I was attributing this to Forbes malice, then i noted the message at the bottom of the slashdot page: Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity

In my experience, the reverse of Hanlon's Razor is far more often true: Never attribute to stupidity that which is adequately explained by malice.

Note that this doesn't exclude the possibility of both stupidity and malice at the same time, but regardless, it's generally easy to tell the difference between the two: stupidity affects the choice of actions and their execution, as well as the probability of getting caught, while malice affects the goals and the decision of which actions to take only, and is otherwise independent of execution. Actions which are inconsistent in both their effect and their apparent motive are generally the result of stupidity, since stupidity tends not to account for luck, and stupidity results in luck playing a larger role in both the choice of action and the execution. Actions which are inconsistent in their effect but consistent in their apparent motive are generally the result of malice attempting to masquerade as stupidity. Actions which are consistent in their effect are always the result of malice (when the effect is malicious or "evil", of course).

And in my experience, malice is much more often seen when measured that way than is stupidity. Hence the preference for the reverse of Hanlon's Razor (Hanlon's Rozar?).

Their "Municipal Wifi" covers a one block area around the courthouse, which probably just means the block that the courthouse is on. That's hardly "municipal".

Well, for that particular town, one block probably does cover the whole town!

:-D

Once they get the tickets in the mail, you better believe the law will change quickly.

Have you guys still not learned?

The law doesn't change in the face of the influential and powerful being inconvenienced by it. Enforcement of it does.