Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Black Friday (Score 4, Informative) 198

The "shopping" black Friday is on the same list, moron.

Single days

        Black Friday (1869), the Fisk-Gould Scandal, a financial crisis in the United States
        Black Friday (1881), the Eyemouth disaster in which 189 fishermen died
        Black Friday (1939), a day of devastating bushfires in Victoria, Australia, which killed 71 people
        Black Friday (1945), an Allied air attack against German ships in Norway
        Hollywood Black Friday (1945), a riot at the Warner Bros. studios
        Black Friday (1978), a massacre of protesters in Iran
        Black Friday (1987), a tornado in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
        Black Friday (2011) or United States v. Scheinberg et al., a case involving online poker companies

Recurring days

      Black Friday (shopping), the day following Thanksgiving in the United States
        Black Friday (partying), the last Friday before Christmas

I'd have made it blink too, but Slashdot won't let me.

Comment Re:take their servers and router (Score 1) 120

In Illinois (and in every other state, I guarantee) attorneys are responsible for retaining and protecting client information -- including things like draft memos and attorneys' notes -- from access by any third party without client permission.

How far does that duty go? If some thief knocks down my reasonably secure door and steals my reasonably secured filing cabinet, am I on the hook? Where's that go with computerized files? If a reasonably secured filing cabinet is just the cheapie you can buy at Staples (and indeed, I don't know if it is or not), would a zip file with a password be sufficient, or are we talking 3-DES or better?

(I'm a law student, and I'm curious why some attorneys i've worked with think "well my office door is locked" constitutes computer security, but too damn busy to actually do any research on the matter until I take Professional Responsibility)

Comment Re:You ain't seen nothin' yet (Score 1) 145

So ... that'll be one camping pass ... and one hunting/fishing permit, unless you plan to eat only plants, then you'll run afoul of the regulations on havesting plants, which are protected, on public lands.

Well, I'm a hunter, and back home in Pennsylvania, one needs not an extra permit to hunt on state game land, just the $20 or so license. Even without that, you can hunt and eat nuisance animals (coyote, crows, starlings, perhaps bobcats) on any day of the week, without limit, even Sunday when no other hunting is permitted. A license to fish is only required for public waters, and only if you're over, IIRC, 16.

Comment Re:Rats with liver cirrhosis (Score 1) 89

They don't need to puff. My buddy has a bulldog that is downright vicious if you light a cigarette near him and refuse to blow a little smoke in his face. Why? When my buddy was at work during the day, the bulldog would eat butts out of the ashtray, and this went on for some time before anyone figured it out. Goofy friggin' dog, that's for sure.

Comment Re:Vaccinating carriers... (Score 1) 569

I was told in some training in undergrad that the reason is that women have to deal with more, well, trauma than men do, leading to microabrasions. Now, I don't know if HPV can be passed from blemish-free skin-to-skin contact, but if it's like most STDs and requires some sort of fluid contact, a woman has a higher likelihood of having such contact than a man. So, we get off a little lucky in the evolutionary department, and so does the STD - I'm sure not going to pop out a free host in 9 months.

Comment Re:My car has a fail-safe device... (Score 1) 356

It is, but it isn't the rule here.

I have a 2000 Jetta, VR6 standard. I can start it just fine in gear, it will happily smash its front end into a wall.
My girlfriend has a 2003 Jetta, 2.0L I4 standard. It will not start without the clutch fully depressed to the floor.

My car is the only car I've ever seen do it, but I've seen plenty of 4x4's that do it, too.

Comment Re:Passcode (Score 1) 367

Look, buddy, you're just wrong. The fourth amendment says that nobody will be deprived of their property unreasonably. Where in that amendment does it say that a warrant is a requirement? Between the first and second clauses, there's a comma and the word and. There's no way to fit your extra words in ther. Where do the Federalist papers talk about it? Where does it say "A search is reasonable ONLY when there is a warrant." Where does it even say that probable cause is reasonable?

You can do your research (or ask a lawyer!), or you can plug your ears and act as if you knew the intent of the Framers. Article III, Section 1 says "The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court[.]" Let them do the judging, OK? I'm going to take back my offer of a reasonable discussion, because clearly, you have no idea how criminal procedure works. Did you notice the 4th Amendment applies equally to people and things? So if a cop sees someone murder another in cold blood, they should have to run down to the courthouse, swear out an affidavit, and get a warrant before they arrest someone? Kafka would have a field day.

Comment Re:Passcode (Score 1) 367

That states the requirements for warrants. It's meant to prevent general warrants, where English tax collectors would get a warrant to search through and seize ALL of your belongings to find evidence of wrongdoing. Warrants require probable cause, searches do not. Warrants are not always required (see, among others, consent and plain/open view searches).

Shoot me an email if you'd like to know more.

Slashdot Top Deals

One man's constant is another man's variable. -- A.J. Perlis

Working...