Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Legal Schmegal (Score 1) 336

I do believe it is as simple, and obvious, as that, caps or not ,chimpanzees, aren't persons. I abide Merriam Webster's definition of person. Chimpanzees, may be self aware and possess a modicum of language yet this does not make them persons.

While, I would assert, that all persons are humans, I would not assert that all persons are strictly Homo sapiens but in fact contain a fair bit of Homo neanderthalensis.

One day may come and one day we may be visited by extraterrestrials and knowing humans, it may well be a mortal insult to call them persons. On That Day(tm) the question can be revisited and some will choose to expand the definition of person, others will want to refer to them as what they are, or create and define a new noun.

Comment Legal Schmegal (Score 1) 336

Should we treat chimpanzees that way we do? NO

Are chimpanzees feeling, intelligent animals? YES

Are chimpanzees persons? NO

In may cases the way we treat animals or allow them to be treated is appalling. The same is also true of how humans treat other humans, as well. I'm left to wonder how long before the fact that I've had two of my dogs euthanized is no longer a legal act? The thought of having to prolong the suffering of or put them through treatment that has little chance of success and a high chance of increasing their suffering and shortening their lives, pains me deeply. There is a long list of potential unintended consequences to consider.

Comment How Did We Get Here? (Score 1) 234

While I strongly believe this is a Bad Idea(tm) of epic proportions with a list of unintended consequences that seemingly has no end, after my initial visceral reaction, I am left to wonder. What led anyone, or group of anyone's, to think this was the answer? Even assuming we are all Good People(tm), do they believe someone will report an incident just because they can do some anonymously? Okay, so we'll put their potential targets on notice but, the report isn't really actionable. The attacker will still be at large and free to prey on someone else.

Anonymous reporting simply seems to be the wrong direction. What about actually changing how we treat and support the victims?

Comment Re:And? (Score 1) 40

I've used a range of options over the years depending on circumstances from VPN, to my access point hardwired to their network to MiFi. While it's likely all/most readers here can do those things and more, that's not the point.

The point is most of the general public doesn't understand. Yes we can, and prolly do laugh and snicker at the luddites, unwashed and ignorant. In truth what hurts them, hurts us. Calling them "stupid" doesn't help, most of them are ignorant not stupid anyway. Is it really that unreasonable to expect that a hotel that provides a service that we are in fact paying for, does so with due dillegence?

Comment Re:goddamnit!!! (Score 0) 123

Kinda reminds me of:

Leonard: Not only is he still not talking to me, but there’s this thing he does where he stares at you and tries to get your brain to explode. You know, like in the classic sci-fi movie Scanners? (Put’s fingers to head) You know, bzzz-pchew! Never mind. How about this one. It says, “I know my physics, but I’m still a fun guy!”

Series 1 Episode 09 – The Cooper-Hofstadter Polarization

Submission + - Dropping the TSA: A Growing Trend (dailysignal.com)

tiberus writes: Amid a growing number of customer service complaints and delays, over a dozen airports have dropped TSA screeners in favor of cheaper and friendlier private screeners.

Tired of long lines at TSA airport checkpoints? Today, the Orlando Sanford International Airport (SFB) began a transition to private security screeners rather than Transportation Security Administration (TSA) screeners in a change that promises more efficient security measures.


Comment Stunned (Score 4, Interesting) 286

So, I missed this having been born in the late 60s but, at least I was able to have my unsuspecting parents purchase proper chemistry and electronics kits for me. I could stick us out of the house or create and electric fence to keep the cat of my room at night. When I tried to give my son the same opportunity, the offerings that were readily available were either so limited or so expensive as to be useless or prohibitive and useless. Then over the last several years, I've heard tell of kinds taking chemistry lab in high school with very little lab and almost no chems. Just how many rads we talking here?

Submission + - Intuit gets greedy, nearly doubles price of TurboTax (networkworld.com)

colinneagle writes: In the 2014 Deluxe edition ($59.99), which was always sufficient to do self-employment taxes, Intuit has removed Schedule C, D, and E, which self-employed people use. The full Schedule C is now only available in the Home & Business version, which runs $99.99, while Schedule E and the complete Schedule D, which has importation brokerage data, are now only available in their Premier edition or higher ($89.99). If you have Deluxe, like me, you will get prompted to make a purchase of an additional $30 to $40.

Needless to say, Intuit is getting skinned alive on Amazon. As of this writing, Turbo Tax 2014 has 852 one-star ratings on Amazon and just 81 five-star ratings, and TurboTax has been far and away the most popular home tax prep software on the market for years.

H&R Block, which has always run a distant second to TurboTax, smells blood in the water and is offering a free copy of its tax prep software, federal and state, to the many furious TurboTax users. There isn't a site for this, you have to email H&R Block at SwitchToBlock@hrblock.com and include your name, address, and phone number, operating system and a photo, scan, or email showing proof of TurboTax Basic or Deluxe purchase. Once approved, H&R Block will then send a link for one free download of H&R Block Deluxe + State tax software. You can even import last year’s tax return from TurboTax into the H&R Block tax software.

Submission + - FBI says search warrants not needed to use "stingrays" in public places (arstechnica.com)

schwit1 writes: The Federal Bureau of Investigation is taking the position that court warrants are not required when deploying cell-site simulators in public places. Nicknamed "stingrays," the devices are decoy cell towers that capture locations and identities of mobile phone users and can intercept calls and texts.

The FBI made its position known during private briefings with staff members of Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa). In response, the two lawmakers wrote Attorney General Eric Holder and Homeland Security chief Jeh Johnson, maintaining they were "concerned about whether the FBI and other law enforcement agencies have adequately considered the privacy interests" of Americans.

According to the letter, which was released last week:

For example, we understand that the FBI’s new policy requires FBI agents to obtain a search warrant whenever a cell-site simulator is used as part of a FBI investigation or operation, unless one of several exceptions apply, including (among others): (1) cases that pose an imminent danger to public safety, (2) cases that involve a fugitive, or (3) cases in which the technology is used in public places or other locations at which the FBI deems there is no reasonable expectation of privacy.


Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Working...