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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:The last 25% (Score 2, Interesting) 368

...pay compensation for the inconvenience to establish a new store...

I agree with the assertion that you should never whine about "leaving where you've been all your life" because it's rooted in an unreasonable aversion to change. Yes, there's a lot involved, but it's not something that's never been done before.

However, going back to the oil problem, in some cases there is no fitting compensation other than uprooting your fishing business and moving to somewhere completely different - on an ocean instead of the gulf. Is BP going to pay for that expense? Or will they get out of it on the grounds that asking them to move you and your family and your entire business to a different, possibly more expensive area is "unreasonable"?

And how do we properly account for what might amount to irreparable damage to that particular source of food in the near- to mid-future?

Comment Re:The last 25% (Score 5, Insightful) 368

If my company has a tanker full of gas, and that tanker explodes outside your store due to my company's negligence, cratering the street and making your store unreachable for months. By your logic, my company shouldn't be liable for monetary damage to your store. How would you feel about this? You can say "adapt! change!" all you want, but the bottom line is, there should be no legal justification for this kind of negligence.

Comment Re:While I agree that anonymity is a good thing... (Score 1) 780

Interesting article. I wasn't aware of so many such incidents occurring. Your source is probably at least a little biased, but if we assume at least some of them are true, it's still unacceptable. However, it's important to remember that there's a difference between persecuting someone for their beliefs and persecuting them for how they *implement* them in ways that affect your life. Your comparison to Jews doesn't work because the Jews were a scapegoat, whereas the pro-Prop 8 folks actually had a hand in the measure's success. I'm not condoning the physical violence or graffiti. I'm also not willing to admit that a punch in the face or some spraypaint in retribution for measurable actions is the same as brutal murder because of dislike for how someone lives his or her life when it has no effect on the persecutor.

Comment Re:While I agree that anonymity is a good thing... (Score 5, Insightful) 780

Not in this specific example. The gay community isn't exactly going out of its way to violently oppress those who oppose it, while the other side can't say the same. In fact, I'd be surprised if this were anything more than the traditional belief that "since they should fear retribution from me, I should fear equivalent retribution from them." It's a pretty common belief among modern social conservatives.

Comment Re:The Illinois experience (Score 1) 375

You write idiocy in quotes. Is this to imply that Palin isn't actually an idiot because she has 12 million dollars? Why do conservatives rabidly believe that possession of money has a direct relationship with intelligence or aptitude? Just because you're the smartest mentally handicapped kid in your special needs class and you've convinced all the other mentally handicapped kids to give you all of their candy doesn't mean you're in the same league as even the most average mainstream students.

Comment Contact! (Score 2, Interesting) 97

Everyone who has brought up or agreed with any of the points raised here (private information protection, spammers lying, disclaimers not working, etc), please use the contact form on the anonwhois site to send them a message informing them that they're doing us all a disservice. Doubtful that we'll get anywhere, but you never know... Note: in the case that this is a front for spammers trying to farm information, you'll probably not want to associate your domain with this site in any way.
Social Networks

Submission + - fav.or.it Will Sell Your Blog's Content

caturday writes: "Online blog aggregator fav.or.it appears to believe that they do not need to adhere to standard copyright laws if the blog owner chooses to reserve full copyright rather than make use of a Creative Commons license. For those who are not familiar, the site uses the RSS feeds from blogs all over the Internet, republishing the content, including comments. It also creates a profile for each blogger, as well as fake comments on other blogs that are attributed to that profile (example: http://fav.or.it/profile/2335 — none of these comments were made by the "user" Poorer Than You). The site owners are never contacted with requests for such aggregation. In addition, the owners of fav.or.it maintain a Twitter feed, in which they vigorously defend their position, claiming that "...some people really have no clue that RSS feeds are there to be aggregated." According to their "Mission Statement", they intend to monetize other people's content."

Slashdot Top Deals

All seems condemned in the long run to approximate a state akin to Gaussian noise. -- James Martin

Working...