Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:An interesting caveat (Score 2) 216

I've personally sat through a case where a bystander's filming was manipulated and only pieces of it brought to court. Without the full context, the film was a lie. That sent a good police officer to prison. The laws are far behind these double edged swords... whatever happened to "the full truth"?

I'm also skeptical of your story without a source. Cops shoot innocent people and at worst get administrative leave, it's rare that dirty cops get sent to prison much less a "good police officer".

Comment Re:An interesting caveat (Score 4, Insightful) 216

I've personally sat through a case where a bystander's filming was manipulated and only pieces of it brought to court. Without the full context, the film was a lie. That sent a good police officer to prison. The laws are far behind these double edged swords... whatever happened to "the full truth"?

If the bystander had the full tape then manipulating it is evidence tampering and laws already exist to deal with this.

Although I am not familiar with the particular case I'm skeptical that a 'good police officer' exists and if that officer had ever done the common police tactic of deleting inconvenient police car video recorder evidence then prison seems poetic justice.

Comment Re:Because... (Score 4, Insightful) 325

There's no way most CS PhD students could go on to be professors. Most professors advise many PhD students, so the number of CS professors would have to double every few decades if that were the case. Most CS PhD students move on to do research in industry: Microsoft, Google, and so on. I just got my masters degree in CS, and I actually do know where the PhDs go -- overwhelmingly to the west coast to work in industry.

I guess it's unfortunate for humanities students that there is not substantial industry that requires their abilities.

Comment Re:Snowden For President (Score 2) 72

It brings up a troubling question, in this day and age of our surveillance state intelligence angencies - who'd want to sign their name on that list, which would obviously be passed over to the "watchers" as "potential troublemakers".

I thought of that myself, 2 points:

1) Anyone who would sign it is probably already on some sort of list
and
2) If we're to the point where that is a legitimate concern then it's even more important to do so.

Comment Re:Embarrassing info, or are the feds just idiots? (Score 1) 272

Either that or the records will indicate that although they exist, a certain percentage of the time the stingray wasn't actually used and was just used as a way to search a home without a warrant.

Sort of like how even untrained drug dogs work.

"Ok we're going to have the dog sniff around your car/home because that doesn't count as a search, then if it alerts we have probable cause and can search you. Oh look it's alerting!"
"No it's not, it's licking its balls"
"Who is a judge and jury going to believe? Time to violate your rights!"

Comment Re:UV (Score 1) 123

They were routinely adding antibacterial agents to nylon when I worked in a nylon spinning plant back in the 80's. I think the practice goes back to the 50's or 60's.

Was that to protect the nylon from bacteria or to prevent bacteria from hanging around on the nylon and infecting whoever wears it next?

Slashdot Top Deals

The optimum committee has no members. -- Norman Augustine

Working...