Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Analogy Sucks... (Score 2) 255

Comcast is turning users' cable modems into public hotspots. So anyone could connect to a user's modem and use it for any purpose that one might connect to the Internet for. If said use is illegal, would the person who owned (or leased it from Comcast as the case may be) be liable as an accomplice?

My understanding is that it's not a public hotspot, the access is only made available for other Comcast customers, and that in any event the traffic is handled separately from the owner of the connection. It goes out with a different globally valid IP and does not count against the owner's bandwidth cap or otherwise inconvenience him.

Comment Re:Uh no (Score 1) 255

Uhh, did you even read the Wikipedia article you linked, never mind actually researching the case in question on your own?

"Ryan Joseph Holle (born November 17, 1982) was convicted in 2004 of first-degree murder under the felony murder rule for lending his car to a friend after the friend and others at the party discussed their plans to steal drugs, money and beat up the 18 year old daughter of a marijuana dealer."
"Holle, who had given the police statements in which he seemed to admit knowing about the burglary, was convicted on August 3, 2004"

I don't see a problem here. "Hey, we're going to go rob this person. Can we borrow your car?" "Sure, here are the keys." What would possibly go wrong?

Comment Re:Would be different (Score 3, Insightful) 185

That's FUD. Yes the Southern Border is porous. Find me one example of a terrorist that has entered the country via that route. Just one. I'm not aware of it having happened. The United States shares intelligence with Mexico and Canada, so you're still dealing with the same fundamental problem of getting into the Western Hemisphere without being detected. Effectively you've given the security forces two bites at your apple, because you're going to have to sneak past Canadian/Mexican customs and American customs (legal route) or the Border Patrol (illegal route). If it was as easy as you make it sound it would have happened already. Heck, they've actually tried it from the Northern Border, and been caught while doing so.

The gun stuff is FUD too. It's "very easy" to get your hands on a cache of firearms large enough to conduct a Mumbai style attack? Where exactly is it "easy" to do that? You can't go the legal route as a non-citizen. That leaves you with the choice of obtaining them from private sellers and/or the black market. Option #1 doesn't scale and Option #2 runs the risk of detection by law enforcement. The only way I can see pulling it off would be to have a sleeper agent in the United States months before your planned attack, who slowly assembled the required weapons cache, but the longer you're here the more likely it is that you get caught. Murphy's Law applies even to terrorists.....

Comment Re:Would be different (Score 1) 185

Tom Clancy was actually interviewed by CNN on 9/11. I remember listening to it on the local radio station, which decided to cut their normal feed and broadcast CNN Radio for the duration of the day. We got all of our news from the radio that day, along with the extra edition of the local paper, because we were at work with no television and the internet was too bogged down to be useful. None of us actually saw what had happened until we got home from work, which made it really surreal.

For some reason the Clancy interview is one of the things that sticks out in my mind when I think of that day. Maybe because I had already read Debt of Honor.

Comment Re:Would be different (Score 1) 185

I'm still waiting for the Teeth of the Tiger shopping-mall attacks. We saw what happened in Kenya recently. Just imagine that in several malls across the US.

After 9/11 we actually got pretty good at keeping terrorists from getting to the United States, so I don't think attacks like these are a particularly likely occurrence. First you've got to get enough committed people here to carry out the attacks, which means you have to find people that aren't already on the radar of American intelligence, then get them through the Visa process. Once they're here you've got to obtain all the weaponry you'll need, because you're sure as hell not bringing it here in your checked baggage, so now you've got to deal with the American criminal element (not exactly the most trustworthy lot) to get your hands on a cache of firearms and explosives, all while remaining off the radar of law enforcement. It's really not as easy as it sounds when you open those technothrillers....

Even if you pulled it off, I doubt you could duplicate what we saw in Kenya or Mumbai. American law enforcement isn't likely to shrink from the confrontation like some of the Mumbai police did. They're well armed and well trained for these sorts of things. You've also got a non-zero chance of running into armed civilians and private security, depending on your choice of targets. I doubt the average civilian concealed carrier or rent-a-cop could stop a committed assault, but they've got a decent chance at taking one or more bad guys out with them, so that's yet another thing that could go wrong from the perspective of the would be attackers.

I suppose you could worry about domestic terrorists doing the same, because they're already here and would have an easier time arming themselves. Of course, shooting up a shopping mall doesn't seem like their style, and the Government is fairly adept at infiltrating these types of organizations before they can pull off anything serious.

Comment Re:Should probably be locked up (Score 2) 185

What's wrong with that? Lots of amusing things come up when you Google that. Hell, Google auto completed the search for me, suggesting "recipes" after I had typed in "human meat".

Incidentally, I'm not much of a whiz in the kitchen, but I suspect human flesh would work pretty well in a red sauce or curry. The bigger problem of course would be the cost of obtaining it, followed by the difficulty of obtaining lean cuts, particularly if you reside in the first world....

Comment Re:Scientific research never got anyone anything (Score 2) 225

it was the OPPOSITE of isolationism which brought war to the US.

The United States was already effectively at war with Germany before the oil embargo against Japan. The US Navy had orders to sink German U-Boats on sight, we were giving weapons away to the British and Soviets (itself a violation of the obligations of a neutral country under international law), and were making plans for the manner in which we would wage open war against Germany once it broke out. Fire was traded between the US Navy and Kriegsmarine months before Pearl Harbor, in fact two American destroyers were torpedoed (one sunk) by U-Boats in October 1941.

The policy of the American Government at the time was to focus on Europe. Nobody in Washington wanted war with Japan, but they also weren't willing to accept a Japanese defeat and conquest of China. The oil embargo was a last ditch effort to bring them to the negotiation table. They opted for war, with a country that had seventeen times their GDP and twice the population . Had the United States not followed the Europe First policy it's quite probable that Japan would have been crushed by late 1943/early 1944. Japan going to war with the United States has to rank as one of the most boneheaded military decisions ever made in the history of the human race. Probably only equaled by Hitler's move to follow them into war against the sleeping giant.

Comment Re:What a crazy situation (Score 5, Insightful) 149

Something seems really, really off kilter if so many of us see the federal government's law enforcement agencies as the enemy.

The War on Drugs made law enforcement into the enemy for a lot more people than the War on Copyright Infringement. That's really where the Government started to overreach, in modern times, and if you think what they're doing with cyber criminals (real and imagined) is horrible you should Google "civil asset forfeiture" and start reading.

Comment Re:Not the same. (Score 1) 1330

Explain to me the fairness of a female being able to surrender a kid she doesn't want to the State (safe haven law) or give it up for adoption while a male is invariably on the hook for 18 years of child support regardless of the circumstances? Hell, she can literally take the used condom out of the trash, impregnate herself, and you're STILL on the hook.

Slashdot Top Deals

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

Working...