Slashdot Mirror
Google Blocks co.cc From Search Results
tekgoblin writes "Google has taken the attack on malware into its own hands today as it blocks the entire co.cc subdomain. The block removed about 11 million results from the Google search index which should dramatically clean up much malware in search results."
Expert Sex Change is a pile of shit and ehow is a waste of space
Snowden and Manning are heroes.
> some people say that it's better to allow a hundred guilty people go free than imprison one innocent person. I'm not sure if I agree with that
If one day you are the one innocent stuck with 100 guilty people maybe you will change your mind. If you want a second opinion on this, ask the mother of Freddy Krueger.
lucm, indeed.
You're not keeping up. In today's society, it's "fuck them, as long as it isn't fuck me."
As Pastor Martin Niemöller rightly pointed out (here), eventually it will become "fuck me", but that requires looking ahead further than tomorrow, and again, today's society doesn't encourage that kind of thinking.
This is a nice, safe way for the authorities (in this case, Google... a self-created and -appointed vector for network search) to do the work and cast a safety net over the incompetent; they are absolutely guaranteed to go along. The only way they'd like it better is if it was done by an act of law.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
The ORIGINAL FUCKING STORY IS ON THE REGISTER
For fuck's sake, stop this linking to every scumbag linkspamming plaigiarising blogger who submits his crappy blog to scam some ad hits.
Why is 100 the number? Why not 1000? or 10? How many guilty people must we accept go free to make sure that one innocent doesn't get punished?
If it is infinitely worse to punish one innocent, we should just close down the police and courts, as we can never be 100%, totally, without doubt certain of anybodies guilt.
If it is zero, we should start putting everybody in prison, to make sure we get everybody who is guilty.
I think we can agree that none of these scenarios are good societies, so we need to aim for something in between. But what level of doubt should be enough for not punishing a person? Until that question is answered, the phrase about a hundred guilty going free is just words that sounds nice.
[...] the number isn't important. It's just an illustration of the legal doctrine of presumed innocence.
But the number IS important, it defines what level of presumption of innocence our judicial system has. This is a fundamental question, and yet is isn't defined anywhere. I would assume that different people found different levels of doubt reasonable, so not defining it just leads to arbitrary justice, depending on what the particular jury or judge finds reasonable.