Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:CDC "Estimates" (Score 1) 280

From my experience, CDC estimates should be taken with a grain of salt, as they often seem dubious at best.

They're not the least bit dubious, or hard to understand. CDC estimates, like all their actions, are designed o get them more tax dollars to play with. They're reasonably good at it, and never ones to miss an opportunity to profit from public hysteria.

More people die in Africa every month from dysentery than have died from ebola ever. But there's no public hysteria, and thus no tax dollars, in that.

Comment Re:Meanwhile (Score 1) 280

p>I don't care how justified you think you are, but right now you're getting up there with "voting national socialist in 1935" levels of awful.

And I don't care how you think Americans should spend their money, especially when you resort to namecalling and are too ignorant to recognize Godwin's Law, even when it's humping your pantleg.

Maybe we should contact the government of Nigeria and offer them millions in aid, but we need a little seed money to free it up from the bank account it's currently in.

Comment Re:Only cost them 25 percent of customer bills? (Score 5, Insightful) 249

I believe their plan is to deliberately violate Yelp's terms of service - by paying for reviews - to force Yelp to enforce said terms by removing the listing entirely. Which is what the restaurant wants - to not be listed at all.

It's a very clever plan. At best, they get everything they want, and at worst, "real" bad reviews get buried in amongst the snarky ones.

Comment Re:why does the CRTC need this list? (Score 2) 324

That sounds great until there is a conflict between the laws of different countries, like the Microsoft/Irish data center case. When a company can't obey the laws of one country without breaking the laws of the other, it's not a legal issue involving the company, it's a political issue between two governments.

And if it comes to One World Government taking precedence over all others, it won't be Canada deciding what international law is.

Canada only has jurisdiction over what is can enforce its orders on. If Netflix has no employees or assets in Canada, Canada has no jurisdiction over Netflix.

Comment Re:Seems reasonable (Score 5, Interesting) 462

The Supreme Court has ruled that civil forfeiture laws are, in fact, subject to the restrictions on excessive fines. Very specifically, and as I recall, on a case that involved seizure of money at the border.

Nobody knows about this, and a foreign tourist won't have any inclination to come back to the US - in a year or two, when it comes to trial - and spend more on legal fees than what was stolen.

The only way to stop this is to criminally prosecute corrupt cops. Which happens from time to time, but not nearly enough.

Comment Re:hmmmm (Score 1) 275

It applies to restrictions on consumer - end customer - reviews, specifically. An NDA on consumer goods is not a common thing; most NDAs apply to employees. And this bill doesn't address that sort of thing at all. Read literally, however, yeah, it does seem to prohibit an NDA that restricts a consumer's right to talk trash about bad services or products. How it gets enforced is anybody's guess. California courts can get pretty stupid sometimes (and remarkably sensible at others).

I got no problem with it, though. If you can't stay in business if your customers talk about your products and services honestly, then you've got far bigger problems than this law.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Ninety percent of baseball is half mental." -- Yogi Berra

Working...