Slashdot Mirror


BBC Uses Skype Links In Murder Hunt

Nico M writes "The highly publicized UK murder hunt for the serial killer(s) of five young sex workers in Suffolk is using Skype to ask the public for information. BBC News is embedding freephone Skype links to both the police incident room and Crimestoppers UK. Is this the first time Skype has been used in this way?"

193 comments

  1. Finally by antifoidulus · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    A legitimate chance to tag something on slashdot as "deadhookers"

    1. Re:Finally by Angostura · · Score: 1

      Not particularly funny.

  2. Hello! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Goodbye!

  3. Sex workers? by Dan+East · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sex worker, is that the PC term for prostitute?

    Dan East

    --
    Better known as 318230.
    1. Re:sex workers? by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's in Wikipedia, so it must be so! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_worker

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    2. Re:Sex workers? by Whiney+Mac+Fanboy · · Score: 5, Informative

      Sex worker, is that the PC term for prostitute?

      I am amazed that so few slashdotters (reading the first 10 posts or so) are unfamiliar with that term. (Do you all live under rocks or something?)

      Its basically a superset of prostitute - including people in the industry who don't actually fuck for money, ie strip dancers, porn stars, topless waiters, dominatrixes (sp?) etc.

      Nothing PC about it.

      --
      There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
    3. Re:Sex workers? by lastninja · · Score: 5, Funny

      including people in the industry who don't actually fuck for money, ie strip dancers, porn stars, topless waiters, dominatrixes (sp?) etc.
      What kind of boring non-fucking porn do you watch?

      --
      John Carmack fan, browsing at +5 since 1999.
    4. Re:sex workers? by dysfunct · · Score: 1

      It's only partially politically correct. Many prostitutes call themselves hookers with pride but do not like the term being used in derogatory ways.

      Then there's also many men and women offering sexual services with high business ethics and highly professional attitude, just-for-fun prostitutes, tantra massage and other intimate services that involve some sexuality for spiritual and emotional reasons as well as parts of the sex industry that perform sexual acts that do not actually involve penetration or similar but focus on phantasy and mental aspects.

      Long story short, prostitutes are still prostitutes but as such only a part of the performing sexual industry nowadays called sex workers.

      --
      :/- spoon(_).
    5. Re:Sex workers? by Marbleless · · Score: 2, Informative

      > I am amazed that so few slashdotters (reading the first 10 posts or so) are unfamiliar with that term. (Do you all live under rocks or something?)

      They may not live under rocks, but it would be interesting to know where they do live.

      Here in Australia, 'sex worker' is a fairly common pseudonym for prostitute.

      > Nothing PC about it.

      An ironic comment from someone with a web address of http://whineymacfanboy.googlepages.com/ !

      --
      --I thought I was wrong once, but I was mistaken.
    6. Re:sex workers? by fabs64 · · Score: 2, Informative

      You're aware that "whore" "prostitute" and "escort" all have other literal and colloquial meanings? Also the aforementioned words fail to include strippers etc.

    7. Re:Sex workers? by Whiney+Mac+Fanboy · · Score: 1


      > Nothing PC about it.

      An ironic comment from someone with a web address of http://whineymacfanboy.googlepages.com/


      I actually think it would've been more appropriate to link to my diary Why is Apple afraid of being PC ;-)

      --
      There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
    8. Re:Sex workers? by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I am amazed that so few slashdotters (reading the first 10 posts or so) are unfamiliar with that term. (Do you all live under rocks or something?)

      A lot of Slashdotters are American and the term isn't really used in the USA, probably since prostitution is illegal in most parts of the country (excepting Nevada but not Las Vegas city). So terms that "legitimize" it are less likely to be used.

      -b.

    9. Re:Sex workers? by Whiney+Mac+Fanboy · · Score: 1

      What kind of boring non-fucking porn do you watch?

      Point taken, but there's plenty of solo/etc porn out there - and it was merely an example of non-fucking-for-money.

      [ot your sig]
      John Carmack fan, browsing at +5 since 1999.

      How did you read my comment (rated +3 at time of writing)

      --
      There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
    10. Re:Sex workers? by Whiney+Mac+Fanboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      prostitution is illegal in most parts of the country

      Seriously? Illegal? (not just regulated?)

      Why is it illegal to sell a (much in demand) service in the land of the free?

      --
      There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
    11. Re:Sex workers? by TapeCutter · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yep, I will second that. Here in Oz we have something called the sex workers union. Personally I think the "deadhookers" tag is extremely bad taste, it is disrespectful toward both the dead and their greiving relatives.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    12. Re:Sex workers? by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 3, Informative
      Seriously? Illegal? (not just regulated?)

      Yeah, illegal, except for "rural" Nevada. Enforced to various degrees depending on where you are, and there are always loopholes for people setting up brothels ("it's a massage parlor, dammit!"). As to why - probably due to religious taboos to a large extent. After all, the USA *was* founded by Puritans.

      I hate to say it, but better illegal than legal *and* legally recognized by the State as a "normal" profession like in Germany. There was the recent case of an unemployed lady there who was refused continuing unemployment benefits because she didn't take a job as a "sex worker." (Cite: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/ne ws/2005/01/30/wgerm30.xml ) I'd be ok if it were legal for the purpose of harm reduction but not overtly encouraged by the State.

      -b.

    13. Re:Sex workers? by RealGrouchy · · Score: 1
      Why is it illegal to sell a (much in demand) service in the land of the free?

      IIRC, technically, it's not. It's simply illegal to do anything related to prostitution (communication with intent to..., etc.)

      Wikipedia's article on "Prostitution in the United States" is not well developed.

      - RG>
      --
      Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
    14. Re:Sex workers? by mhore · · Score: 4, Funny
      Sex worker, is that the PC term for prostitute?

      No. The term you're thinking of is Penile Stimulation Engineer, or something to that effect.

      Mike.

      --

      Mmmm......sacrelicious.

    15. Re:Sex workers? by hdparm · · Score: 1

      [ot]
      because it appears since you're subscriber

    16. Re:Sex workers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
      To "protect" the innocence of the women who would be whoring themselves on the streets, of course! As opposed to the capitalistic whoring done in other fields. . . .

      In sparsely populated towns in Nevada it is legal, but only in brothels. IMHO I'd rather blow several hundred bucks on a coupling with a gorgeous professional "sex worker" than in a casino (I still haven't gotten around to mastering the art of counting cards, which means the odds are in the house's favor), but perhaps that is just me. Actually, I'd rather have the latest in graphics card technology...*sigh*. Geek.

    17. Re:Sex workers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      How did you read my comment (rated +3 at time of writing)

      I have some mod categories set to be worth more than +1.

    18. Re:sex workers? by EtherealStrife · · Score: 1
      That's what "stripper" and "exotic dancer" are for. Lumping them all together under one category is a bit of a stretch, and unnecessary imo.

      Although I must admit, doubleplussex worker has a nice ring to it.

    19. Re:Sex workers? by notwrong · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I hate to say it, but better illegal than legal *and* legally recognized by the State as a "normal" profession like in Germany. There was the recent case of an unemployed lady there who was refused continuing unemployment benefits because she didn't take a job as a "sex worker." (Cite: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/ne ws/2005/01/30/wgerm30.xml ) I'd be ok if it were legal for the purpose of harm reduction but not overtly encouraged by the State.

      That seems like a much better argument for "legal but voluntary" than "illegal". The police in the US must waste so much time trying to stamp out something that is never, ever going to go away. Here in New South Wales (the most populous state in Australia), prostitution has been legal for decades. It's not like there isn't still a social stigma attached, but I find it hard to see how throwing criminal sanctions into the mix is helpful.

    20. Re:sex workers? by fabs64 · · Score: 1

      Oh gimme a break.
      "Sex Worker" is a pretty descriptive term and useful as a generic category.
      No one is calling them "Happiness Workers"

    21. Re:Sex workers? by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 2, Informative
      That seems like a much better argument for "legal but voluntary" than "illegal". The police in the US must waste so much time trying to stamp out something that is never, ever going to go away.

      Agreed about the "legal but voluntary" part. As far as US police, I don't think that they try *that* hard. They may run an occasional sting operation in some cities to look like they're doing something or if the residents of the neighborhood complain, but the law isn't enforced all that severely.

      -b.

    22. Re:Sex workers? by martijn-s · · Score: 1
      Its basically a superset of prostitute - including people in the industry who don't actually fuck for money, ie strip dancers, porn stars, topless waiters, dominatrixes (sp?) etc.

      Well, that's exactly what's strange. They all were prostitutes, so there's no reason to call them by a superset name. So indeed, the submitter was actually trying to be politically correct. Or didn't RTFA of course.

    23. Re:Sex workers? by Grismar · · Score: 1

      A lot of Slashdotters are American and the term isn't really used in the USA, probably since prostitution is illegal in most parts of the country (excepting Nevada but not Las Vegas city). So terms that "legitimize" it are less likely to be used.

      I'd say that a country with a porn industry with the size of the US' has a great need for a term like sex worker. Not to mention strip clubs, lap dancers, etc. None of those are illegal wholesale.

    24. Re:Sex workers? by kestasjk · · Score: 1

      The founding fathers of the USA weren't as religious as the powers that be today.

      --
      // MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
    25. Re:Sex workers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hate to say it, but Your recent case is so last year AND an urban legend.

    26. Re:Sex workers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative
    27. Re:Sex workers? by 1u3hr · · Score: 5, Informative
      I hate to say it, but better illegal than legal *and* legally recognized by the State as a "normal" profession like in Germany. There was the recent case of an unemployed lady there who was refused continuing unemployment benefits

      Note there are no names or dates in that stpory. It's an urban legend. Never happened. http://www.snopes.com/media/notnews/brothel.asp

      ...a story was sensationalized for political purposes and passed from one news source to the next, and somewhere in the rewriting and translating process what was originally discussed as a mere hypothetical possibility has now been reported as a factual occurrence.
    28. Re:Sex workers? by MichaelSmith · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Agreed about the "legal but voluntary" part. As far as US police, I don't think that they try *that* hard. They may run an occasional sting operation in some cities to look like they're doing something or if the residents of the neighborhood complain, but the law isn't enforced all that severely.

      The big advantage of having prostitution legal and recognised as such is that you can require regular checks for STD's, as well as enforce standards for working conditions.

    29. Re:Sex workers? by nacturation · · Score: 1

      No. The term you're thinking of is Penile Stimulation Engineer, or something to that effect. Come on, this is Slashdot. The "something to that effect" would be: Penis Engineer: Notable In Stimulation.
      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    30. Re:Sex workers? by redcane · · Score: 1

      Interesting since this ended up in a (supposedly) reputable Australian Newspaper (If my memory serves me right). Now, who to trust, snopes, or the newpaper. Although I have noticed a couple of "Direct from reuters news network" style cock ups in the papers.

    31. Re:Sex workers? by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      Interesting since this ended up in a (supposedly) reputable Australian Newspaper

      Read the Snopes article, it explains what seems to be the history of the story. Note that no version of the story names the woman who was supposed to have been forced to work in a brothel, or gives any other verifiable facts. Once a story gets on a wire service, it will go everywhere. The newspapers just cut and paste them to fill required space.

      Like a lot of "it could have happened" stories, you have to think that if it did really happen, there would have been a lot more fuss made and the person involved would have done the media circuits and/or started a legal case.

    32. Re:sex workers? by Threni · · Score: 1

      > That's what "stripper" and "exotic dancer" are for. Lumping them all together under one category is a bit of a stretch, and
      > unnecessary imo.

      What, like lumping "software engineer", "network analyst" and "database administrator" under the category "IT staff" is unnecessary?

    33. Re:Sex workers? by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 1
      Personally I think the "deadhookers" tag is extremely bad taste, it is disrespectful toward both the dead and their greiving relatives.
      Welcome to Slashdot, where the only substantial difference from /b/ is the lack of images.
      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
    34. Re:Sex workers? by Duds · · Score: 1

      Then they can go read a different site.

      I presume you've never made a joke about any kind of military conflict, you never watched M*A*S*H for instance?

    35. Re:Sex workers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That kind of hits a point. Why is porn legal, and prostitution illegal? Both are sex for money. Being in front of a camera changes the law?

    36. Re:sex workers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I guess this is like the "sanitation engineers"(garbagemen) or "network engineers"(i got a website and a linksys router and have 15 workstations to manage at work.)

      My all-time favorite was Petroleum Displacement Engineers. Though, with the advent of self-serve gas stations, they must surely be an endangered species.

      Just the other day, I accidentally used the phrase, "check your oil and water" and had to explain it to a thirty year old woman.

    37. Re:sex workers? by EtherealStrife · · Score: 1
      The problem is that what's happening in the sex industry is effectively this: software engineer, network analyst, and database administrator are all becoming simply "IT Staff". So someone who just does network analysis now has the same title as those database administrator whores (derogatory term used to make a point; I have nothing against database admins), and when people refer to IT Staff it refers to all three fields. Not everyone does all three.

      As an aside, this *is* happening with the IT staff and is a horrible situation. Employers have certain expectations of the constantly-redefined "IT staff" individual, that the employee may not have been hired for, and have no business doing. For the sex worker who strictly strips, getting propositioned for the selling of one's body (sexually) may be insulting, sexual harassment, or downright illegal (depending on where you live). Distinction and clarity are necessary.

      The shadier the lines are, the easier it is to generalize about the entire group as a single entity.

    38. Re:sex workers? by EtherealStrife · · Score: 1

      My problem is when "sex worker" replaces prostitute/hooker AND replaces stripper/exotic dancer. Then the distinction between the two is lost. In Germany and other parts of the world where prostitution is legalized, sex worker has virtually replaced "prostitute" and "stripper" and "erotic masseuse" and other professions related to sexual stimulation and erotica, thereby lumping all of them under the same roof. A relative of mine stripped to pay for college, but would never even consider accepting money for sex. Yet she was a "sex worker", lumped together with the HIV-bearing hookers working West Hollywood, and having unprotected sex. Along with all the less extreme examples of prostitutes. :) Now that terms like prostitute, hooker, stripper, etc are becoming un-PC, this general term encompasses all of them and is replacing them. Labels serve a purpose.

    39. Re:Sex workers? by Da+Fokka · · Score: 1

      That kind of hits a point. Why is porn legal, and prostitution illegal? Both are sex for money. Being in front of a camera changes the law? Prostitution *is* legal, at least it still is in the Netherlands. However with a christian coalition as the most likely candidate for a new government, I'm curious how long that will last...

    40. Re:Sex workers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > What kind of boring non-fucking porn do you watch?

      Lesbian porn?

    41. Re:Sex workers? by Da+Fokka · · Score: 1

      That is not what happened.
       
        http://www.snopes.com/media/notnews/brothel.asp
        Somehow parent was modded down as troll so I'm going to risk the same fate. But Grandparent is patently wrong. So if you mod me down, mod me flamebait!
    42. Re:Sex workers? by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      "Then they can go read a different site."

      I have a thicker skin than that, I would rather argue my point. I wholeheartedly agree that the slashdot editors have the "right to offend", and if they don't want to hear me complain they also agree they have a "right to censor".


      "I presume you've never made a joke about any kind of military conflict, you never watched M*A*S*H for instance?"

      Context and reality are the key concepts here, I watched most of the MASH episodes the first time round in black and white and loved the show, same with "Hogan's heros". OTOH: Attaching the tag "deadgrunts" to a slashdot story about recent events in Iraq would not get me to "crack a smile".

      Have I ever laughed at something inappropriate, you bet! I just don't find "deadhookers" at all funny in this context and I get a bit prickly when it comes to dehumanising the victims.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    43. Re:sex workers? by Da+Fokka · · Score: 1

      ...and to take this one step further, calling them 'Sex Workers' would also mean us hard-working folks would be lumped together with prostitutes and pimps (assuming you have a job, of course). Come on, a 'sex worker' is someone who gets paid for a sexual act - which a striptease is. 'Sex' can mean more than sexual intercourse. I'm sorry if this puts a stigma on your sister.

    44. Re:Sex workers? by pafrusurewa · · Score: 1
      There was the recent case of an unemployed lady there who was refused continuing unemployment benefits because she didn't take a job as a "sex worker."
      This has never been reported as an actual fact in Germany, not by any real news source anyway. This was more of a (not very tasteful) thought experiment in response to giving prostitutes some of the insurance benefits (unemployment, medical etc.) that most other people get, thus making prostitution more of a "normal" profession.
    45. Re:Sex workers? by piinkfloyyd · · Score: 0

      "Why is it illegal to sell a (much in demand) service in the land of the free?" For the same reason you can't buy marijauna...just because it's in demand does not mean it's legitimate...

      --
      ...the SIGnificance of inSIGnificance is SIGnificant...
    46. Re:sex workers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Korean women that the Japanese army forced into prostitution for their soldiers were called "ianfu", which translates as "Comfort Women". Not far off your Happiness Workers.

    47. Re:Sex workers? by Duds · · Score: 1

      So really the debate is that if you don't consider it funny no-one else is allowed to.

    48. Re:Sex workers? by HeadlessNotAHorseman · · Score: 0

      I agree, "deadhookers" is in very poor taste. It should be tagged as "deceasedhookers" instead.

      --
      I like my coffee the way I like my women - roasted and ground up into little tiny pieces.
    49. Re:Sex workers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Why is it illegal to sell a (much in demand) service in the land of the free?

      because you're missing the rest of the term, it's "land of the free, home of the pentacostal church"
    50. Re:Sex workers? by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      "What kind of boring non-fucking porn do you watch?"

      Spanking, foot fetish, and Univision.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    51. Re:Sex workers? by Phillip2 · · Score: 1

      "A lot of Slashdotters are American and the term isn't really used in the USA, probably since prostitution is illegal in most parts of the country (excepting Nevada but not Las Vegas city). So terms that "legitimize" it are less likely to be used."

      Thats probably the difference then. In the UK, being paid for having sex is not illegal, although some of the other aspects of working as a prostitute are.

      Can't quite understand it, myself. Why would the US make prostitution illegal? It's just supply and demand. Is that not "the genius of capitalism".

      Phil

    52. Re:Sex workers? by crabpeople · · Score: 1
      "Here in Oz we have something called the sex workers union [google.com]"

      Do you really think you should be legitimzing prison rape by forming a union?

      --
      I'll just use my special getting high powers one more time...
    53. Re:Sex workers? by a.d.trick · · Score: 1
      Why is it illegal to sell a (much in demand) service in the land of the free?

      Abestos removal. You can do it yourself, but you can't do it for other people because of the danger involved with comming in contact with that stuff too much. Also prostitution is often something that people get into without understanding the consequences and often there is a lot of coersion involved too.

    54. Re:Sex workers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Crickets chirping...

    55. Re:Sex workers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the families - maybe they should have instilled a better set of values in their children instead of allowing this to happen to them.

      I don't have any respect for the hookers. I would have preferred that they could have been rehabilitated instead of murdered in cold blood, but I do not put these hookers in the same level of esteem that I would a great leader or honest co-worker.

      Hookers do not deserve any respect. What they do is degenerate and degrades neighborhoods and attracts all sorts of crime and bad values to an area. I refuse to gloss over the fact.

    56. Re:Sex workers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The hookers did a pretty good job of dehumanizing themselves by taking up those activities. I don't think the discussion needs to venture offtopic into their lifestyles - this is a story about Skype, not hookers.

      However, it seems that more people are interested in whining about calling a spade a spade and want to call it something else. That fact, I will not let go unchecked. Hookers are hookers. Their activities speak for themselves. Being dead does not give you a clean slate on the actions you made during your life.

    57. Re:Sex workers? by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      You can laugh your head off for all I care, I am registering my disgust.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    58. Re:Sex workers? by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      Yep the story is about skype, hookers and murder.

      "Hookers are hookers. Their activities speak for themselves. Being dead does not give you a clean slate on the actions you made during your life."

      Get of your psuedo-christian pedestal, we all whore for money unless daddy is rich, they did not "ask for it"?

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    59. Re:sex workers? by EtherealStrife · · Score: 1
      I'm sorry if this puts a stigma on your sister.

      I'm in fact a single child; that is but one of your (incorrect) assumptions.

      calling them 'Sex Workers' would also mean us hard-working folks would be lumped together with prostitutes and pimps

      Hardly. The point is that you still have your own title (garbage collector, secretary, programmer, etc). Prostitutes are disappearing, and "sex workers" are popping up in their place. The same is happening across the board for all erotic professions, even those that do not involve sexual intercourse, or oral sex, or any other act involving ejaculation. Your christian pov (you may not be, but your pov is shared) is quite tiresome, I deal with it every day. Lumping all "perverted" acts together is the first step in eradicating them entirely. Once distinction is lost, it is easy to refer to all of "those whoreish professions" in the singular and mark them as Wrong and Immoral. I see it on a daily basis here in the States with the local strip clubs and massage parlors, which are under attack by the local churches.

    60. Re:sex workers? by Da+Fokka · · Score: 1

      I apologize - your earlier post deserved a more serious answer than I gave you. However I was joking and my viewpoint is far from christian/conservative. However, I still believe that the term 'sex worker' is not a problem, for it can work two ways. In the Netherlands, where prostitution is legalized the term 'sex worker' is used for prostitutes to acknowledge that their profession has a legal status just like any other job with all the advantages (regulation) and disadvantages (taxes) that come with that status. Frankly, I think this is a saner way to deal with prostitution (and drugs, for that matter) than ignoring it as a society and hope it just goes away.

  4. Why yes... by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 2, Informative

    Why yes it is. Becoming more and more prevalent as a recognition that there are apparently a lot of people that willingly choose that trade. Look in the back of your local "alternative" weekly, and you'll find many many ads for "sex workers" willing to assist in your every kink. And, of course, not all prostitutes are "sex workers". For example the average CEO...

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    1. Re:Why yes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look in the back of your local "alternative" weekly, and you'll find many many ads for "sex workers" willing to assist in your every kink.

      Thanks! I was having trouble finding them.

    2. Re:Why yes... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And, of course, not all prostitutes are "sex workers". For example the average CEO... It's always struck me as a strange comment on our society that those who are willing to sell their bodies are regarded as lower than those who are willing to sell their souls.
      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    3. Re:Why yes... by xiard · · Score: 1

      Alright...I'm going to take a chance and move off the sex worker/Skype topic for a sec to respond to the CEO comment. I find this to be a very unfortunate comment, and a good example of a strong anti-business bias that seems all to common these days. Do you actually know any CEOs? I do, along with various other people in high positions in companies. Contrary to the popular belief, most of these people are extremely hard-working, extremely ethical people. If anything, I would say their greatest "flaw" is that they have to spend too much of their lives on their job, because the job is so demanding. Certainly they are conscious of the bottom line. They have to be aware of what makes money and what doesn't, or they wouldn't be in their position. But if they're good at what they do, they've also learned through experience that beating their employees up and sucking the life out of them is not only unethical, it also isn't good for business. When you actually witness the decision making process that executives go through, you're typically not going to see them looking purely at financial factors. They also look at the human factors involved, and think about how the decisions will affect customers, employees, vendors, etc. They may feel that they have to ask people to work late to get a particular project done, for example, but if they do they might also think about what they can do to make people feel better about it. They'll see if they can find money in the budget for buying bagels and pizza, for example, or find some other way to reward them after the project is done. Of course there can be exceptions. There can always be CEOs that rise to power based on their ability to be ruthless, not caring how many good people they piss off and lose in the process. But in my experience those people are the exception, not the rule, and when they are involved in a company the company usually suffers for it...which means the CEO is considered a failure, not a model to which other executives aspire.

    4. Re:Why yes... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      I find this to be a very unfortunate comment, and a good example of a strong anti-business bias that seems all to common these days.

      When I wrote the comment, I wasn't thinking specifically of CEOs. Pretty much every job requires the employee to sell part of themselves; their time at the very least and in some professions (certain branches of law spring to mind) their integrity and ethical standards. These, however, are not demonised nearly as much as prostitution.

      Why do we, as a society, look down on those who sell their bodies, but not those who sell other aspects of themselves? Actually, we don't look down on all those who sell their bodies. People who take part in drug trials, for example, sell their bodies far more than prostitutes (often for less money, and with bigger risks), and yet they are not regarded as social outcasts. People in the military sell their ethics (assuming they had some ethical objections to killing) and often their lives, but are not regarded with the same stigma as prostitutes.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    5. Re:Why yes... by metamatic · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Do you actually know any CEOs? I do, along with various other people in high positions in companies. Contrary to the popular belief, most of these people are extremely hard-working, extremely ethical people.

      ...who collectively feel like they deserve to be paid more than 400x as much as a regular worker, then outsource our jobs to India. But of course, you never see their jobs being outsourced, even though I'm sure China and India have plenty of business school graduates who could do the job for a hundredth of the money. That's why we hate them.

      --
      GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
    6. Re:Why yes... by heinousjay · · Score: 1

      Oh, so it's envy. Well that's a very noble reason to hate someone.

      --
      Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
    7. Re:Why yes... by metamatic · · Score: 1

      No, I don't envy that a CEO can outsource my job while enriching himself. Try again.

      --
      GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
    8. Re:Why yes... by Kancept · · Score: 1

      *cough* ENRON *cough*

  5. sex workers? by puto · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well although my nick is Puto, which is technically male whore in spanish, and for the umpteenth time I am not gay and I know what it means it some countries.

    But when in the hell did hookers become "sex workers"? What happened to prostitute?

    Whore, escort, streetwalker, lady of the night, etc. Sex workers?

    I guess this is like the "sanitation engineers"(garbagemen) or "network engineers"(i got a website and a linksys router and have 15 workstations to manage at work.)

    Puto

    --
    The Revolution Will Not Be Televised
  6. Why yes...will grab for code. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    "And, of course, not all prostitutes are "sex workers". For example the average CEO..."

    Or the average slashdotter...once they hit daylight that is.

    1. Re:Why yes...will grab for code. by Dabido · · Score: 1

      'once they hit daylight that is.'

      What is this 'daylight' thing you speak of young man? Do you mean that Stalone Movie? It's the only thing I can recall that uses the term.

      --
      Sure enough, the cow costume was hanging up next to the superhero outfit and sailors uniform. (S,Spud)
  7. This is probably a really bad idea by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Informative

    This is probably not a good idea, because there is no anonymity with Skype. It is trivial to log the IP address of anyone calling. At least with a normal phone number, you can just use a public payphone and there is no real chance of being identified.

    Anonymity is really important, especially if they want other sex workers to contact them. After all the recent "crack-downs" and "zero tolerance" policies, not to mention the bad reputation the police have, is it any wonder that prostitutes dont want to talk to them?

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    1. Re:This is probably a really bad idea by Whiney+Mac+Fanboy · · Score: 5, Informative

      This is probably not a good idea, because there is no anonymity with Skype

      1) They have a normal number in addition to the skype links.
      2) You can anonymously use skype from an internet cafe (most have it installed, with mic + headphones these days)
      3) Its for convenience sake, so someone who doesn't think it's worth calling (for the little thing they remember seeing walking past) will just click on the link when reading a story.

      --
      There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
    2. Re:This is probably a really bad idea by hjf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      use tor (tor.eff.org) and you're most likely safe.

    3. Re:This is probably a really bad idea by JPriest · · Score: 1
      What about just changing you mac address and using someone elses WiFi network?

      That is just as good or better than someone elses phone.

      --
      Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
    4. Re:This is probably a really bad idea by elronxenu · · Score: 1
      If they knew how to use tor, they could make more money as a network administrator than as a prostitute, err hang on ...

    5. Re:This is probably a really bad idea by RealGrouchy · · Score: 2, Insightful
      2) You can anonymously use skype from an internet cafe (most have it installed, with mic + headphones these days)

      Notwithstanding your other points, if I were concerned about anonymity/privacy, I wouldn't be blabbing about this kind of stuff in an internet cafe.

      - RG>
      --
      Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
    6. Re:This is probably a really bad idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But this is the UK, there will be a dozon cameras watching that pay phone you're calling from.

    7. Re:This is probably a really bad idea by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      1) They have a normal number in addition to the skype links.

      Actually, they don't. If anyone had cared to RTFA, they'd see only normal numbers. Unless you've installed a Skype toolbar and imagine the links it makes are actually on the BBC site. Hint: Look at the source HTML. Just numbers, no links at all.

    8. Re:This is probably a really bad idea by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      Most prostitutes have too much self respect to work as network administrators.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    9. Re:This is probably a really bad idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least with a normal phone number, you can just use a public payphone and there is no real chance of being identified. I wonder how many payphones there are in the UK that don't have a CCTV pointed at them, assuming you can find one that works.
  8. i cant see them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful


    nowhere in the article can i see Skype mentioned or see any Skype links, perhaps the submitter has a Skype BHO (browser helper object) or a Firefox plugin that creates Skype links from phone numbers

    iam on WinXP with FF2 and IE7 but i have Skype 2.5 (not the hideous mess called v3.0) perhaps Skype V3.0 installs such a facility by default

    1. Re:i cant see them by Geoffreyerffoeg · · Score: 3, Informative

      Same here. No Skype links for me, with Safari and the near-latest Mac version.

  9. Re:Prostitute? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why yes it is.

  10. Nail by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

    You hit the nail on the head. Another fine job of "editing" from Slashdot, they didn't even check out the article!

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
  11. Why do people suddenly care? by pembo13 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    This women have been suffering for ages now. And have been killed by all sorts of people before. Why do people suddenly care about them? Society is very wierd. I personally think these women needed help long before one dude started taking them out.

    --
    "Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
    1. Re:Why do people suddenly care? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I personally think these women needed help long before one dude started taking them out.

      It wasn't that he was taking them out. He just didn't pay the bill.

    2. Re:Why do people suddenly care? by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I personally think these women needed help long before one dude started taking them out.

      Agreed, but can you really help them if they don't want to go into drug treatment or maybe even don't think they have a problem? AFAIK, Britain has one of the best systems in this regard anyway, since they'll actively pay for drug treatment for addicts rather than just jailing them.

      -b.

    3. Re:Why do people suddenly care? by TheoMurpse · · Score: 2, Interesting
      This women have been suffering for ages now. And have been killed by all sorts of people before. Why do people suddenly care about them?
      You seem to be implying (albeit unintentionally) that our only justifiable course of action is to continue to ignore their plight. Also, if you think that police have not cared about the murder of prostitutes before, I'd like to direct you to information about Jack the Ripper, who killed exclusively prostitutes in the late 1800s.

      Furthermore, are you implying that we are only allowed to care about a person's murder if we also took steps to improve their lot in life? I don't know about the UK, but in the US we have something called welfare that a woman could live in on instead of prostituting herself. We also have student loans to go to college (including extremely cheap community college) and free public education. Anyone who becomes a prostitute sure doesn't become one for lack of opportunity. He or she either makes a conscious decision to get some fast money and then gets caught up in the system of crime (or, perhaps in a few cases, just really loves sex), is forced into the system through slavery, or isn't told about FAFSA opportunities.

      If it is slavery, we already have laws banning that, and there is enforcement of the laws in the US. Perhaps, because there is a lot of slavery and human trafficking we don't know about (and it is difficult to detect often), there is a lot of forced prostitution we just don't know about or cannot track down.

      If it is for the love of sex, well, shouldn't a woman or man be allowed to make that decision for themself?

      If it is for the lack of information about financial aid, I don't know how it could be improved -- every high school I've been to in the US has posters on the walls about the program. And "welfare" is a household word in the US.

      If it is someone who got caught up in the system and is now trapped in the system, this is the same as the aforementioned slavery case, and all cases have now been reduced to two: slavery or willful participation. The only one we should care about remedying (excluding moral objections to prostitution -- which not everyone has, e.g. Las Vegas and the Netherlands) is slavery/human trafficking, and I think government already actively cracks down on that sort of thing.

      Thus, it seems that the US government (I cannot vouch for the UK government, as I do not know what the UK does for human trafficking within its borders) does, in fact, care about these woman (perhaps not personally, but as a whole) with regards to public policy decisions and legislation.
    4. Re:Why do people suddenly care? by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      I don't know about the UK, but in the US we have something called welfare that a woman could live in on instead of prostituting herself. We also have student loans to go to college (including extremely cheap community college) and free public education. Anyone who becomes a prostitute sure doesn't become one for lack of opportunity. He or she either makes a conscious decision to get some fast money and then gets caught up in the system of crime (or, perhaps in a few cases, just really loves sex),

      In the UK we also have state aid that they can live on, and student loans and even grants for totally free higher education in certain cases. These are not the problem. The 'problem' is that these women are selling a renewable resource for significant sums of money that places their income quite high in relation to the alternatives. Quite simply, the vast majority of them see the reward outweighing the negative side. If they want to do that, good for them.

    5. Re:Why do people suddenly care? by OoberMick · · Score: 1
      Quite simply, the vast majority of them see the reward outweighing the negative side. If they want to do that, good for them.

      I would love to be a naïve as you. The reality is that each of these victims are drug addicts, they walk the street each and every night because they have little other choice. They need to pay for these drugs. They can either steal for the money or prostitute themselves.

      The only way you are going to stop these women from working the streets is to either pay for there drugs or get them off of them. This is evident from the fact that they continue to work when they know there are 5 women dead and 2 missing.

    6. Re:Why do people suddenly care? by benzapp · · Score: 1

      Well, this is still generally true. People die every day. Why do we make such a big deal about the few who are murdered when billions of people are living like animals on this planet?

      It seems to me that the problem in this world is there are too many people, not that a few are murdered.

      The problem in this world is there is not enough death, and soon enough this reality will destroy us all.

      --
      I don't read or respond to AC posts
    7. Re:Why do people suddenly care? by t0rkm3 · · Score: 1

      Perhaps those women were drug addicts...

      Anecdotally, most of the sex workers that I have known were simply money or fame hungry. I worked as security for strippers, and escorts in LA and Vegas for a few years. Some of the girls used drugs recreationally, most drank, but very few had addiction issues. Those that did burned out of the strip-club/call-girl scene pretty quickly and ended up on the streetwalker/pimp list.

      As sex workers I have met: Several MBA holding women who used the income as a capital generation mechanism for real estate investment, two med-school attendees who were paying for school, and sundry psych or lib arts majors that were paying for school or travel via stripping. I married a stripper/Playmate who is a published short story author.

      More than most of them are women dealing with a world in which money and fame are worth more than anything else. Practically speaking, they've got a better handle on the world than we in our geeky little towers do.

      One thing about the girls that do porn and/or whore themselves out. They are more likely to have that vacant, soulless incapacity for intimacy... Which reminds of the expression Paris Hilton often wears.
      That 'used up' look is why I pity them. It also creates a conflict for me regarding legalization. Porn 'actresses' are legit, but they still often seem as if their humanity has been eaten away...

  12. First time for what? by SQL+Error · · Score: 5, Funny
    Is this the first time Skype has been used in this way?
    For making phone calls? Probably not.
  13. Yeah .. hilarious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Imagine if every anti-U.S. story on /. were tagged with deadiraqis. The /. left would be up in arms. Dead hookers is ok though. Because you know, they weren't human.

    1. Re:Yeah .. hilarious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Waaa waaa.... Come on, I laughed my ass off at that. Hey, here's a joke for you:

      Q : What's the difference between an onion and a hooker?

      A : I don't cry when I chop up the hooker.

    2. Re:Yeah .. hilarious by morboIV · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      What's the difference between a Ferrari and a dead hooker?

      I don't have a Ferrari in my garage.

      That'll show the sanctimonious bastard.

    3. Re:Yeah .. hilarious by EvanED · · Score: 1

      Imagine if everyone only used appropriate analogies...

      Never mind, that's too hard.

    4. Re:Yeah .. hilarious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They were almost certainly killed because they were hookers - not people or women.

    5. Re:Yeah .. hilarious by odourpreventer · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I don't cry when I chop up the hooker.

      Now replace "hooker" with "nigger". Still laughing?

    6. Re:Yeah .. hilarious by BiggerIsBetter · · Score: 3, Funny

      Then replace "nigger" with "baby".

      Baby jokes never get old...

      Aisle seat please.

      --
      Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
    7. Re:Yeah .. hilarious by spootle · · Score: 1

      Yes.

    8. Re:Yeah .. hilarious by morboIV · · Score: 1

      Oh, so is 'hooker' a race now?

    9. Re:Yeah .. hilarious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not? Replace it with honkey, gook, dyke... we could go on for a half an hour like this... provocative words are fucking hilarious. The thing that makes them so funny is how utterly exasperated people can get at them.

    10. Re:Yeah .. hilarious by Fnkmaster · · Score: 0

      There's nothing provocative about the word hooker. But I found that tag to be particularly not funny as well - it carries the clear implication that the life of a prostitute is worth less than that of other people. I'm all for laughing at particularly dark humor, but the "deadhooker" tag isn't amusing, it's just a sad comment on how society views these people at its fringes.

      Which is a large part of the reason they are so often the victim of brutal violence of this sort.

    11. Re:Yeah .. hilarious by odourpreventer · · Score: 1
      Oh, so is 'hooker' a race now?

      No, but neither is "nigger". It's a word describing people, the meaning of the word being whatever we (society) want it to be.

    12. Re:Yeah .. hilarious by Goaway · · Score: 1

      No, "deadiraqis" is a political message. Politics is never funny. "deadhookers", though, is completely uncalled for and offensive, thus funny.

    13. Re:Yeah .. hilarious by Goaway · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I should expand on that: Nobody cared about these women when they were alive. Few people would work up any indignation if they were mocked then. But in death, they are suddenly elevated to this sainthood where making fun of them is absolutely verboten.

      This is nothing but hypocricy. Nobody cares about all the prostitutes who die every day just from doing what they do. Nobody cares about the prostitutes who are alive and suffer. Nobody would care about a single murdered prostitute, but when suddenly several of the turn up dead in a short while, it scares people. And they mask their fear for their own lives as concern for those murdered.

      The "deadhookers" tag is one of a million jokes that are funny because they pierce the hypocricy, and remind people that normally they don't give a hooker a second thought. And that's why it offends.

    14. Re:Yeah .. hilarious by morboIV · · Score: 1

      So what? 'Politician' is a word describing people. What's your point?

      My point is that while race is something you're born with, and hence no basis on which to judge an individual (much less deride them), being a hooker is a job choice. If you choose a sleazy job I can and will mock you. Comparing 'nigger' to 'hooker' is comparing apples and oranges.

    15. Re:Yeah .. hilarious by NemosomeN · · Score: 1

      Q: What's the difference between an onion and an orange?

      A: I don't cry when I chop up an orange.

      --
      I hate grammar Nazi's.
    16. Re:Yeah .. hilarious by Kagura · · Score: 1

      Exactly. There's no reason to kill hookers anyway, because most of them are already dead inside.

    17. Re:Yeah .. hilarious by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      How would they feel about terrorists-- ?

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    18. Re:Yeah .. hilarious by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      But in death, they are suddenly elevated to this sainthood where making fun of them is absolutely verboten.

      Yes. Exactly. Making fun of the recently deceased, especailly those who were murdered by a psychopath, leaving their familes in shock and mourning, is forbidden in any civilised society. Regardless of whether you think they were saintly or not. And if you want to "pierce the hypocricy, and remind people that normally they don't give a hooker a second thought", well, think of a way to do it that actually makes that point instead of the point that these women were worthless and deserved to be killed. Because having your tongue in cheek on a subject like this while their bodies are still yet unburied is being obnoxiously insensitive, and in person would get you vilified and attacked yourself.

    19. Re:Yeah .. hilarious by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      That's funny but the deadhookers tag isn't.

      And for all the nerds out there that disagree, remember that the last laugh may be on you -

      http://www.lifeisajoke.com/worknleisure9_html.htm

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    20. Re:Yeah .. hilarious by Goaway · · Score: 1

      You don't do it to the face of those actually involved, genius. This is about all the completely unrelated people who suddenly start showing completely insincere concern, or act high and mighty about somebody they never knew and would never care one bit about, had they not been blasted all over the media.

    21. Re:Yeah .. hilarious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And on what basis are you judging prostitution to be a sleazy job worthy of mocking? Social norms? You mean like how society used to judge 'niggers' inferior to whites? So it's ok to mock as long as society okes it!

    22. Re:Yeah .. hilarious by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      This is about all the completely unrelated people...

      How have you restricted readership of your comments to those people?

    23. Re:Yeah .. hilarious by Goaway · · Score: 1

      By posting on Slashdot.

    24. Re:Yeah .. hilarious by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      By posting on Slashdot.

      Cute. So we're all cunts here then.

  14. deadhookers, now that is a sad tag for humanity... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    deadpeople would be better. These people have been murdered. It is in noway funny. Just because they don't write code for money don't make them less of people. Do you like your job? No? Still you are lucky to have some choice in what you do, most of the "deadhookers" do not. Im pretty sure they disliked being killed just as much as you would have... When will humanity stop feeling its OK (or fully) to harrass or even kill people just because of there social status?

  15. Mobile Phone Tracking by MrSteveSD · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I wonder if the murderer was stupid enough to have a mobile phone with him when he dumped the bodies. All you would have to do is do a search of all mobile phones that have been in those particular cells at the estimated times of death of each victim. The bodies were dumped in the surrounding countryside so it might narrow it down to a few phones. Another possible line of attack is that the murderer's mobile phone would have been in the same cell as each victims mobile phone for some amount of time. Once you have his mobile number, the game is up. Even if it was not purchased in his name, the phone would spend most of its time where he lives, so it would be simple to narrow it down to the row of houses where he lives.

    1. Re:Mobile Phone Tracking by finnw · · Score: 1

      I suspect they have tried that. I also suspect it will not work. Mobile phone tracking is just not that accurate.
      In my last job I was involved in a project to track machines (to prevent theft) using embedded GSM modems (The phone company had a service where you could get the equivalent of GPS coordinates and we would draw the location on a map in a web page.) You could tell which cell was nearest and the approximate distance from it but because cells are so thinly spread in the British countryside you could end up with a large crescent-shaped area that covered half the town.
      I have a vague memory of a paedophile and/or murderer being caught in the mid-1990s in the UK based on a mobile phone trace that supposedly pinned down his location to a particular corner of a field. I can't seem to find anything using Google now though. Anyone else remember this? I'm pretty sure it wasn't Roy Whiting (who murdered Sarah Payne) - it was a year or two earlier.
      Perhaps they are able to track locations more accurately if requested by the police, but I fear it may just be that an "expert witness" drew a point on a map and noone questioned the accuracy.

      --
      Is Betteridge's Law of Headlines Correct?
    2. Re:Mobile Phone Tracking by glesga_kiss · · Score: 1

      Shhhhh!! The public are not meant to know that their every move is logged. It's only now and then that they accidentally let this method be known. The last instance I remember was the Lord Hamilton sexual assault case, where they actually used it to prove their innocence.

      In addition to the privacy implications, I'm sure this is kept quiet as it would cease to be useful and potentially bad should criminals realize a mobile left at home can be an alibi.

  16. Besides, there's no need to kill them by rdwald · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Most of them already dead inside.

    1. Re:Besides, there's no need to kill them by redcane · · Score: 1

      Come now, That was a "Family Guy" reference, not flamebait. Of course the humour in Family guy borders on flamebait on occasion....

    2. Re:Besides, there's no need to kill them by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

      Although you put it too bluntly (for which you have been labeled a flammer :-) ). there is a monumental grain of truth there. One of the ladies used tos say to one of her firends that she was convinced she will not live beyond the age of 24...

      --
      IANAL but write like a drunk one.
    3. Re:Besides, there's no need to kill them by rdwald · · Score: 1

      Sheesh, none of you moderators have seen Family Guy? I thought this was a 5, Funny for sure. I guess this is why such comments often have "Oblig. Family Guy/Simpsons/Futurama Reference" in the subject.

  17. Skype 3.0 Phone Highlighting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's no Skype link unless you've installed Skype 3.0 which automatically highlights any phone number at least on Firefox... So... yeah.

  18. Re:deadhookers, now that is a sad tag for humanity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh lighten up, that tag is just fake macho bullshit overcompensation for the average geek's mortal fear of human females in particular, and sex acts in general.

  19. San Francisco... by msimm · · Score: 1

    Maybe its more a term used in the cities where sexuality (among other things) or a little more open. Sex worker, in my understanding is slightly more open-ended. Meaning it can be used in reference to a number of activities.

    Anyway, I think its sad how afraid of sexuality we are and I don't see a lot of good coming out of it. America was in many ways founded by missionaries and fundamentalists. Bad combo.

    If anything feeds vice its repression and shame. There are certainly some things we should protect (children..) but I think we've taken sexuality and turned it into something we teach our children is wrong. We teach them shame and we do it out of ignorance and fear.

    --
    Quack, quack.
  20. google by ticklish2day · · Score: 1

    I must make it a point to recommend this awesome tool called a "Search Engine" to you. In my humble opinion (IMHO), the best "Search Engine" I know is named Google and is available at www.google.com. It's free and easy to use.. To go there, please click the text that is underlined in the previous sentence. There is a rectangle that us geeks call a "text box" where you can type "words". For example, why don't you type "skype dead hookers" or "skype police investigation" into it and click the button named "Google Search"? You will then be magically transported to a page with lots of things on it that you can click and figure out the answer to your question.

    Fellow slashdotters, please add to this comment with more detailed instructions on how to search using Google (screenshots welcome).

  21. There are NO SKYPE LINKS in TFA by 1u3hr · · Score: 4, Informative
    Anyone with information that would help Ipswich detectives is urged to contact the incident room on 0800 096 1011 or speak to Crimestoppers in confidence on 0800 555 111.

    Which idiot wrote the headline without even looking at TFA?

    1. Re:There are NO SKYPE LINKS in TFA by jasoncart · · Score: 4, Informative

      Looks like the submitter has this installed, which turns the phone numbers into Skype links. This toolbar was distributed with the latest version of Skype.

  22. Is the term "deadniggers" offensive? by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

    "Many prostitutes call themselves hookers with pride but do not like the term being used in derogatory ways.

    Exactly! And illustrates the point I tried to make elsewhere about the "deadhookers" tag! Imagine if the story was about a series of race related murders, would the story be tagged as "deadniggers" or "deadgooks"?

    My "moral compass" tells me it is just as offensive to dehumanise prostitutes as it is to dehumanise any other group. If anyone in this case could be considered "less than human" it would be the perpetrator, and even he will be afforded basic human rights by a civil society. In the UK (like most other western countries) this means that even though he took the "right to life" from others, the state does not have the right to take it from him as punishment.

    Disclaimer: I recognise that Slashdot has the "right to offend", I don't dispute that. I am simply registering my dismay that they excercised it to: insinuate "they asked for it", trivialise murder, disrespect the dead, and possibly upset the still greiving relatives/freinds.

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    1. Re:Is the term "deadniggers" offensive? by aproposofwhat · · Score: 1
      Thanks, man - I was taught at school that the first stage in (perm any 1 from 3) was to dehumanise the victim.

      I'm offended - but then again, I reserve the right to be offensive myself, short of dehumanising anyone.

      The next US based tragedy I shall be sure to tag deadyankeemofos or similar - haw about a dominoeffect tag for 9/11, for example?

      --
      One swallow does not a fellatrix make
    2. Re:Is the term "deadniggers" offensive? by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      Tell me you have never whored yourself for something and I will tell you that you have never worked a day in your life.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  23. Story is false by Geoffreyerffoeg · · Score: 4, Informative

    (I posted this further down as a reply to an anon comment, so it got buried.)

    Guys, this story is false. I see no Skype links. Do you see any Skype links?

  24. No, it is the respectful term. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    It is the term that people not intent on moralizing or stigmatizing oters will use.

    But there are always some people intent in hurting and moralizing about what others do, I'll assume you don't belong to this group of bastards and that you ask driven just by natural curiosity.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
    1. Re:No, it is the respectful term. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The meaning of the word doesn't change, it is only the perception that people hold. Calling them a "sex worker" doesn't mean anything different than hooker. It is not any more legitimate or normative.

      I don't think there should be any discrimination made in terms of the murder investigation, but the obsession with trying to legitimize their behavior is really odd and puzzling.

  25. Slightly Offtopic by CmdrGravy · · Score: 2, Funny

    There was a great interview with one of the Chief Constables involved in this case about the number of calls they were receiving from the public

    Interviewer: There's been a massive public response to your request for information hasn't there, how are you coping with the sheer volume of information you are getting ?
    Police: Obviously we're very pleased with the positive response and we're working through everything we receive.
    Interviewer: A lot of its very helpful but you were just telling me you're also getting a lot of calls about peoples dreams and what cards or dice have told them ?
    Police: Er, yes we are. That sort of information isn't a high priority
    Interviewer: Clearly you're being polite, it's just a waste of your time isn't it ?
    Police: We would rather concentrate on serious information
    Interviewer: These people are just getting in the way of your investigation by phoning up with this, frankly, nonsense aren't they ?
    Police: Well yes, we would rather they didn't bother us with superstious nonsense.

    1. Re:Slightly Offtopic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fantastic - do you have a source for this?

    2. Re:Slightly Offtopic by finnw · · Score: 1

      I saw that interview (presumably the same one) on BBC News 24 last night (17/12/06), but the "superstitious nonsense" line wasn't in it. Perhaps it's been edited out since.

      --
      Is Betteridge's Law of Headlines Correct?
  26. Slashdot's most offensive moments by gjuk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So, someone posts a non-story about Skype being used by the police and bbc to report infomration on murdered women. Slashdot users don't discuss the fakeness of the story, or the skype marketing angle, or the future of telecoms. They feel it appropriate to make declarations and guenuinely offensive 'humour' about murdered women.
    Seriously, these women may be prostitutes, but the key facts are: 5 people were murdered in a market town in the space of a couple of weeks. These people were people; daughters, mothers, sisters. They were all, I believe, hooked on drugs. And one day they may have got off drugs and enjoyed a normal life. Not now. The fascination some /.ers have shown for the 'sex angle' makes me worry about who I'm associating with here, and says far more about the writers than the victims.

    1. Re:Slashdot's most offensive moments by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2, Informative
      You seem to be reading a different /. to me. The first 60% of comments were on the how tasteless and dehumanising it was to tag the article deadhookers. Most of those defending it were mod'ed below my threshold. The next few posts were pointing out that the idiot submitter just had a toolbar installed which turned all 'phone numbers into Skype links, and that the 'editors' should have spotted this. Then I got to your post.

      Oh, and for the record, I tagged this article 'deadpeople' and (since this is slashdot) 'iseedeadpeople.'

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    2. Re:Slashdot's most offensive moments by gjuk · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's a very fair point that, depending on your threshold you see a different /. ...

    3. Re:Slashdot's most offensive moments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But women are simply objects for my sexual gratification. I know because that is what prostitution and porn has taught me. Perhaps if women (I won't dignify them with the title of "person") didn't work in these areas I wouldn't have been taught they're simply objects for my sexual gratification and I would realise they're human beings. But these women decided to work in the field they did, so as long as the murderer got his rocks off, I see no problem with the murders.

    4. Re:Slashdot's most offensive moments by GeckoX · · Score: 1

      Not worthy of a response, nice flame though.

      Someone with mod points nuke this please.

      --
      No Comment.
    5. Re:Slashdot's most offensive moments by benzapp · · Score: 1

      See Johnny, the problem here is there are several billion other people out there doing nothing wrong at all whose lives suck and no one gives a fuck about them.

      There are too many people on this planet, we don't have time to save the wretches who have nothing to offer our future generations. Your duty is for the FUTURE, not the present.

      --
      I don't read or respond to AC posts
    6. Re:Slashdot's most offensive moments by Thornae · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, this is why this is headline news. SEX + MURDER pushes all the tabloid buttons. It's dangerous. It's dirty. Most importantly, it's someone I don't know - and therefore titillating and outrageous, but safe.

      There was an extremely insightful and pertinent comment from a media observer here in Australia recently, pointing out that the popular media had moved from being a source of information to being a source of outrage. The prevalence of "Current Affairs" type programs, with their emotionally biased content, is a symptom of this.

      What I find extremely depressing is the difficulty of fighting this all-pervasive new media meme. Sure, the intelligentsia dismiss it for the biased nonsense it is, but the great majority - the mythical "average person" - reads and watches this stuff, and believes what they are told. You can't tell them differently - you're not the authority figure that the "news" is. And so, emotional, biased content becomes fact in the mind of the public.

      I'm a reasonably smart person, and I can't see a way to change this.
      It bothers me, but more than that, it scares me.
      A lot.

      I hope someone smarter than me can see a way to make a difference. Meanwhile, I fear for my children's future...

      --
      |>
      Here be Dragons
    7. Re:Slashdot's most offensive moments by crabpeople · · Score: 1

      Are you saying people who do drugs don't live a "normal" life? Why do you feel the need to descriminate against drug users?

      Someone posts a non story about dead hookers and you think its perfectly acceptable to make declarations about drug users?

      The fascination some slashdotters (ie you) have show^H^H^H trolled for the "drug angle" makes me worry about who I am associating with here, and says far more about the write^H^H^H^H trolls than the victims.

      --
      I'll just use my special getting high powers one more time...
  27. You guys in the US.... by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    ... sometimes really look awkward from the wider world.

    All the terms you are mentioning are clearly derogative, do not tell us you did not know that as well.

    I don't know about you, but if I were doing that activity for a living I would want to be referred as with a respectful term. Sex worker is the accepted term for people that use their sexuality to make a living, but refers more particularly to people that are paid to have sex with clients.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  28. Not quite that good. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    People are jailed for drug offences, one of these ladies spent one year in jail for drug related offences (i.e possession or trafficking).

    Is a fact, recognized by this government, that drug addicts get little or no help while they are in jail.

    Having said that, if you want to quit they provide you with some help, but, foolishly, drug addicts don;t seem to be anybody's priority (if the government was any wise drug addicts should be a helat priority since a big percentage of petty crime is related to drug addicts trying to get money for their next fix).

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  29. Re: Why do people suddenly care? Answer & Cont by evilandi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    pembo13: Why do people suddenly care?

    The answer: This case involves a large number of murders within a short space of time in a quiet semi-rural area where murders are exceptionally rare and crime very low.

    Let's not kid ourselves that anyone (significant) cares about prostitutes, especially not drug-addicted ones. This is about five murders within a fortnight in a middle-class provincial town (100,000 folks). Ipswitch, contrary to London-based journalists misunderstanding, doesn't have a "red light district". It has a corner of a road near a truck stop. Not even one whole street. Think almost the furthest town you can imagine from The Bronx. Think Agatha Christie's "Miss Marple".

    To give context, the town is only a few miles from where Constable painted The Hay Wain, possibly the most famous English countryside scene of all time. Imagine five naked dead women on the banks of that painting- the bodies were found in similar locations. THAT is why people suddenly care, because it is so incredibly unusual given the semi-rural location.

    --
    Andrew Oakley - www.aoakley.com
  30. advertising by owlnation · · Score: 1

    If the BBC is using Skype - and there seems to be some doubt about this - then someone should be asking serious questions about their charter. The BBC is forbidden from advertising and is directly funded by a license fee.

    To the point where kids TV show "Blue Peter" would have handcraft items on making things out of old packaging, any branding or logos on the packaging had to be blacked out.

    No way should the BBC be promoting skype - blatantly or otherwise. Brits, ask the BBC for your license fee back. Ask your MP why this is happening. If the BBC wants to be honest about their advertising then fine, scrap the license fee.

    Of course, the BBC smuggles PR, payola, and viral marketing into news, tech and entertainment items all the time - and I'm sure someone somewhere gets a nice backhander for those. The News dept is the one most guilty of marketing products.

    However, to be this blatant should result in someone being fired.

    1. Re:advertising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      RTFA, BBC.co.uk article doesn't mention Skype at all.

    2. Re:advertising by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      If the BBC is using Skype - and there seems to be some doubt about this

      No doubt at all. Click on the BBC link. Then you find a web page without any mention of Skype.

    3. Re:advertising by glesga_kiss · · Score: 1
      If the BBC is using Skype - and there seems to be some doubt about this - then someone should be asking serious questions about their charter. The BBC is forbidden from advertising and is directly funded by a license fee.

      Nonsense! That's not advertising. Are you suggesting that in the BBC staff canteen the Nescafe has the name blacked out? Using a product and advertising it are entirely different things.

      Quick, grab your pitchforks, we're marching on Google. The BBC uses Google Earth imagery regularly, and yes, it says Google Earth in the image at all times.

      They've also used RealPlayer but we we are putting together a lynching mob, count me in on that one.

    4. Re:advertising by Angostura · · Score: 1

      Someone's got a bit chip on their shoulder haven't they?

      Should we be asking "serious questions" about the fact that the BBC makes footage available via Real Player, and has its podcasts available via iTune, as well?

  31. Sex Workers Okay? by nerdussuperior · · Score: 1

    It can seem like an enjoyable way to make alot of bucks if it wasn't that it often destroys there self-worth. There is something about intimate contact and cash that makes women just feel like things being used. People naturally look for respect, even from strangers. Somehow I think sex workers get little of that.

  32. Dead Hookers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Im disgusted at someone tagging this story "deadhookers". Oh how you must chuckle at your comic genius, but lets get one thing straight - these girls were murdered. There is nothing funny about it. They sold there bodies to feed an addiction that they had no control over.

    Slashdots really gone down the tube if readers think this is acceptable

    1. Re:Dead Hookers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe hookers are more acceptable in your part of the world than here, but I hardly think that calling these disgusting creatures what they are is wrong or insensitive.

      Hookers are disgusting people. I don't care what you think. The fact they were murdered is irrelevant and immaterial to telling the truth about these people.

  33. They just arrested somone for this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    More intresting than the Skype connection is the fact that the police arrested somone who gave an interview to the Sunday Mirror newspaper the day before.

    See http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/suffolk/6189409 .stm
    and
    http://www.sundaymirror.co.uk/news/news/tm_headlin e=ripper-hunt--the-suspect%26method=full%26objecti d=18275623%26siteid=62484-name_page.html

    Its quite chilling to read the interview

  34. Offensive tag by NemosomeN · · Score: 1

    tagged "deadsexworkers" in response

    --
    I hate grammar Nazi's.
  35. Murderers MySpace Profile! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    The murderers myspace profile is here. Found it after reading this article

    1. Re:Murderers MySpace Profile! by ear1grey · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Important correction: The man has been arrested on suspicion of the five murders; he is not, unless proven guilty, "the murderer".

    2. Re:Murderers MySpace Profile! by Marlow+the+Irelander · · Score: 1

      Actually, whether or not he's proven guilty has no bearing on whether he's the murderer. If he killed these women, then even if he's found innocent by the court, he's the murderer; conversely, if he's wrongfully convicted, that doesn't make him the killer.

    3. Re:Murderers MySpace Profile! by ear1grey · · Score: 1
      Actually, whether or not he's proven guilty has no bearing on whether he's the murderer.
      Agreed: one of the reasons why the UK has abolished capital punishment.
  36. Skype 3.0 adds the Skype links by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I didn't see any free Skype links on that page at all. However, right at the bottom of the page are two telephone numbers. If you have the new Skype 3.0 installed it will automatically highlight phone numbers on a page and turn them into Click-2-Call numbers. Being 0800 numbers on this page, they are free.

  37. Sex and Womens rights by smoker2 · · Score: 2
    I am going off at a tangent here, but as the post have mainly gone towards the sex angle, I thought I'd bring it up.

    Here in the UK, I was reading a Littlewoods mail order catalogue (just for christmas gift ideas) and came across a new toy for young girls.

    It's a *POLE DANCING* kit !

    What is wrong with this picture ? I mean, have the womens liberation movement ceased to exist ? I mentioned this to a friend of mine and he replied that he already knew about it, and that his daughter had been doing it as a course at school ! WTF.

    I am all for liberisation etc, but surely this is a bit over the top. I mean, do they teach these children what the fucking pole represents ?

    I tried to get to Littlewoods website to find a link, but the net is slow here right now, google has some good links to a story on it though, as it appears Tesco had a similar product. I remember a time when women got pissed off if you bought a young girl a pram and a doll, now apparently we can train them to be erotic dancers, at public expense ! Jesus H Christ, on a bike. What's next, My Little Pony Fuck 'n' Suck outfits, Crotchless panties (age 5 to 6), Leather gear for the discerning 8 year old ?

    Amazon have the same product and it even includes toy dollars ! They also have a toy lapdancing kit, which seems to have the words "not a toy" hastily tacked onto the description.

    Sometimes you do actually have to think of the children.
  38. story update 37 year old man arrested by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  39. [Prostitutes vs the military] was Re:Why yes... by guacamole+rocks · · Score: 1
    Why do we, as a society, look down on those who sell their bodies, but not those who sell other aspects of themselves? Actually, we don't look down on all those who sell their bodies. People who take part in drug trials, for example, sell their bodies far more than prostitutes (often for less money, and with bigger risks), and yet they are not regarded as social outcasts. People in the military sell their ethics (assuming they had some ethical objections to killing) and often their lives, but are not regarded with the same stigma as prostitutes.

    Your argument seems to be that society should not look down on prostitutes more than we look down on those who participate in drug trials or in the active duty military.

    You are presenting the evidence that some drug trial participants and some military members put their lives at greater risk than prostitutes. The implicit assumption seems to be that personal risk is the only reason for the lower social status of prostitutes.

    I can't speak for the rest of society, but I consider prostitutes of lower social status because they attempt to profit from highly addictive behavior (and people who are vulnerable to this). Prostitutes are profiting from an activity that triggers much deeper in the brain's emotional center, which is the heart of many addictive behaviors. I believe that this is morally wrong, in the same way that selling highly addictive drugs is wrong.

    I don't want to start an extended discussion about the morality of drugs and prostitution... this guy asked what might be a troll or an honest question... I'm not sure.
    1. Re:[Prostitutes vs the military] was Re:Why yes... by orgelspieler · · Score: 1
      Do you also think being a bartender, blackjack dealer, chocolatier, or barista is morally wrong? Those jobs also profit from activities that trigger addictions. Shopping has also been shown to be addictive to some individuals. Should we thus consider all store owners to be morally bankrupt? I wish there were some easy way to define good and bad jobs, but triggering an addiction is probably not the right criterion.

      What about the deep emotional center idea? Well, intense religious experiences have been shown to trigger some of the same centers as sex, chocolate, and roller coasters. Does that mean that pastors/ministers/priests are of a "lower social status"? I was paid to sing in a choir. That choir sang very touching songs that several people in the audience later said they came back to listen to again, because they had a deep emotional experience. Is that morally wrong?

      On to the drug trial thing. For both drug trials that I have participated in, I had to have surgery to remove two wisdom teeth. I effectively sold part of my body in order to pay for college. Looking back, that sure seems a little creepy. Maybe I was wrong to do that. On the other side of the drug trial equation are those making money off the drugs, not the trials. There are situations like those fictionalized in The Constant Gardener, where undesired effects go on too long before the test is halted. And that sort of thing does happen in real life. It's easy for us to say, "Look there. That's an immorral thing to do." But at the time, all the people involved surely thought they were doing the right thing.

      I guess all I'm trying to say is that this is a very murky area, and trying to pin down exactly why some people don't like hookers is very hard to do.

    2. Re:[Prostitutes vs the military] was Re:Why yes... by guacamole+rocks · · Score: 1
      Do you also think being a bartender, blackjack dealer, chocolatier, or barista is morally wrong? Those jobs also profit from activities that trigger addictions.
      Nope, I'm personally fine with the above... remember, I said highly addictive. How much is too addictive? Obviously a judgment call, but hookers clearly cross the line for me and most other people.

      What about the deep emotional center idea? Well, intense religious experiences have been shown to trigger some of the same centers as sex, chocolate, and roller coasters. Does that mean that pastors/ministers/priests are of a "lower social status"?
      Pastors do not profit from the "intense religious experience"; they are paid by contributions, but I have been in church all my life and haven't met a single person who would consider church every remotely as fun as sex... myself as an example... I frequently skip church during NFL season for football.

      So in your opinion, what percentage of the population experiences this kind of religious intensity to the point that it is comparable to sex? Where is your source material, and what evidence can you provide to prove this assertion? If religious experiences are so addictive, then why is the per-capita Christian & Catholic population declining in the US?

      This discussion is bordering on absurd and is spinning off topic... if you really want to discuss it, my email address is in my slashdot profile
  40. Regarding bad taste... by Karganeth · · Score: 1

    Have you heard about that dyslexic santa in Ipswitch? He keeps leaving prozzies under the trees.

  41. Re:Sex workers? Outwhoring Vs. Inwhoring by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Outwhoring - the act of employing services from low cost Penile Stimulation Engineer(s).
    Inwhoring - the act of employing a single extremely expensive PSE in a long term life contract!
    Boring - the act of working as your own PSE whilst learning (erm reading) about sex on slashdot

    Other useful terms:
    Sex - something most slashdot readers learn about after leaving their mums basements (aged 46!)
    Scratch & Match clinic - a specialist team able to help resolve "issues" caused by outwhoring.

  42. Insensitive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't think that referring deadhookers is a good idea because it is glib. Regardless of whether the word is hooker or prostitude or whore or woman. I've had enough of slashdot.

    1. Re:Insensitive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Telling the truth is too insensitive? Moron.

  43. This toy was for for adults by giafly · · Score: 1

    Tesco last night denied the pole dancing kit was sexually oriented and said it was clearly marked for "adult use". A spokesman added: "Pole dancing is an increasing exercise craze. This item is for people who want to improve their fitness and have fun at the same time." Story

    Now put your dick away and consider that this is a tragic story about murdered drug addicts and not an excuse for pedophile ravings.

    --
    Reduce, reuse, cycle
  44. Re:advertising - mod parent down idiotic troll ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    owlnation (858981) wrote.... a load of crap that I can't even be bothered to quote!

    Well you are so absolutely right the BBC would NEVER ever dare mention SKYPE in an article about Making phone calls over the net and clearly the very idea of the BBC having advertising on non-UK BBC channels like BBCWORLD is against their charter!

    I suggest you check the BBC charter. Personally I think the BBC is excellent value for money, I do wish that Tony the croney would keep out of it but that's another issue entirely. Anyway I suggest you get back to writing about things you clearly know about like beautiful women that you will never ever meet as your clearly a muppet still living with his parents!

  45. [OT] by orgelspieler · · Score: 1

    Ah, a fellow football fan. I wonder how few of us there are on /. ?

    And yes, the discussion got wildly off-topic. You are too kind by saying "bordering on absurd." I'm pretty sure anybody with less patience would have completely written me off as a whacko. :-)