Slashdot Mirror
Reiser Murder Case Gets Stranger
Fahrvergnuugen writes "Wired is running a story about how an ex-lover of the missing wife of accused spouse killer Hans Reiser has confessed to killing eight people unrelated to the case. While Reiser will still stand trial for the murder, this development will undoubtedly complicate things."
When I saw this story, I skimmed the first line, then got to the second, which read: "Hans Reiser has confessed to killing eight people unrelated to the case." It was a bit of a jolt. Then I went back and realized that it was referring to his wife's ex-lover, not to Reiser himself.
This is why you don't put a giant 10-word prepositional phrase between a subject and verb, especially if that phrase ends with something that could plausibly by a subject.
If your wife's ex-lover is a confessed serial killer, the evidence against you has to be pretty damning for you not to create reasonable doubt. Like if he was videotaped by a policeman while committing a murder and later signed a statement that he is a person on the video. It's not a big stretch of imagination that someone who killed 8 times and didn't get caught is capable of some creativity when planting evidence.
I always wondered where they got some of the crazy idea's for Soap Opera's, I don't wonder anymore. I really feel sorry for poor Hans, assuming he is innocent. This is a nightmare of unimaginable proportions. Even if he "wins", he will probably be bankrupt from paying the attorneys.
"To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
Lol. You're missing the point of open source, which is that, if something is mission-critical, and the maintainer falls off the face of the earth, anyone, and I mean anyone, can pick up the code and continue on. The practical upshot of this is that, if suddenly overnight and with no warning your software became unsupported you could hire someone to provide support because you have all the code.
SRSLY.
I can just see the defense now:
1) No body, so the prosecution cannot prove that she is even dead.
2) If the IS dead, she recently dated a guy who has confessed to eight killings.
What are the odds that he gets convicted?
"-1 Troll" is the apparently the same as "-1 I disagree with you."
I think you're missing the point, which is that the OSS philosophy that someone will just come along and pick up the project is quite different from reality, as evidenced by the cratering of ReiserFS since this happened. If you're using a product from a business, it's a different story since a business can hire someone experienced enough to replace the previous developer. You're right that a business could pick up the project since the code is out there, but then why isn't that happening with ReiserFS?
"Sufferin' succotash."
Wow, how delightfully shallow! If we found out that Newton murdered someone we should all drop newtonian physics!
Honestly, whatever he has done on a social level (killing could be considered social interaction) has NOTHING to do with the technical merit/achievements... and we should not abandon his work merely because he (may have) killed his wife.
</bitter>
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
There aren't many people actually capable of comitting a murder, so the fact that Nina Reiser's ex-lover is a self-confessed serial killer strikes me as a far too remarkable coincidence.
... it's the right thing to do. There a lot of people in the United States that don't understand that anymore, don't accept that human life is valuable but not infinitely so, and that some are worth more than others. We may all have been created equal, but sadly not all end up that way.
It depends upon the motivation, the stakes. I wouldn't kill someone for money. I wouldn't kill them for revenge. I wouldn't kill them because they angered me. On the other hand, say you tried to kill my fiancee: I'd murder you in a heartbeat without batting an eye. Now, even if I escaped official punishment I would pay a high price for that act. Most of us would, but we're all capable of murder, at some level. We have to be, because sometimes
You're right in that by far the majority of us won't kill for trivial reasons, although one has to wonder how much of that reluctance is due to the sanctions imposed by society against such behavior, or some intrinsic aversion to killing. Sociopathy, to varying degrees, is more common than one might want to believe, so maybe all that's keeping murder in check is the fear of consequences. I mean, all societies feel the need to impose severe punishment for murder, which leads me to believe that, at the core, we aren't quite as civilized as we think we are.
Besides, O.J. Simpson killed two people in cold blood, and in spite of substantially more incriminating evidence, O.J. managed to get off scott free. O.J. had mountains of money to spend on his Dream Team though.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
"Apple did go on without Jobs," ...almost into bankruptcy, until they hired him again, and he turned the company into NeXT 2.0.
...into the latest, most expensive, least-desirable version of Windows yet, a product that makes ME look enchanting by comparison.
"MS is going on without Gates at the helm..."
"And HP is getting along fine without Carly." my point; WITH her, they were not getting along so well.
Probably fairly high, she's likely to be predisposed to be attracted to a particular personality type...
"Consider how lucky you are that life has been good to you so far. Alternatively, if life hasn't been good to you so far
Yeah, sure you could. However, if you were accused of murder, the first thing you'd do would be to shut your mouth and tell no-one anything about anything (including car seats), besides your lawyer of course.
Does it go on forever?
When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem