Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Not trying to excuse what he did (Score 1) 376

but had the first degree women friends of the Professor on Facebook not replied to that first woman saying that they were also in an online sexual relationship with the Professor, then the first woman wouldn't have considered his behavior sexual harassment, and she would have never retroactively taken back her consent to the online relationship.

Sadly, this seems to be the case for many recent sexual harassment cases, which is bad firstly because it turns innocent (not necessarily morally good, but criminally innocent) people into victims of the system and secondly because it muddies the water when it comes to real cases. Too many of these "angry ex-lover" cases, and people will tend to believe that actual cases are of the same kind.

She also said she felt trap near the end, but really how trapped could she have been?

You can feel very trapped in relationships, ask any of your married friends. ;-)

Seriously, over the Internet, when it's not really an actual relationship - yes, she does have attachment issues.

Comment Re:Bitcoins - Good Enough for Government Work! (Score 3, Interesting) 129

Parts of the US government hold that Bitcoin is property, namely the IRS. However, the government certainly counts it as money with regard to money laundering - just ask Charlie Shrem.

Laundering can be done with any tangible asset, from cash to diamonds to Bitcoin. That's hardly news and doesn't suggest the Government considers Bitcoin to be a currency. Bitcoin can be considered a currency when it's legal tender for all debts, public and private. Until then it's merely an asset. The fact that some people are willing to trade it for goods and services does not make it a currency. You could exchange everything from beer to securities for goods and services. Maybe I'll start charging people shares of GOOG for my labors....

Comment Re:Air-gap. (Score 1) 177

I have every file from every computer system from every OS upgrade/re-install. In Windows the heirarchy looks like this: C:\old c\old c\old c\old c\old c

Oh, I need that file from 1996? Well duh, it's under C:\old c\old c\old c\old c\old c\old c\old c\old c\old c\stuff\
2001? C:\old c\old c\old c\documents and settings\shakrai\my documents\

Works in Linux too, where it's just /oldroot/oldroot/oldroot/

Comment Huey Long's Philosophy applies here.... (Score 5, Interesting) 177

Things we used to say in person or on the phone we now say in e-mail, by text message, or on social networking platforms. ... Everything is now digital, and storage is cheap — why not save it all?

Sony illustrates the reason why not. The hackers published old e-mails from company executives that caused enormous public embarrassment to the company. They published old e-mails by employees that caused less-newsworthy personal embarrassment to those employees, and these messages are resulting in class-action lawsuits against the company.

Never Write what you can Phone;
Never Phone what you can Say;
Never Say what you can Whisper;
Never Whisper what you can Nod;
Never Nod what you can Wink.

Comment Re:Gotta stop all those law abiding terrorists... (Score 1) 329

The terrorists have no problem with breaking the law to kill and murder people on kamikaze missions... but I'm sure they're nice reasonable people who will stop using encryption if we make it illegal.

It's worked for the gun control movement; we made carrying a firearm during the commission of a felony illegal and presto, no more gun violence.

Comment Re:Capable, sure (Score 1) 329

ts just like the extreme NRA supporters who see anarchy around every corner and need to carry a gun when they go shopping "because its their constitutional right" to do so

The Right to Keep and Bear Arms is not a "Constitutional Right." It's a Natural Right inherent to all human beings that is simply recognized by the Constitution. The Constitution does not grant us any rights, our rights are inalienable and endowed by our creator(s)

Your broader point is one of common sense, which I tend to agree with; I don't make a point of carrying my firearm with me everywhere but there are certain places where I will always carry it (the laundromat at 2AM) and recent events (a spree of strong-arm robberies in my hometown) also factor into my decision as to when and where to carry.

Comment Re:2015: Still using Facebook (Score 1) 80

I'm no more "forced" to use Facebook than I am "forced" to have a cell phone. I could get by with just a landline or even no phone. It would just be massively inconvenient. It's the same with Facebook. Yes I could live without it. I choose not to. You're welcome to decide differently if you wish.

Slashdot Top Deals

The following statement is not true. The previous statement is true.

Working...