Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Appropriate punishment (Score 1) 250

In the ruling, the SC made it expressly clear this was not some corporate pseudo-person's right to speech, but rather the rights of the owners, who carry along the right of free speech whatever they do, like anyone.

As AK Marc already pointed out, those owners already have their right of free speech, as individuals. Citizens United has conferred a further right, that other individuals do not have.

This was an attempt by right-wing extremists on the court attempting to extend the power of the ruling elite just a little longer. It will absolutely be overturned, and in the future, Citizens United will be looked at as an artifact of a shameful period in our history, sort of like Brown v Board.

Comment Re:Appropriate punishment (Score 2) 250

Citizens United is simply Freedom of Assembly + Freedom of Speech = Freedom of Speech for Assemblies of People.

Not quite. A corporation is not an assembly of people. By definition, it is an aggregation of capital. This is why you can have corporations that are entirely owned by another corporation, with the only human involved being the notary in another state who serves as the registered agent (at arm's length).

As you know from your thorough study of the writings of the Founders, especially the Federalist Papers, there was a strong belief that rights and responsibilities go hand in hand. A corporation is designed very specifically to remove personal accountability from shareholders (who are the owners of the corporation).

How can a legal mechanism be used on the one hand to shield individuals from personal responsibility be used at the same time to confer greater rights?

We'll look back on Citizens United approximately the same way we now look back on Brown v Board of Education. As the product of a shameful period in our history.

Comment Re:Blade Runner's script had little to do with Rid (Score 1) 144

Remeber when it was call Tech Noir?
man, Blade Runner is great. For the record I prefer the voice over for that kind of film.

Yeah, it does seem like Ridley seems to suffer a common Hollywood problem: Believing ones own PR.
He's great, has great vision, but he needs detail experts who are also well known in their field.

I understand the issue. When you work with a great team, but it's always your name people mention and talk about it, I see where that could warp your view point after decades. I just wish they would realize this and hire someone to shoot them down, even if it's in private.
Specifically, Hire me :)

Comment Re:Wow ... (Score 4, Informative) 419

Visa/MC and the banks have security measures in place, merchants who follow the process aren't liable for loss from fraudulent cards. Asking for ID provides no additional protection to merchants and to the extent they rely on it instead of established Visa/MC processes it can lessen security.

The info on the ID is the security measures Visa/MC have in place. They allow a merchant to enter info like address or phone number, and their computers will tell the merchant whether or not it matches the address/phone they have on file for that card. When you pay for gas with a credit card and the pump asks you to punch in your zip code, it's not collecting marketing information. It's using the zip code as a (rather flimsy) security measure to protect against someone buying gas with a lost/stolen credit card. Yeah you can ask the customer to recite their address, but any burglar who stole the card from a house or mugger who got their victim's entire wallet would know the address. A photo ID with that info, while fairly easy to fake, requires a bit more effort on the part of the thief.

Credit card security is in the dismal state it's currently in because Visa/MC/Amex have successfully transferred all the damage from fraudulent transactions onto the merchants. Since they lose practically no money to fraud, they have very little incentive to improve security. (The exorbitant interest rates are to cover the cost of credit card holders who default on their debt.) For market forces to work correctly, financial penalties for risks which fail must be linked to financial profits when those same risks succeed. What Visa et al have done is decouple the penalties from the profits (profits go to them, penalties to the merchant), leading to a situation where they are not penalized when the risks they take (poor security) fail. Consequently there is no motivation for them to improve credit card security beyond the laughable state it's currently in.

Comment Re:Arneson (Score 1) 183

Arneson was at TSR for a year, then left to do his own thing.
Dave's Blackmoor changed my life.

When the Made AD&D DAve sued, TSR said it was significanly different, and the courts agreed. INHO the court were right, it was substantially different. Eventual Gary and Dave agreed to credit each other as co-creater.

Later, WoTC wanted to drop 'Advanced' so they paid Arneson some cash. Since DnD is a hobby game, that cash settlement might have been in to the 10's of dollars. HAHA, that as a joke, I hope it was substantial.

Slashdot Top Deals

Marriage is the triumph of imagination over intelligence. Second marriage is the triumph of hope over experience.

Working...