You still attempt to psychoanalyze me. You pick out key phrases which you seem to view as "justifying" the predator.
And, you're wrong.
Please, quote one instance in which I say that the predator is justified, or that the prey "deserves" their treatment.
I have merely stated that I lack sympathy for the suicidal. I place them a little further up the food chain from the suicidal fools who decide to kill someone else on their way out - but they still dangle near the bottom of the food chain.
And, please. Comparing a suicide to a race or a religious group? Duhhh. Suicide doesn't equate to genocide, no matter how imaginative you are.
Oh. I see. An isolated, one sentence insult. Hmmmm. I wonder what I would find if I searched slashdot for "Rob Malda" and "cock", or "Rob Malda" and any number of other derogatory terms?
If Rob committed suicide, a good prosecuting attorney might make a case of conspiracy against all the people who have ever spewed hatred toward Rob. Think about it.
Oh. I'm scared. Perhaps you'll explain, first, why you are coming for me. Because I'm an asshole, and you disagree with me? Talk about petty......
Get a clue, lackwit. This predator has spent a lifetime destroying other lives. He has proven himself unworthy of our time, our compassion, our understanding, or our resources. He does not deserve a moldy crust of bread, or a scummy glass of dirty water.
This bastard kidnapped and repeatedly raped an 11 year old child. One might presume that he was looking forward to raping the children he fathered on the first child. Whether that be so, or not, he is far beyond any reasonable man's hope for redemption.
Let him look to his creator for redemption in the next life.
MacOS was based on BSD, right? By extension, does BSD have no security at all? Or, are we to assume that Mac stripped out BSD's inherent security? Remember, Unix like operating systems are inherently modeled on security.
Where did I justify anyone abusing anyone else? Abuse is wrong, no matter when, where, or how. This doesn't change the fact that the weak succumb, and the strong fight.
He is a lowlife sumbitch who has preyed on the innocent and the helpless for most of his life. He is undeserving of so much as a bread and water diet, and a prison cell.
Your post makes it obvious that you have discarded the possibility of capital punishment.
I am willing to put a cur dog down, you are not. There's not much point in arguing over it. Just stay out of the way while real men and women go about getting the job done.
Spam the shit out of their inbox, and tell them they look like a bunch of douches. I did. 50 million emails should be enough for the densest of democrats, so get started. Of course, they are all engrossed with the memorials for the rat bastard from MessyTwoShits who dropped dead recently - the one who murdered his pregnant girl friend. It may take a few days before they get back to business.
"This is nothing like me calling Rob Malda a douchebag "
And, you're a fucking psychologist, right? You know for certain that Rob Malda is rock stable, that he has never once considered suicide, right? That one more fucking douchebag won't push him over the edge with one more idiot insult? And, because you are a professional psychologist, your insult doesn't imply the same responsibility as some redneck bitch in Missouri improperly getting involved in her daughter's love life - or the life of her daughter's peers.
Get a grip on reality. If Malda suicides after you call him a douchebag, you are just about as responsible as the redneck bitch in Missouri.
We should all be grateful that this particular case has been thrown out. Very few of us on slashdot use our proper names - obviously putting us into the same class of predator as Lori Drew - at least in the mind of an overzealous prosecutor who doesn't like what we might have to say.
Once again, I remind people that the proper course of action in this case would have been CIVIL, not criminal. We don't need more criminal law on the books, there is already enough to make criminals of all of us. We especially don't need criminal law that threatens free speech.
Having lived through an abused childhood, I have near zero sympathy for kids who are such losers that they can't face life's challenges. Not quite zero, but near it. This girl who committed suicide because some boy she had never met apparently turned on her isn't very far up the food chain from the idiots who choose to "go out in a blaze of glory" while shooting up their school. She was weak and unstable, and she chose to suicide. Her lack of a support group contributed, yes, but the fact remains, she failed.
I've seen someone's sig - "Instead of child proofing the world, let's world proof the child!" Damned good advice - I just can't remember where I've seen the sig.
Can we throw out another fallacy? You assume that the government has no right or obligation to seek revenge or to seek to punish harmful conduct. You assume that rehabilitation is possible, and that attempting to rehabilitate people is desirable.
Have you looked at the Dugard case in California? That rat bastard who kidnapped Jaycee has a HISTORY of kidnapping and sexual assault. He deserves a bullet in the ear. Or, if the family members of any of the victims wants some hands-on revenge, let them deal with both Garridos in whatever way they choose.
There are to damned many self-proclaimed psychologists involved in making and enforcing law.
Yes, there is one great outcome here. Those who are able to discern that a civil suit for wrongful death is open to the girl's family will be able to understand this great outcome.
The outcome boils down to this: the government has no right to meddle in every little dispute that arises between two people. The federal government has no right or responsibility to get involved in petty disputes between bit players. The state governments cannot regulate every aspect of a person's life. A new law cannot be written to cover every possible use of every new technology. Attempting to do so only shows how anally retentive politicians and prosecutors can be.
Each and every individual who was involved in this particular case of harassment has some degree of responsibility. That INCLUDES the parents. Their "child" was permitted unsupervised access to the internet. This unstable child was permitted by her parents to suffer ongoing emotional and psychological abuse by her own parents.
There is plenty of responsibility to go around. Enough to keep a civil lawsuit going for years.
Criminal responsibility? Sorry. If I call you a flaming homosexual moron, and you go commit suicide, I've not committed a criminal act. Of course, that goes both ways - if you call ME the same thing, and I commit suicide, you aren't criminally liable either.
There - aren't you relieved that you aren't likely to spend the rest of your life in prison if you insult someone? Even if that someone happens to be a kid?
Be back later - I've got some queer little monkey faced bastards on my lawn.......
Yeah, I've read this "market share" argument used as a defense for shoddy MS code time and time again. That just doesn't cut it.
Mac has a presence in the business world. If it were as buggy as MS, crackers would be launching fishing expeditions for vulnerable Macs, so that they could gain access to company networks.
What I asked for were examples of exploits, or reasons why this bug were really dangerous. Posts before yours are attempting to put things into perspective. Please, no more lame defenses of from MS astroturfers - there are enough of those even before you arrive at my question.
Market share, indeed. Remind me that the next time I want a cheap padlock, I should purchase a no-name lock. Since it has no market share, burglars won't try to pick it or break it.
Alright, I read TFA. I read the earlier slashdot article. I even googled around a little bit. What I find is, an obscure little bug, if exploited locally, enables a user to crash his machine. What I don't find is an exploit that makes use of this bug.
Am I missing something?
I suppose that I could accomplish something similar on my current Ubuntu installation. If I thought it made a difference, I could install a few other flavors of Linux and try doing something like that. But, why?
MS astroturfer's posts above are noted. And, I also note that MS bugs are routinely exploited, locally and remotely. The unwarranted superiority complex looks pretty pathetic, doesn't it?
Does anyone really give a damn about tech support? Seriously - the problems with tech support just illustrate that 90% + of "computer users" are clueless, and are unable to use a computer unless they follow the strait and narrow edicts of Microsoft.
Monkeys trained to ask rote questions, then respond to rote answers with yet more rote questions, for the most part.
"Good morning, Towne's customer support, how may I help you?"
"I have no connectivity to the intartubez."
"Please reboot your computer and your modem."
"I don't run Windows - my Linux has been running for months, and I don't want to reboot. Can we just discuss the lack of a signal on my telephone line?"
"I'm sorry, but we don't support Linux."
"I'm not asking for Linux suport, I'm asking for support for lack of a signal - my modem can't find your server to authenticate."
"I'm sorry, I can't help you."
"Can you not check that the server is up and runnind?"
"No, but I can escalate - oh, no, sorry, I can't do that because we don't support Linux."
"Are you aware that the modem you sold me is Linux?"
"Oh, that can't be, we don't support Linux!"
The only way to get "support" from people like this, is to lie. But, it's so easy to make a mistake when you start lying . . . . .
Let's look at the same argument used by Corporate America - specifically, RIAA. The statement that file sharers are "criminals" is common. It is a determined effort to alienate filesharers from people who genuinely respect the law. That inaccurate statement is incorporated into any and every PR release made by a majority of IP holders. "Criminal" are costing Corporate America billions of dollars annualy.
I've argued and pointed out many times that file sharers may or may not be guilty of infringing on CIVIL LAW, but that does not make them "criminals".
Honesty demands that we not use the same dirty trick against Corporate America. Microsoft is not a "convicted criminal". They may be a bunch of rat bastards, but being a rat bastard is not in and of itself a criminal offense.
Please, don't put me in the position of defending Microsoft again.
I saw this article a couple times, and finally clicked it to see what's being said. Good post you've made there.
I'd like to add though, that Dell jumped on the bandwagon years ago when MS demanded exclusivity agreements in exchange for distribution rights. Even if Dell were to suffer a loss if ordered to distribute no more Word products, I couldn't feel sorry for them. Dell assisted, even if indirectly, in creating the Microsoft monopoly. A little hardship might make them reconsider pushing Linux and No-OS machines a little harder. It would be good to see such offerings on their FRONT page. It would be even better to see the end of "Dell recommends Windows Blah" on every page.
In the United States, there has been a phone line almost everywhere for decades. A phone line allows dial up. We even have electricity! In recent years the "Rural Water Development" has even brought "city water" out into - get this - RURAL AMERICA! Get a clue.
It's a one hour drive to the nearest hospital that will deliver a baby. It's more than a 1/2 hour drive to pay the electric bill. The nearest grocery store is a 5 minute drive - a family operation that's been in the same small building since about the time the Oklahoma territory opened up. Any grocery store chain that most Americans would recognize, is an hour away, in the same city with the hospital.
Seriously - I gave up on it. And, I do believe that it relies on the IA32 library being present. I could be wrong on the library, but I simply couldn't keep any of my browsers running reliably until I switched back to the 32 bit version.
Exactly what are you referring to? Glancing at a map? Yes, I did. Perhaps you noticed the "millions of miles"? Nowhere did I say that I STUDIED the map, or searched for alternate routes while driving. That was completed before putting the truck in gear. One can actually glance away from the road from time to time. Keyword: glance.
No one hits on one important point, though. Paywalls can only result in a less informed populace. While we can and do argue the merits of any given news source, at this point in time, we can browse ALL news sources.
If news is doled out on a subscription basis, we'll be returning to the 1960's when there were only three real source of news - ABC, NBC, and CBS - in the US. Seriously, browse around the news sites, click on the subscription link, and see what it costs. Slashdotters might have decent incomes, and maybe they can afford to subscribe to their ten or twenty favorite news sites. That would probably include the technical news sites, as well as the more general daily news.
Personally, if I had to pay to view places like the Dallas News, the Houston Star, and the BBC, I would be tapped out. I can't AFFORD subscriptions at every place I read. I certainly wouldn't PAY to read Fox News - so the occasional bit of factual reporting by a Fox reporter that no one else covered would never make it into my house.
The entire scheme would tend to produce a more ignorant population. Bad move from everyone's point of view, except the corporate bigwigs who stand to make money from our ignorance.
No, asshole - I was born in the boonies. What? You think everyone in the world chose where to be born? Did you choose YOUR parents? You got to choose your color, your nationality, your parent's religion, the whole works, huh?
You, and others, seem to have made the assumption that I'm a suburbanite who has escaped the city. The old "back to my roots" thing that country singers like to sing about. That crap doesn't apply to me.
You're perfectly right. People shouldn't be held accountable for the consequences of their actions. I see the light now. People should be accountable for their intentions. If I happen to kill someone with good intentions, then I shouldn't be punished.
Where the hell is the sarcasm button - time to turn it off now.
Anecdotal personal experience doesn't count for much, but let me offer this.
I've driven millions of miles. Literally. In my younger day, it was no problem at all to lay Rand McNally's atlas across the seat, or the steering wheel, to check my progress. My eyes would focus and refocus as I switched between the windshield and the map without problem.
Age put a stop to that practice. The eyes just won't focus fast enough. I actually experience a heartbeat of time when I simply CANNOT see what I'm looking at. By the time my eyes were focused on the roadway again, an automobile had obviously moved quite a long distance, so I gave the practice up.
Somebody is asking, "What do old eyes have to do with the discussion?" Well - the same eyes that are slow to focus on Rand McNally then refocus on the highway again require double or triple the time to do the same thing with an LCD screen.
Try it sometime. Do it safely, though. Park someplace safe, where you can see traffic moving at high speed. Lay a newspaper or an atlas where you can read it. Pick out a car or truck, look at the paper, read a small snippet, then look back to see where that car is. You'll be very surprised at how far the vehicle has moved.
Now, do the same with your telephone. Try sending a text instead of just reading the screen, and see how far traffic has moved when you look back.
Repeat a few times to convince yourself that a car really does travel as much as 1/8 to 1/4 mile while you switch focus. Repeat a few more times to discover how night and day affect the results. And, weather conditions too! Experiment in fog, heavy rain, and falling snow.
No one can convince you just how dangerous texting is, until you've seen the evidence. So, experiment.
You wouldn't mind answering a simple question, would you? Are you a neocon, or a republican? Wait - scratch that. The question is better phrased as, Are you a rabid neocon, or a foaming at the mouth republican?
Slashdot Mirror
You still attempt to psychoanalyze me. You pick out key phrases which you seem to view as "justifying" the predator.
And, you're wrong.
Please, quote one instance in which I say that the predator is justified, or that the prey "deserves" their treatment.
I have merely stated that I lack sympathy for the suicidal. I place them a little further up the food chain from the suicidal fools who decide to kill someone else on their way out - but they still dangle near the bottom of the food chain.
And, please. Comparing a suicide to a race or a religious group? Duhhh. Suicide doesn't equate to genocide, no matter how imaginative you are.
Oh. I see. An isolated, one sentence insult. Hmmmm. I wonder what I would find if I searched slashdot for "Rob Malda" and "cock", or "Rob Malda" and any number of other derogatory terms?
If Rob committed suicide, a good prosecuting attorney might make a case of conspiracy against all the people who have ever spewed hatred toward Rob. Think about it.
Oh. I'm scared. Perhaps you'll explain, first, why you are coming for me. Because I'm an asshole, and you disagree with me? Talk about petty......
Get a clue, lackwit. This predator has spent a lifetime destroying other lives. He has proven himself unworthy of our time, our compassion, our understanding, or our resources. He does not deserve a moldy crust of bread, or a scummy glass of dirty water.
This bastard kidnapped and repeatedly raped an 11 year old child. One might presume that he was looking forward to raping the children he fathered on the first child. Whether that be so, or not, he is far beyond any reasonable man's hope for redemption.
Let him look to his creator for redemption in the next life.
"It had NO SECURITY AT ALL!"
MacOS was based on BSD, right? By extension, does BSD have no security at all? Or, are we to assume that Mac stripped out BSD's inherent security? Remember, Unix like operating systems are inherently modeled on security.
This site, among others, suggests that Mac OS users might have been security conscious: http://homepage.mac.com/macbuddy/SecurityGuide.html
A shrink speaks.
Where did I justify anyone abusing anyone else? Abuse is wrong, no matter when, where, or how. This doesn't change the fact that the weak succumb, and the strong fight.
Sorry, the shrink didn't speak, he blathered.
He deserves a bullet in the ear.
Does he? Why?
__________________
He is a lowlife sumbitch who has preyed on the innocent and the helpless for most of his life. He is undeserving of so much as a bread and water diet, and a prison cell.
Your post makes it obvious that you have discarded the possibility of capital punishment.
I am willing to put a cur dog down, you are not. There's not much point in arguing over it. Just stay out of the way while real men and women go about getting the job done.
http://www.democrats.org/page/s/techproblems
Spam the shit out of their inbox, and tell them they look like a bunch of douches. I did. 50 million emails should be enough for the densest of democrats, so get started. Of course, they are all engrossed with the memorials for the rat bastard from MessyTwoShits who dropped dead recently - the one who murdered his pregnant girl friend. It may take a few days before they get back to business.
"This is nothing like me calling Rob Malda a douchebag "
And, you're a fucking psychologist, right? You know for certain that Rob Malda is rock stable, that he has never once considered suicide, right? That one more fucking douchebag won't push him over the edge with one more idiot insult? And, because you are a professional psychologist, your insult doesn't imply the same responsibility as some redneck bitch in Missouri improperly getting involved in her daughter's love life - or the life of her daughter's peers.
Get a grip on reality. If Malda suicides after you call him a douchebag, you are just about as responsible as the redneck bitch in Missouri.
We should all be grateful that this particular case has been thrown out. Very few of us on slashdot use our proper names - obviously putting us into the same class of predator as Lori Drew - at least in the mind of an overzealous prosecutor who doesn't like what we might have to say.
Once again, I remind people that the proper course of action in this case would have been CIVIL, not criminal. We don't need more criminal law on the books, there is already enough to make criminals of all of us. We especially don't need criminal law that threatens free speech.
sudo mod theraven64 up.
Having lived through an abused childhood, I have near zero sympathy for kids who are such losers that they can't face life's challenges. Not quite zero, but near it. This girl who committed suicide because some boy she had never met apparently turned on her isn't very far up the food chain from the idiots who choose to "go out in a blaze of glory" while shooting up their school. She was weak and unstable, and she chose to suicide. Her lack of a support group contributed, yes, but the fact remains, she failed.
I've seen someone's sig - "Instead of child proofing the world, let's world proof the child!" Damned good advice - I just can't remember where I've seen the sig.
Can we throw out another fallacy? You assume that the government has no right or obligation to seek revenge or to seek to punish harmful conduct. You assume that rehabilitation is possible, and that attempting to rehabilitate people is desirable.
Have you looked at the Dugard case in California? That rat bastard who kidnapped Jaycee has a HISTORY of kidnapping and sexual assault. He deserves a bullet in the ear. Or, if the family members of any of the victims wants some hands-on revenge, let them deal with both Garridos in whatever way they choose.
There are to damned many self-proclaimed psychologists involved in making and enforcing law.
Yes, there is one great outcome here. Those who are able to discern that a civil suit for wrongful death is open to the girl's family will be able to understand this great outcome.
The outcome boils down to this: the government has no right to meddle in every little dispute that arises between two people. The federal government has no right or responsibility to get involved in petty disputes between bit players. The state governments cannot regulate every aspect of a person's life. A new law cannot be written to cover every possible use of every new technology. Attempting to do so only shows how anally retentive politicians and prosecutors can be.
Each and every individual who was involved in this particular case of harassment has some degree of responsibility. That INCLUDES the parents. Their "child" was permitted unsupervised access to the internet. This unstable child was permitted by her parents to suffer ongoing emotional and psychological abuse by her own parents.
There is plenty of responsibility to go around. Enough to keep a civil lawsuit going for years.
Criminal responsibility? Sorry. If I call you a flaming homosexual moron, and you go commit suicide, I've not committed a criminal act. Of course, that goes both ways - if you call ME the same thing, and I commit suicide, you aren't criminally liable either.
There - aren't you relieved that you aren't likely to spend the rest of your life in prison if you insult someone? Even if that someone happens to be a kid?
Be back later - I've got some queer little monkey faced bastards on my lawn.......
Yeah, I've read this "market share" argument used as a defense for shoddy MS code time and time again. That just doesn't cut it.
Mac has a presence in the business world. If it were as buggy as MS, crackers would be launching fishing expeditions for vulnerable Macs, so that they could gain access to company networks.
What I asked for were examples of exploits, or reasons why this bug were really dangerous. Posts before yours are attempting to put things into perspective. Please, no more lame defenses of from MS astroturfers - there are enough of those even before you arrive at my question.
Market share, indeed. Remind me that the next time I want a cheap padlock, I should purchase a no-name lock. Since it has no market share, burglars won't try to pick it or break it.
Alright, I read TFA. I read the earlier slashdot article. I even googled around a little bit. What I find is, an obscure little bug, if exploited locally, enables a user to crash his machine. What I don't find is an exploit that makes use of this bug.
Am I missing something?
I suppose that I could accomplish something similar on my current Ubuntu installation. If I thought it made a difference, I could install a few other flavors of Linux and try doing something like that. But, why?
MS astroturfer's posts above are noted. And, I also note that MS bugs are routinely exploited, locally and remotely. The unwarranted superiority complex looks pretty pathetic, doesn't it?
"They're a nutty cult like Heaven's Gate"
This looks like a Microsoft bashing post to me.....
Does anyone really give a damn about tech support? Seriously - the problems with tech support just illustrate that 90% + of "computer users" are clueless, and are unable to use a computer unless they follow the strait and narrow edicts of Microsoft.
Monkeys trained to ask rote questions, then respond to rote answers with yet more rote questions, for the most part.
"Good morning, Towne's customer support, how may I help you?"
"I have no connectivity to the intartubez."
"Please reboot your computer and your modem."
"I don't run Windows - my Linux has been running for months, and I don't want to reboot. Can we just discuss the lack of a signal on my telephone line?"
"I'm sorry, but we don't support Linux."
"I'm not asking for Linux suport, I'm asking for support for lack of a signal - my modem can't find your server to authenticate."
"I'm sorry, I can't help you."
"Can you not check that the server is up and runnind?"
"No, but I can escalate - oh, no, sorry, I can't do that because we don't support Linux."
"Are you aware that the modem you sold me is Linux?"
"Oh, that can't be, we don't support Linux!"
The only way to get "support" from people like this, is to lie. But, it's so easy to make a mistake when you start lying . . . . .
Sorry, your argument doesn't hold water.
Let's look at the same argument used by Corporate America - specifically, RIAA. The statement that file sharers are "criminals" is common. It is a determined effort to alienate filesharers from people who genuinely respect the law. That inaccurate statement is incorporated into any and every PR release made by a majority of IP holders. "Criminal" are costing Corporate America billions of dollars annualy.
I've argued and pointed out many times that file sharers may or may not be guilty of infringing on CIVIL LAW, but that does not make them "criminals".
Honesty demands that we not use the same dirty trick against Corporate America. Microsoft is not a "convicted criminal". They may be a bunch of rat bastards, but being a rat bastard is not in and of itself a criminal offense.
Please, don't put me in the position of defending Microsoft again.
I saw this article a couple times, and finally clicked it to see what's being said. Good post you've made there.
I'd like to add though, that Dell jumped on the bandwagon years ago when MS demanded exclusivity agreements in exchange for distribution rights. Even if Dell were to suffer a loss if ordered to distribute no more Word products, I couldn't feel sorry for them. Dell assisted, even if indirectly, in creating the Microsoft monopoly. A little hardship might make them reconsider pushing Linux and No-OS machines a little harder. It would be good to see such offerings on their FRONT page. It would be even better to see the end of "Dell recommends Windows Blah" on every page.
In the United States, there has been a phone line almost everywhere for decades. A phone line allows dial up. We even have electricity! In recent years the "Rural Water Development" has even brought "city water" out into - get this - RURAL AMERICA! Get a clue.
It's a one hour drive to the nearest hospital that will deliver a baby. It's more than a 1/2 hour drive to pay the electric bill. The nearest grocery store is a 5 minute drive - a family operation that's been in the same small building since about the time the Oklahoma territory opened up. Any grocery store chain that most Americans would recognize, is an hour away, in the same city with the hospital.
This ain't the suburbs.
Seriously - I gave up on it. And, I do believe that it relies on the IA32 library being present. I could be wrong on the library, but I simply couldn't keep any of my browsers running reliably until I switched back to the 32 bit version.
Exactly what are you referring to? Glancing at a map? Yes, I did. Perhaps you noticed the "millions of miles"? Nowhere did I say that I STUDIED the map, or searched for alternate routes while driving. That was completed before putting the truck in gear. One can actually glance away from the road from time to time. Keyword: glance.
No one hits on one important point, though. Paywalls can only result in a less informed populace. While we can and do argue the merits of any given news source, at this point in time, we can browse ALL news sources.
If news is doled out on a subscription basis, we'll be returning to the 1960's when there were only three real source of news - ABC, NBC, and CBS - in the US. Seriously, browse around the news sites, click on the subscription link, and see what it costs. Slashdotters might have decent incomes, and maybe they can afford to subscribe to their ten or twenty favorite news sites. That would probably include the technical news sites, as well as the more general daily news.
Personally, if I had to pay to view places like the Dallas News, the Houston Star, and the BBC, I would be tapped out. I can't AFFORD subscriptions at every place I read. I certainly wouldn't PAY to read Fox News - so the occasional bit of factual reporting by a Fox reporter that no one else covered would never make it into my house.
The entire scheme would tend to produce a more ignorant population. Bad move from everyone's point of view, except the corporate bigwigs who stand to make money from our ignorance.
No, asshole - I was born in the boonies. What? You think everyone in the world chose where to be born? Did you choose YOUR parents? You got to choose your color, your nationality, your parent's religion, the whole works, huh?
You, and others, seem to have made the assumption that I'm a suburbanite who has escaped the city. The old "back to my roots" thing that country singers like to sing about. That crap doesn't apply to me.
You're perfectly right. People shouldn't be held accountable for the consequences of their actions. I see the light now. People should be accountable for their intentions. If I happen to kill someone with good intentions, then I shouldn't be punished.
Where the hell is the sarcasm button - time to turn it off now.
Anecdotal personal experience doesn't count for much, but let me offer this.
I've driven millions of miles. Literally. In my younger day, it was no problem at all to lay Rand McNally's atlas across the seat, or the steering wheel, to check my progress. My eyes would focus and refocus as I switched between the windshield and the map without problem.
Age put a stop to that practice. The eyes just won't focus fast enough. I actually experience a heartbeat of time when I simply CANNOT see what I'm looking at. By the time my eyes were focused on the roadway again, an automobile had obviously moved quite a long distance, so I gave the practice up.
Somebody is asking, "What do old eyes have to do with the discussion?" Well - the same eyes that are slow to focus on Rand McNally then refocus on the highway again require double or triple the time to do the same thing with an LCD screen.
Try it sometime. Do it safely, though. Park someplace safe, where you can see traffic moving at high speed. Lay a newspaper or an atlas where you can read it. Pick out a car or truck, look at the paper, read a small snippet, then look back to see where that car is. You'll be very surprised at how far the vehicle has moved.
Now, do the same with your telephone. Try sending a text instead of just reading the screen, and see how far traffic has moved when you look back.
Repeat a few times to convince yourself that a car really does travel as much as 1/8 to 1/4 mile while you switch focus. Repeat a few more times to discover how night and day affect the results. And, weather conditions too! Experiment in fog, heavy rain, and falling snow.
No one can convince you just how dangerous texting is, until you've seen the evidence. So, experiment.
You wouldn't mind answering a simple question, would you? Are you a neocon, or a republican? Wait - scratch that. The question is better phrased as, Are you a rabid neocon, or a foaming at the mouth republican?