It doesn't really disclose anything that is news to the/. community, but it does seem to confirm what many of us suspected. The trolls and chaotic crackers who take action that is actually harmful, whether physically (e.g. the epilepsy attack) or mentally (e.g., the depraved trolls targeting the parents mourning their son) exhibit symptoms commonly associated with NPD, delusional disorder of the grandiose variety, and in some cases APD (the somewhat Orwellian term now used to encompass sociopathy and pyschopathy). This particular variety of troll or cracker (let me call them c-trolls) is self-aggrandizing, viewing himself or herself as vastly superior to the majority of the world's population, rising at times to the level of self-deification (see the comments in the article attributed to Weev). They show little to no remorse when injuries occur, suggesting that they consider their victims as a lesser being, a sort of animal that the c-troll may do with as they please. They defend their actions by blaming the victims for not recognizing their vulnerability. The very idea of warning the victims in a less harmful fashion (perhaps notifying them of the vulnerability rather than using it to crack their skulls) either has not occured to them, or has been considered and dismissed. In either scenario, the actions of the c-trolls show that their purpose is entirely self-serving despite the warped quasi-altruistic motive that they proffer in defense. It is easy to view these persons with revulsion due to their visible lack of empathy and their desire to manipulate basic human emotions to cause harm. Still, these c-trolls are themselves deserving of pity, in that they have personally experienced traumatic events which have harmed their psyche, or suffer from psychological disorders that prevent them from interacting normally with other persons. However, unless the disorder is severe, these persons cannot shed themselves of moral responsibility for their actions.
This of course assumes that the persons interviewed in the article gave truthful responses to the reporter's questions. Given that many of these c-trolls seem to wish for admiration for their deeds while maintaining their anonymitity, it is unlikely that the majority of those interviewed gave false answers about the philosophy behind their actions.
Also, I would like to point out that Tycho and Gabe explained the phenomena of your average irritating yet harmless troll in only three panels, while the New York Times required several paragraphs.
You know, slashdot is not really a representative sample of the US population... I wouldn't draw conclusions about the response of Americans generally based on comments posted to slashdot, particularly after 12 AM EST.
I'm on a pretty bad connection here, could someone tell me whether craigslist is incorporated in California or somewhere else? I'm really not familiar with corporate law on closely held corporations outside Delaware and Massachusetts.
This isn't traditional tort, it's copyright/trademark. As the US and UK participate in a number of international IP treaties, there is a good possibility that a UK court would be obligated to respect the decision of the US court.
IANAL, some lawyer want to clear that up?
Publish, publish, publish. Put the prior art out there and make it easy to find. It is very important that the prior art is not only easily accessible to any interested person, but also that it is timestamped and teaches the "person having ordinary skill in the art" to practice whatever novel idea it is you are presenting.
Patenting with a ton of disclosure would also achieve this purpose, but getting a patent isn't as easy as everyone thinks... you're looking at eighteen months on average of negotiating with the patent examiners before you get any claims through. You don't need to get any claims through to put your disclosure in the public domain, so long as the application gets published later on, but publishing like a madman seems a quicker and easier way of providing examiners with prior art to base rejections on. Believe it or not, most examiners are trying to reject patent applications and the easier you can make it to find prior art the easier that task becomes.
Noone is suing anyone.
If you had bothered to RTFA, you'd know that T-Mobiles lawyers just asked Engadget not to use that color.
In these circumstances, a request not to use a color claimed as a trademark is likely a prelude to a lawsuit should the targeted party refuse to comply with the request. T-Mobile's lawyers will probably move quickly against any perceived encroachment on T-Mobile's claimed trademark territory so as to prevent any possibility of losing the mark as applied to consumer electronics webpages through laches. The argument here would most likely be dilution rather than direct consumer confusion.
Um... I guess that rang in legalese, so here is the standard disclaimer: IANAL, but I play one on slashdot. Any real lawyers want to comment on my ramblings?
You have an ISP, and I have an ISP, and I have a series of tubes, and my series of tubes goes acrooosss the country, and I DRINK YOUR MILKSHAKE! I DRINK IT UP!
NO Republicans voted against. Lindsey Graham, one of my state's (SC) senators, was the only Republican not to vote at all. I'm hoping that this was because he was against it but couldn't go against the party so much as to vote against it, but we'll see. I concur with your intuition, Graham is a good man. I often wonder why he remains a Republican when his party has so clearly swung away from his political preferences.
Yes, this ruling is awful, but at the moment the only place it has any value as precedent is in the federal district court for the district of Idaho. The court of appeals for the district of Idaho is the 9th Circuit. Should the 9th circuit agree to hear the appeal and affirm the lower court's ruling, then this decision would become binding on those states within the 9th Circuit's jurisdiction (the west coast, Alaska, and Hawaii). Should the 9th Circuit reverse, in terms which explicitly dispose of the lower court's logic, then the opposite rule would govern those states.
Why exactly is there a "jews" tag attached to this post? Gershowitz is probably Jewish, but that doesn't seem to be the point of the article.
Futrhermore, IANAL, and I have yet to read this article, but given what I learned in crim pro it seems highly unlikely the police could search your iphone as part of a simple search incident to an arrest without cause to believe your iphone was used to commit a crime.
Just as a baseline rule, I would be highly suspicous of a private corporation's arguments that strictly enforcing a regulation against non-profits and public entities somehow benefits the public good. Corporations are obligated to act in the interests of their shareholders, not for the public good. There is almost always some matter of consequence that will benefit the corporation that the corporation is not disclosing; in this particular situation, it is not difficult to speculate as to Sprint Nextel's less altruistic motives. I'm not saying that Nextel necessarily has the weaker argument, but I would certainly be more skeptical of their assertions than the article summary.
Nonsense!
The quality of American chocolate is every bit fine as American cheese, American Pizza, American Wine, American beer... oh wait! You know, every one of those things is great... if you go for the local or regional favorites, and not the mass-market production line crap. If you want good American beer, go find a good micro-brewery, there is almost always one nearby. You want good American wine, don't buy two buck chuck or that stuff that comes in a plastic bag. Pizza? C'mon. American cheese... well maybe I'll give you that one. That Kraft stuff makes good dog treats though.
And on another note... everybody follow that link and tell the FDA what you think about this nonsense. Maybe the system will work like its supposed to for a change.
I would be careful about over-generalizing here... I've known plenty of punkers and metalheads who seemed incapable of critical thought, they were just enamored with the idea of being rebels or outsiders. For some, listening to this sort of music is just an easy way of expressing individuality in a world populated by six billion people.
On the other hand, "alternative" types of music certainly ought to appeal to intelligent persons, as the musicianship is usually more technical than that found in the top 40 pop drek, and the lyrics are definitely of a higher caliber in the indie genre ("my sh*t is bananas"... truly, you are the Frost of your generation)
You know, you yourself remind of one of those religous nutjobs you claim to despise.
Same smug sense of moral superiority, same need to openly denigrate the intelligence of those whose do not share your beliefs, same intolerance of diverse beliefs.
When you judge the intelligence of others based solely on their religous alignment, you do everyone involved a great disservice. Being the victim of intolerance doesn't give you a free pass to inflict the same on others.
we are all born curious Fixed it for you.
If you were to remove a child from his parents at birth and withold that child from human contact for the rest of his natural life, sooner or later he would begin to wonder whether life had a "point", and what happened at the end. While this wouldn't necessarily imply inquiry into the existence of a monotheistic style higher power, a foray into the super-natural seems likely. It is incorrect to say a person is born anything other than curious; conclusions to these questions would only come from experience, and verification would come only upon death.
But your first point was right - atheism is a religion:)
Funny you mention that. See my sig. To cite dictionary.com, one possible definiton of religion is "a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs."
Therefore, in a sense, the belief that there is no cause, nature or purpose to the universe still falls under the definition of a religion. Granted, this closely mirrors the "is zero a number" debate, but it is not unreasonable to classify aethism as a religion itself.
...nerds get their pants pulled down and they are spanked with moonrocks. Why the heck is that modded informative? Did a few too many people misclick while aiming for the funny tag?
Slashdot Mirror
It doesn't really disclose anything that is news to the /. community, but it does seem to confirm what many of us suspected. The trolls and chaotic crackers who take action that is actually harmful, whether physically (e.g. the epilepsy attack) or mentally (e.g., the depraved trolls targeting the parents mourning their son) exhibit symptoms commonly associated with NPD, delusional disorder of the grandiose variety, and in some cases APD (the somewhat Orwellian term now used to encompass sociopathy and pyschopathy). This particular variety of troll or cracker (let me call them c-trolls) is self-aggrandizing, viewing himself or herself as vastly superior to the majority of the world's population, rising at times to the level of self-deification (see the comments in the article attributed to Weev). They show little to no remorse when injuries occur, suggesting that they consider their victims as a lesser being, a sort of animal that the c-troll may do with as they please. They defend their actions by blaming the victims for not recognizing their vulnerability. The very idea of warning the victims in a less harmful fashion (perhaps notifying them of the vulnerability rather than using it to crack their skulls) either has not occured to them, or has been considered and dismissed. In either scenario, the actions of the c-trolls show that their purpose is entirely self-serving despite the warped quasi-altruistic motive that they proffer in defense. It is easy to view these persons with revulsion due to their visible lack of empathy and their desire to manipulate basic human emotions to cause harm. Still, these c-trolls are themselves deserving of pity, in that they have personally experienced traumatic events which have harmed their psyche, or suffer from psychological disorders that prevent them from interacting normally with other persons. However, unless the disorder is severe, these persons cannot shed themselves of moral responsibility for their actions.
This of course assumes that the persons interviewed in the article gave truthful responses to the reporter's questions. Given that many of these c-trolls seem to wish for admiration for their deeds while maintaining their anonymitity, it is unlikely that the majority of those interviewed gave false answers about the philosophy behind their actions.
Also, I would like to point out that Tycho and Gabe explained the phenomena of your average irritating yet harmless troll in only three panels, while the New York Times required several paragraphs.
Every time I hear about Alice and Bob, I now think of this
You know, slashdot is not really a representative sample of the US population... I wouldn't draw conclusions about the response of Americans generally based on comments posted to slashdot, particularly after 12 AM EST.
Please do not kick our robotic overlords, it just makes them angry.
I'm on a pretty bad connection here, could someone tell me whether craigslist is incorporated in California or somewhere else? I'm really not familiar with corporate law on closely held corporations outside Delaware and Massachusetts.
This isn't traditional tort, it's copyright/trademark. As the US and UK participate in a number of international IP treaties, there is a good possibility that a UK court would be obligated to respect the decision of the US court. IANAL, some lawyer want to clear that up?
IANAL, but...
Publish, publish, publish. Put the prior art out there and make it easy to find. It is very important that the prior art is not only easily accessible to any interested person, but also that it is timestamped and teaches the "person having ordinary skill in the art" to practice whatever novel idea it is you are presenting.
Patenting with a ton of disclosure would also achieve this purpose, but getting a patent isn't as easy as everyone thinks... you're looking at eighteen months on average of negotiating with the patent examiners before you get any claims through. You don't need to get any claims through to put your disclosure in the public domain, so long as the application gets published later on, but publishing like a madman seems a quicker and easier way of providing examiners with prior art to base rejections on. Believe it or not, most examiners are trying to reject patent applications and the easier you can make it to find prior art the easier that task becomes.
In these circumstances, a request not to use a color claimed as a trademark is likely a prelude to a lawsuit should the targeted party refuse to comply with the request. T-Mobile's lawyers will probably move quickly against any perceived encroachment on T-Mobile's claimed trademark territory so as to prevent any possibility of losing the mark as applied to consumer electronics webpages through laches. The argument here would most likely be dilution rather than direct consumer confusion.
Um... I guess that rang in legalese, so here is the standard disclaimer: IANAL, but I play one on slashdot. Any real lawyers want to comment on my ramblings?
You have an ISP, and I have an ISP, and I have a series of tubes, and my series of tubes goes acrooosss the country, and I DRINK YOUR MILKSHAKE! I DRINK IT UP!
How is that flamebait, you anonymous homophobic bastard?
Fight back, tag !gayyouhomophobicbastard
I concur with your intuition, Graham is a good man. I often wonder why he remains a Republican when his party has so clearly swung away from his political preferences.
Yes, this ruling is awful, but at the moment the only place it has any value as precedent is in the federal district court for the district of Idaho. The court of appeals for the district of Idaho is the 9th Circuit. Should the 9th circuit agree to hear the appeal and affirm the lower court's ruling, then this decision would become binding on those states within the 9th Circuit's jurisdiction (the west coast, Alaska, and Hawaii). Should the 9th Circuit reverse, in terms which explicitly dispose of the lower court's logic, then the opposite rule would govern those states.
Why exactly is there a "jews" tag attached to this post? Gershowitz is probably Jewish, but that doesn't seem to be the point of the article. Futrhermore, IANAL, and I have yet to read this article, but given what I learned in crim pro it seems highly unlikely the police could search your iphone as part of a simple search incident to an arrest without cause to believe your iphone was used to commit a crime.
Just as a baseline rule, I would be highly suspicous of a private corporation's arguments that strictly enforcing a regulation against non-profits and public entities somehow benefits the public good. Corporations are obligated to act in the interests of their shareholders, not for the public good. There is almost always some matter of consequence that will benefit the corporation that the corporation is not disclosing; in this particular situation, it is not difficult to speculate as to Sprint Nextel's less altruistic motives. I'm not saying that Nextel necessarily has the weaker argument, but I would certainly be more skeptical of their assertions than the article summary.
Oh please please please let them find these guys in contempt of court and hand them some time in a jail cell.
I would be careful about over-generalizing here... I've known plenty of punkers and metalheads who seemed incapable of critical thought, they were just enamored with the idea of being rebels or outsiders. For some, listening to this sort of music is just an easy way of expressing individuality in a world populated by six billion people. On the other hand, "alternative" types of music certainly ought to appeal to intelligent persons, as the musicianship is usually more technical than that found in the top 40 pop drek, and the lyrics are definitely of a higher caliber in the indie genre ("my sh*t is bananas"... truly, you are the Frost of your generation)
You know, you yourself remind of one of those religous nutjobs you claim to despise. Same smug sense of moral superiority, same need to openly denigrate the intelligence of those whose do not share your beliefs, same intolerance of diverse beliefs. When you judge the intelligence of others based solely on their religous alignment, you do everyone involved a great disservice. Being the victim of intolerance doesn't give you a free pass to inflict the same on others.
Also covering this one: SANS ICS
Tycho at PA and others seem to love this game, but the reviewer over at The Onion AV was pretty harsh.
Have they tried a virgin sacrifice?
...nerds get their pants pulled down and they are spanked with moonrocks. Why the heck is that modded informative? Did a few too many people misclick while aiming for the funny tag?Pretty much reminds me of this.