Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Why does the library need to be "family-friendl (Score 3, Informative) 584

Well, here's the thing. It's always important to remember that the United States was founded by a bunch of Puritans who had sticks shoved up their asses SO FAR that the rest of mainstream Europe was like "Seriously? Get the fuck out, go over there to that New World far-far-away from us. Yeah here's a boat, here's some food. Go. We'll be right behind you. Swear."

Comment Re:First Amendment isn't relevant here (Score 1) 584

If he's displaying the porn in a manner where there are ACTUAL MINORS able to see it (not just theoretical ones who could someday be there, but weren't there that day) then you can absolutely go after him for the providing pornography to a minor charge, and nobody (including the Free-Speech-Librarian) is likely to stand in your way.

But until you show that one of those minors is ACTUALLY being harmed? It's perfectly legal for everyone who was able to see it, and so "no harm, no foul".

Comment Re:First Amendment isn't relevant here (Score 1) 584

The prior-restraints on First Amendment speech are very narrowly crafted, and have to meet a HUGE Constitutional test in terms of legitimate "needs of the State" and there is no "need of the State" when it comes to whether or not you happen to accidentally see some perfectly legal legs-in-the-air artistic-expression.

But of course you knew this already and were happily crafting a Straw Man to tear down. Well done.

Comment Re:First Amendment isn't relevant here (Score 5, Insightful) 584

The library isn't choosing what content to PROVIDE when they say someone has to be quiet and orderly.

By saying "you can view this but not that", or whatever, they're making a judgement call on the actual material they provide (albeit virtually) to their patrons, and to many librarians, that's the third-rail. You DON'T censor the material you provide to the patrons. You might have to prioritize some content over others when it comes time to buy them (what books are most in demand, etc., etc.), but if there's no cost difference involved to "serve porn versus not serve porn" to the patrons, then almost every librarian I know will choose to allow access to it, rather than be the censor.

And, to be honest, I don't care "what someone wants to see". You don't have some Constitutional right to not be offended.

Comment Re:...profit? (Score 1) 1880

For an example of how one of the most well-established products in this space, in the Mac world, handles this request, I point you to the Gold Star of bad customer service responses... iBank, which has had an open thread since 2008 with hundreds of posts BEGGING for Direct Bill Pay, and various allusions to next version, next version, and then finally simply cop-outs.

http://forums.iggsoft.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=26479

And it was at this point that I gave up trying to migrate from Quicken For Mac (the last non-sucky version) to "something else mac" and just went BACK to windows (yeah, that's right, I converted FROM Mac TO Windows, because Intuit nerfed QfM, and none of their competitors actually wanted to do what it took to, y'know, compete).

Comment Quicken For Windows (Score 1) 1880

Because, seriously, Quicken for Mac sucks moose-balls, most of the "Mac-Friendly" competition have glaring holes in their feature-sets (no online bill-pay from within the app, seriously?, etc.), and QfW just works, year after year, getting better and better.

It's not without its share of quirks, but it's the sole reason my Windows VM hangs around on my Mac these days.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Experience has proved that some people indeed know everything." -- Russell Baker

Working...