Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Nominations Open For "Most Likely to be Shut Down By Government"

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the targeting-interface-for-the-man dept.

The corporate overlords at SourceForge asked me to name a Slashdot category for their upcoming Community Choice Awards and to let you guys select the winner. I have named my category "Most Likely to be Shut Down by a Government Agency." We're going to run this like we do an Ask Slashdot call for questions — post your nominations into the comments here. Use moderation to send up good ideas. In the upcoming days we'll post another story where you can vote on the actual winner. Nominations need to include the project name, a link to some sort of official website, and a paragraph of why you think they deserve to win. The project that wins will gain fame, notoriety, and maybe a cease and desist order that they could print out and frame if they had that kind of time.

5 of 629 comments (clear)

  1. Ron Paul by Yoooder · · Score: 1, Troll

    Oh wait... I guess he was already shut down by the media.

    1. Re:Ron Paul by maxume · · Score: 0, Troll

      He wasn't shut down by the media, he was never anything but a marginal figure.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
  2. Craigslist by SirKron · · Score: 0, Troll

    How can you have a site that anyone can sell anything without any taxes being collected? Not to mention that it is a perfect place to get your enemies house looted just by posting a "free stuff" listing.

  3. Re:Truecrypt by Bastard+of+Subhumani · · Score: 0, Troll

    Nonesense. P.S frotso pots!

    --
    Only three things are certain; death, taxes, and apocryphal quotations - Ben Franklin.
  4. Re:Truecrypt by collinstocks · · Score: 1, Troll

    I remember about a year ago, I did fifteen or so different statistical tests on the random numbers generated by the Windows urandom system call in Python. It turns out that the numbers are not cryptographically secure, and most of the results of the statistical tests were p less than 0.0001 or p greater than 0.9999. That is, very high correlation between "random" numbers. You want something 0.01 less than p less than 0.99 for something even moderately secure.