promoted it on the first page. That's worse.
For the record: By replacing the actual names of people with fictional names, nothing is really changed from the court records for any practical reasons (you can still use them and quote them in other hearings, etc.). The only thing that changed is that you cannot identify the people (to easily) -- who would such data need anyway (and did not have access to it already before posting court orders on-line)?
Travel agents don't charge you more than going directly to the airline. If they did, nobody in their right mind would use them. They make a profit on the transaction because the airline charges them 15% less because the agency's do so much business with them in the long run and because if they didn't the agencies wouldn't handle their business.
Wrong, at least in Europe. This "hidden cost" feature, which actually made the air tickets more expensive is no longer used (probably even no longer allowed by consumer protection agencies).
So, travel agents charge you a service fee. In France, this is typically 25 Euro for a national, and 35 Euro for an international flight. This is for real-person travel agents, I'm not sure for aggregation sites.
You know what else... Someone left a thick softcover book on my doorstep the other day that listed the names, addresses, and phone numbers of everyone in my region. Hundreds of thousands of people, maybe millions. I called the police about this, but they seemed unconcerned.
Yep, and rightly so. If my name would appear in this softcover book, I would sue the publisher (I opted out in all contracts that my name and address could be published).
Who the heck modded the parent down? He is absolutely right: When you create something, it's your choice to set the terms of distribution -- at least within the bounds of current copyright legislation (e.g. it's your choice to use GNU copyleft terms or creative commons or other terms).
But Lithium-6 is stable, i.e. not radioactive. It can be used to produce Tritium by neutron activation, which in turn is used in thermonuclear weapons. But for Neutron activation you need another radioactive source. So, what's this source? Or is Toshiba using a totally different process?
I doubt that these are properties of an export hit...
In France, Acer was just convicted by a judge to reimburse for all preinstalled and not used software:
A whooping 311,85 Euros (~ 435 US$) for: * 135,20 pour Microsoft Windows XP Home (dont 49,90 euros pour l'installation) * 60,00 pour Microsoft Works * 40,99 pour PowerDVD * 38,66 pour Norton Antivirus * 37,00 pour NTI CD Maker
Note that Acer needed to pay back the prices for shrink wrap full versions, since they did not mention on the box that the versions were only trialware or OEM software with much less functionality.
> Because it subsidizes the cost of the computer. Computers without this stuff would probably retail for another $50-100 or so. > The > market for PCs is all driven by price nowadays. If the HP costs $75 less than a model with similar hardware from another > manufacturer with less "crapware," people are going to buy the HP because it's cheaper.
If this is true, I would like to see much more crapware and get the computer for 1$. Then you only need to reinstall...
Seriously: I doubt that HP gets $75 per machine, maybe $10 -- but this is not enough to install that crap.
> And, just because you don't want to have Norton antivirus (or McAfee, etc.) installed doesn't mean that it's > not a good idea for > many other purchasers. Or, would you rather see another order of magnitude increase in the volume of spam?
No; it's actually a *very bad idea*. It would be a good idea, if they would install a *free* anti-virus. But an anti-virus that stops working after 60 days is a very, very bad idea. And it is a burden to deinstall it and to install a free anti-virus (running two antivirus programs at the same time spells trouble).
Oh, yes. I also bought an HP computer recently. It also took me about 3 hours to have it just sanitized and the required updates installed. I do not remember to have the same annoying problems with Dell, but then this was 4 years ago.
Why the hell is all that crapware on the HP? And why the hell did it even not let it boot me Windows before it asked me stupid questions?
but on the other hand: Here is not MS to blame -- this is HP.
If you have multiple Java versions on your computer and/or you do not know which version is used by your browser, try this page: http://www.javatester.org/version.html
According to AusCERT, http://www.auscert.org.au/render.html?it=7664 you are vulnerable, if your JRE is: - Sun Java Runtime Environment (JRE) 6 - Sun Java Runtime Environment (JRE) 5.0 Update 10 and prior - Sun Java Runtime Environment (JRE) 1.4.2_14 and prior - Sun Java Runtime Environment (JRE) 1.3.1_20 and prior
About closing subsidiaries in the EU or any member state: It is stated over and over at/. that Google could do so, MS could do so, $company_name could do so. Actually: no, they can't if they want to do business in the EU. And doing business is their goal, not fighting regulations (which btw in the trademark case about gmail is absolutely clear: Google is wrong).
About the Google announcement that they might fight the planned German data retention laws by removing access to their services in Germany. Call this a bluff. And nobody actually believes them; probably Google don't believe themselves.
BTW: It's interesting that Google has a problem with the German data retention laws. It's still fact that Google has one of the worst data keeping policies (nearly forever, now they want to anonymize the IP addresses and cookies after 18 months). If you have those policies, the German data retention laws really look mostly harmless (which they are not IMHO, but still Google's are worse).
Actually, Google already lost this case in April 2006, but they appealed. Now, they lost the appeal also at the Hanseatic Upper Court. Google cannot appeal at the German Supreme Court but could try to file for non-admission of the ruling. Here is an article that gets the details right.
Interestingly, Google already rebranded GMail in Germany as Googlemail, so it's really not that clear why they think that they have a case and why it is important to them.
... missing from the/. summary. What kind of summary is this, an appetizer?
So, the result is: The test persons could not really find a difference between the different encodings, but were please to use the high-end earphones. The test itself is absolutely not representative (only 10 testers, favorite pop music only, etc.).
I wonder how many would have read TFA if this has been known from the summary?
As a footnote, after going to the movies 3 times and sitting through the useless mpaa ad about 'stealing is a crime' I don't go to the cinema any more.
Better: "Bouh" the mpaa ads. Cry loud: "I am not a criminal". It has a quite nice effect in the theater (I know, because I do so).
Well, the reason why Greenpeace exists (and people give them money) is that they actually investigate and report those misuses. However, there are lots of reports done by other authorities (including French and German federal laboratories) -- Greenpeace just used legal means to publish these reports. Just follow the links in the original article for more information.
Where did you those stories from? I am living in Europe, but I only heard about "happy slappers" once in the UK -- and those slappers were usually the white guys slapping the not so white guys.
Obviously all conclusions drawn from those wrong premises are void.
Notice to slashdot moderators: Who thinks that the parent is informative? Please mod it down; the poster is obviously a troll (unless you find that racists comments are not troll postings -- but then you're the troll).
If you RTFA, you see that his problems are a Microsoft environment at work that required seamless exchange of MS DOC formats and MS Exchange. Since MS does not open those formats, the applications under Linux are not 100% compatible with the proprietary MS environment. So he gave up.
While his decision is probably OK for his MS centric environment, it does by no means mean that Linux is somehow at fault. So, no news.
Short: His blog entry is superfluous and was for no good reason reflected at/.
At the same time/. has a poll of our favorite weapons, which would have been funny, if not containing two existing mass destruction weapons. Then, a new weapon, heat rays, makes the front page on/.
Sight, when was the last time geeks weren't impressed by weapons?
Slashdot Mirror
One of the major points of a free society is the openness of courts. The reason is that it's a lot harder to engage in shenanigans if you know that the public has the ability to attend the proceedings or view the record.
Yes, but the important thing is that any member of the public may observe a court in action to determine that it is being run according to a fair process. For this purpose, the way a case is dealt with and any precedents the ruling sets are very important, but the participants in the particular case are not.
Yes. Thank you. One cannot say this often enough.
"An anonymous reader" wrote a clueless summary, completely unaware about privacy. So far, so bad. samzenpus, a /. editor who should know what privacy means in the digital era promoted it on the first page. That's worse.
For the record: By replacing the actual names of people with fictional names, nothing is really changed from the court records for any practical reasons (you can still use them and quote them in other hearings, etc.). The only thing that changed is that you cannot identify the people (to easily) -- who would such data need anyway (and did not have access to it already before posting court orders on-line)?
Travel agents don't charge you more than going directly to the airline. If they did, nobody in their right mind would use them. They make a profit on the transaction because the airline charges them 15% less because the agency's do so much business with them in the long run and because if they didn't the agencies wouldn't handle their business.
Wrong, at least in Europe. This "hidden cost" feature, which actually made the air tickets more expensive is no longer used (probably even no longer allowed by consumer protection agencies).
So, travel agents charge you a service fee. In France, this is typically 25 Euro for a national, and 35 Euro for an international flight. This is for real-person travel agents, I'm not sure for aggregation sites.
You know what else... Someone left a thick softcover book on my doorstep the other day that listed the names, addresses, and phone numbers of everyone in my region. Hundreds of thousands of people, maybe millions. I called the police about this, but they seemed unconcerned.
Yep, and rightly so. If my name would appear in this softcover book, I would sue the publisher (I opted out in all contracts that my name and address could be published).
Who the heck modded the parent down? He is absolutely right: When you create something, it's your choice to set the terms of distribution -- at least within the bounds of current copyright legislation (e.g. it's your choice to use GNU copyleft terms or creative commons or other terms).
And, let's be blunt, American state pensions might possibly feed a squirrel, but nothing much bigger.
So what? It's about a European plan, and in most EU countries you have a quite good pensions scheme.
And even if: What does the pension has to do with copyright periods?
I second this. This mix of Science Fiction and Fantasy more than once drove me out a book store without newly bought SF literature under my arms.
Try pressing a book against your ear for half an hour -- ever notice that you skin gets warm?
TFA says it'll use lithium-6
But Lithium-6 is stable, i.e. not radioactive. It can be used to produce Tritium by neutron activation, which in turn is used in thermonuclear weapons. But for Neutron activation you need another radioactive source. So, what's this source? Or is Toshiba using a totally different process?
I doubt that these are properties of an export hit ...
And for the first time, /.'s Borg Gates pictogram really makes sense ...
In France, Acer was just convicted by a judge to reimburse for all preinstalled and not used software:
A whooping 311,85 Euros (~ 435 US$) for:
* 135,20 pour Microsoft Windows XP Home (dont 49,90 euros pour l'installation)
* 60,00 pour Microsoft Works
* 40,99 pour PowerDVD
* 38,66 pour Norton Antivirus
* 37,00 pour NTI CD Maker
Note that Acer needed to pay back the prices for shrink wrap full versions, since they did not mention on the box that the versions were only trialware or OEM software with much less functionality.
Here are links to the story:
In French: http://perso.libre-zone.net/article-125-proc-dure-r-ussie-num-ro-4.html
In German: http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/96518
>> Why the hell is all that crapware on the HP?
...
> Because it subsidizes the cost of the computer. Computers without this stuff would probably retail for another $50-100 or so.
> The
> market for PCs is all driven by price nowadays. If the HP costs $75 less than a model with similar hardware from another
> manufacturer with less "crapware," people are going to buy the HP because it's cheaper.
If this is true, I would like to see much more crapware and get the computer for 1$. Then you only need to reinstall
Seriously: I doubt that HP gets $75 per machine, maybe $10 -- but this is not enough to install that crap.
> And, just because you don't want to have Norton antivirus (or McAfee, etc.) installed doesn't mean that it's
> not a good idea for
> many other purchasers. Or, would you rather see another order of magnitude increase in the volume of spam?
No; it's actually a *very bad idea*. It would be a good idea, if they would install a *free* anti-virus. But an anti-virus that stops working after 60 days is a very, very bad idea. And it is a burden to deinstall it and to install a free anti-virus (running two antivirus programs at the same time spells trouble).
Oh, yes. I also bought an HP computer recently. It also took me about 3 hours to have it just sanitized and the required updates installed. I do not remember to have the same annoying problems with Dell, but then this was 4 years ago.
Why the hell is all that crapware on the HP? And why the hell did it even not let it boot me Windows before it asked me stupid questions?
but on the other hand: Here is not MS to blame -- this is HP.
If you have multiple Java versions on your computer and/or you do not know which version is used by your browser, try this page:
http://www.javatester.org/version.html
According to AusCERT, http://www.auscert.org.au/render.html?it=7664
you are vulnerable, if your JRE is:
- Sun Java Runtime Environment (JRE) 6
- Sun Java Runtime Environment (JRE) 5.0 Update 10 and prior
- Sun Java Runtime Environment (JRE) 1.4.2_14 and prior
- Sun Java Runtime Environment (JRE) 1.3.1_20 and prior
About closing subsidiaries in the EU or any member state: It is stated over and over at /. that Google could do so, MS could do so, $company_name could do so. Actually: no, they can't if they want to do business in the EU. And doing business is their goal, not fighting regulations (which btw in the trademark case about gmail is absolutely clear: Google is wrong).
About the Google announcement that they might fight the planned German data retention laws by removing access to their services in Germany. Call this a bluff. And nobody actually believes them; probably Google don't believe themselves.
BTW: It's interesting that Google has a problem with the German data retention laws. It's still fact that Google has one of the worst data keeping policies (nearly forever, now they want to anonymize the IP addresses and cookies after 18 months). If you have those policies, the German data retention laws really look mostly harmless (which they are not IMHO, but still Google's are worse).
Actually, Google already lost this case in April 2006, but they appealed. Now, they lost the appeal also at the Hanseatic Upper Court. Google cannot appeal at the German Supreme Court but could try to file for non-admission of the ruling. Here is an article that gets the details right.
Interestingly, Google already rebranded GMail in Germany as Googlemail, so it's really not that clear why they think that they have a case and why it is important to them.
... missing from the /. summary. What kind of summary is this, an appetizer?
So, the result is: The test persons could not really find a difference between the different encodings, but were please to use the high-end earphones. The test itself is absolutely not representative (only 10 testers, favorite pop music only, etc.).
I wonder how many would have read TFA if this has been known from the summary?
As a footnote, after going to the movies 3 times and sitting through the useless mpaa ad about 'stealing is a crime' I don't go to the cinema any more.
Better: "Bouh" the mpaa ads. Cry loud: "I am not a criminal". It has a quite nice effect in the theater (I know, because I do so).
I absolutely agree. And that's why I have voted it down in the Firehose. Apparently enough others found the article good enough. *Sight*.
However, it is also apparent that no experiments have been carried out to investigate this product's effect on human subjects.
Do you volunteer?
Well, the reason why Greenpeace exists (and people give them money) is that they actually investigate and report those misuses. However, there are lots of reports done by other authorities (including French and German federal laboratories) -- Greenpeace just used legal means to publish these reports. Just follow the links in the original article for more information.
Where did you those stories from? I am living in Europe, but I only heard about "happy slappers" once in the UK -- and those slappers were usually the white guys slapping the not so white guys.
Obviously all conclusions drawn from those wrong premises are void.
Notice to slashdot moderators: Who thinks that the parent is informative? Please mod it down; the poster is obviously a troll (unless you find that racists comments are not troll postings -- but then you're the troll).
It would be criminal for an ordinary spectator -- but for completely different reasons: Copyright.
If you RTFA, you see that his problems are a Microsoft environment at work that required seamless exchange of MS DOC formats and MS Exchange. Since MS does not open those formats, the applications under Linux are not 100% compatible with the proprietary MS environment. So he gave up.
/.
While his decision is probably OK for his MS centric environment, it does by no means mean that Linux is somehow at fault. So, no news.
Short: His blog entry is superfluous and was for no good reason reflected at
At the same time /. has a poll of our favorite weapons, which would have been funny, if not containing two existing mass destruction weapons. Then, a new weapon, heat rays, makes the front page on /.
Sight, when was the last time geeks weren't impressed by weapons?