I see... your uncle was decorated for shooting innocent civilians exercising their right to free speech in a public forum? Quite a guy. I can see why a screaming lunatic such as yourself would be proud.
If it interferes with the phone's signal, won't the phone will just up its transmission power and drain its battery faster, while possibly subjecting the kid to comparable levels of radio waves?
Well, to me the public's need to know about potentially corrupt and dangerous police in their area outweighs their right to privacy. If they don't like it, they can quit.
She has evidence these guys are corrupt and dangerous? That might be worth seeing. Of course, there's nothing in her blogs I saw that would indicate that's the case. She's a nutcase who follows cops in her spare time and takes pictures of them doing nothing special. On the other hand, her blog has every indication that she is trying to aggravate them and expose them to danger. She is part crazy, part malicious.
Did the cops paste your face, address, home, and other information on a web site in a way that might get your head blown off by a cocaine dealer? I didn't think so. Your comparison isn't apples to apples.
Dude, I wasn't serious about that forcible moving part. Relax. My point was that her perspective on police operations might change if she needed them to keep crackheads from robbing her house while meth-addicted hookers give $20 blowjobs on her front lawn.
I can quote the Constitution and Bill of Rights all day long. Her Consitutional right to free speech is limited when it puts others' lives in jeopardy, like yelling "fire" in a theater.
Of course regarding relocation, the Constitution does grant powers of eminent domain to the government, so theoretically they could force her off her property. (All joking aside for a moment, recent eminent domain takings and court decisions have been absurdly anti-citizen). However, I don't think they have any say where she ends up after that. Unless, of course, she ends up being a guest of the state.
They have a lot to hide, and for legitimate reason. Undercover officers face the possibility of violent death on a daily basis, and avoiding that chance comes down to keeping their real identity and their assumed identity separate. This woman is clearly trying to put the police and, by posting address information, their families in danger. She can post what bullshit she wants about public information, free speech, etc., the point of her blog is simply and obviously the harassment and endangerment of cops. She should be forcibly moved to a high-crime area and forced to fend for herself.
I took his "Same for me, but more publishers than two" to mean that he agreed with the parent's "ask if any publishers *aren't* a nightmare to deal with".
I'm worried about the chilling effect of email being tied to commerce. Internet commerce requires that your identity be tied to the transaction, whether it is to the ISP who provides your email account, PayPal for your ebay goodies (or supporting Slashdot), CC transactions on Amazon, etc. They know who you are. Now, in an instance where you need privacy, or better yet, actual anonymity, you are screwed because you can't use email to blow the whistle on an employer who acts unethically, violates OSHA regs, etc. And I wouldn't be surprised if the government likes the ability to track a specific email back to a specific person.
I don't mean to come off like a tin-foil hatter, and could probably write a more coherent rant if I had more time. There is no good that can come from this. Ever.
I think this is a terrible idea, and it will never work. Law-abiding folks will be taxed a few more pennies, and lawbreakers will find a way around it. Even when it becomes an abject failure, you can bet that whoever is in charge if this will never kill their nice fat revenue stream by admitting that it is a pig.
If the average corporate worker sends 20 emails a day and copies 3 people on each, and works for a company that has 1,000 employees, that's 60,000 emails per day, or about $150k per year. That's the annual salary for a couple good jobs.
You yourself hit on an obvious spammer solution... rather than send the emails directly, simply trojan a few thousand PCs and let someone else foot the bill. Do you think that ISPs are benevolent enough to forgive a $100k debt? I could very easily see someone dragged into court to collect on it, for no reason more than they weren't protected against the latest malware. It would be ironic if the end user in such a case had been relying on the AV/firewall that their ISP provided, like Comcast.
Spammers only make money if a company pays them to "advertise" their product. The reason our inboxes are filled with spam is because some company down the line (other than the spammers) makes money from it. I say we find a way to sue/fine the shit out of the companies who hire spammers. Make spam a toxic way to do business, and demand will dry up.
Batteries are already better than what hydrogen can or ever will do.
I wasn't saying that hydrogen production was clean & renewable today. Assuming that this technology (or another renewable hydrogen-producing technology) someday proves viable, I was wondering what you saw wrong with hydrogen vs. batteries.
You also don't "need" the right to refuse to quarter soldiers in your home in times of peace, but it's in there, and it counts as a Constitutional right. I hate the concept that some rights are "less equal" than others. They are in the Constitution for a reason. They are all important.
Stronger protections for the 1st vs. 2nd is a matter of self-serving politicians and courts without the spine to back the Constitution as it was written and intended. The Bill of Rights shouldn't need protection. It is the protection.
IANAL, but off the top of my head there are a few major distinctions: sexual assault, statutory rape, rape, and aggravated rape. These are broken down further (sexual assault of a child over / under 14, rape of a child, aggravated rape of a child, etc.)
I don't know if you were among this particular group of partying nerds, but I seem to remember a website from about 15 yrs ago, built by the faculty of the engineering department of some college. It showed pictures of their annual picnic. Every year, there was a contest to see who could get the briquettes ready the quickest. Year after year, they got more inventive, finally culminating when someone took 1) a grill filled with charcoal, 2) a lit cigarette at the bottom of the pile to act as a source of ignition, and 3) a bucket of liquid oxygen at the end of a long pole. The result (yes, there were pictures) was a 10-foot column of fire, and the total destruction of the el cheapo grill.
I wish I could find that website again. I wonder if they have beaten their old record. They must have by now.
Slashdot Mirror
I see ... your uncle was decorated for shooting innocent civilians exercising their right to free speech in a public forum? Quite a guy. I can see why a screaming lunatic such as yourself would be proud.
... geneticists are now working feverishly to develop the world's first nano-shark.
If it interferes with the phone's signal, won't the phone will just up its transmission power and drain its battery faster, while possibly subjecting the kid to comparable levels of radio waves?
Well, to me the public's need to know about potentially corrupt and dangerous police in their area outweighs their right to privacy. If they don't like it, they can quit.
She has evidence these guys are corrupt and dangerous? That might be worth seeing. Of course, there's nothing in her blogs I saw that would indicate that's the case. She's a nutcase who follows cops in her spare time and takes pictures of them doing nothing special. On the other hand, her blog has every indication that she is trying to aggravate them and expose them to danger. She is part crazy, part malicious.
Did the cops paste your face, address, home, and other information on a web site in a way that might get your head blown off by a cocaine dealer? I didn't think so. Your comparison isn't apples to apples.
Dude, I wasn't serious about that forcible moving part. Relax. My point was that her perspective on police operations might change if she needed them to keep crackheads from robbing her house while meth-addicted hookers give $20 blowjobs on her front lawn.
I can quote the Constitution and Bill of Rights all day long. Her Consitutional right to free speech is limited when it puts others' lives in jeopardy, like yelling "fire" in a theater.
Of course regarding relocation, the Constitution does grant powers of eminent domain to the government, so theoretically they could force her off her property. (All joking aside for a moment, recent eminent domain takings and court decisions have been absurdly anti-citizen). However, I don't think they have any say where she ends up after that. Unless, of course, she ends up being a guest of the state.
They have a lot to hide, and for legitimate reason. Undercover officers face the possibility of violent death on a daily basis, and avoiding that chance comes down to keeping their real identity and their assumed identity separate. This woman is clearly trying to put the police and, by posting address information, their families in danger. She can post what bullshit she wants about public information, free speech, etc., the point of her blog is simply and obviously the harassment and endangerment of cops. She should be forcibly moved to a high-crime area and forced to fend for herself.
I took his "Same for me, but more publishers than two" to mean that he agreed with the parent's "ask if any publishers *aren't* a nightmare to deal with".
I could be wrong. Occasionally it happens.
It's a more obscure organization, but they do lots of good work saving porcine victims of shipwrecks.
Now, if they could guarantee getting me a posthumous FP on /. it would be worth a look. They could call it "lastfirstpost.com" or something.
Of course, you might get sent to hell for that.
Err, didn't you mean to hit the AC button?
+5, Sticking to the subject.
Any contract hints?
Some guy probably suffering from the brilliant hindsight that follows a divorce.
I'm worried about the chilling effect of email being tied to commerce. Internet commerce requires that your identity be tied to the transaction, whether it is to the ISP who provides your email account, PayPal for your ebay goodies (or supporting Slashdot), CC transactions on Amazon, etc. They know who you are. Now, in an instance where you need privacy, or better yet, actual anonymity, you are screwed because you can't use email to blow the whistle on an employer who acts unethically, violates OSHA regs, etc. And I wouldn't be surprised if the government likes the ability to track a specific email back to a specific person.
I don't mean to come off like a tin-foil hatter, and could probably write a more coherent rant if I had more time. There is no good that can come from this. Ever.
I think this is a terrible idea, and it will never work. Law-abiding folks will be taxed a few more pennies, and lawbreakers will find a way around it. Even when it becomes an abject failure, you can bet that whoever is in charge if this will never kill their nice fat revenue stream by admitting that it is a pig.
... rather than send the emails directly, simply trojan a few thousand PCs and let someone else foot the bill. Do you think that ISPs are benevolent enough to forgive a $100k debt? I could very easily see someone dragged into court to collect on it, for no reason more than they weren't protected against the latest malware. It would be ironic if the end user in such a case had been relying on the AV/firewall that their ISP provided, like Comcast.
If the average corporate worker sends 20 emails a day and copies 3 people on each, and works for a company that has 1,000 employees, that's 60,000 emails per day, or about $150k per year. That's the annual salary for a couple good jobs.
You yourself hit on an obvious spammer solution
Spammers only make money if a company pays them to "advertise" their product. The reason our inboxes are filled with spam is because some company down the line (other than the spammers) makes money from it. I say we find a way to sue/fine the shit out of the companies who hire spammers. Make spam a toxic way to do business, and demand will dry up.
Yes, but when a 1500 page bill lands on a congresscritter's desk 2-3 days before the vote, what do you expect?
Gracias.
Batteries are already better than what hydrogen can or ever will do.
I wasn't saying that hydrogen production was clean & renewable today. Assuming that this technology (or another renewable hydrogen-producing technology) someday proves viable, I was wondering what you saw wrong with hydrogen vs. batteries.
Is it just inefficiency you object to?
You also don't "need" the right to refuse to quarter soldiers in your home in times of peace, but it's in there, and it counts as a Constitutional right. I hate the concept that some rights are "less equal" than others. They are in the Constitution for a reason. They are all important.
Stronger protections for the 1st vs. 2nd is a matter of self-serving politicians and courts without the spine to back the Constitution as it was written and intended. The Bill of Rights shouldn't need protection. It is the protection.
The point is that the internet is an easy place for sexual predators to find new prey
So are malls. So are parks. So are sidewalks.
Network: a series of tubes.
So it's sort of social. Demented and sad, but social.
But I imagine they do not, with the exception of ID fraud, share a Social Security number?
IANAL, but off the top of my head there are a few major distinctions: sexual assault, statutory rape, rape, and aggravated rape. These are broken down further (sexual assault of a child over / under 14, rape of a child, aggravated rape of a child, etc.)
So, exactly how would having a clean, endless supply of hydrogen would be bad?
I don't know if you were among this particular group of partying nerds, but I seem to remember a website from about 15 yrs ago, built by the faculty of the engineering department of some college. It showed pictures of their annual picnic. Every year, there was a contest to see who could get the briquettes ready the quickest. Year after year, they got more inventive, finally culminating when someone took 1) a grill filled with charcoal, 2) a lit cigarette at the bottom of the pile to act as a source of ignition, and 3) a bucket of liquid oxygen at the end of a long pole. The result (yes, there were pictures) was a 10-foot column of fire, and the total destruction of the el cheapo grill.
I wish I could find that website again. I wonder if they have beaten their old record. They must have by now.