Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Who said this was limited to the US government? (Score 1) 260

The Congress did not give the Executive branch this power by any sort of law that I can recall

Who said this was limited to the US government? You are talking about against US citizens by the US government, a very select case. Several countries can spy on their own citizens "by law", China for instance. It's quite legal there. So, that immediately would contradict your statement "It's an illegal activity, whether done by governments or by the mob." Because it's just not true on its face.

We are not aware which country did this, unlike Stuxnet. So let's look at Stuxnet, which was created by the US and Israel. The CIA operates under similar legality to operate on foreign agents and powers. Why does Stuxnet differ from an agent sneaking in and sabotaging a machine?

In what way is Stuxnet, targetted at Iran, crimeware under US law. Sometimes laws give explicit powers. Other times, powers are assumed unless explicitly prohibited.

Something is not simply illegal where the law is silent.

So, assuming Stuxnet was an operation carried out by the US government against the Iran government, and assuming that it operated as intended, namely that it never left Iranian facilities... show me the law, the exact law, that makes it illegal.

You are sort of blandly making these assumptions of legality... without anything legal backing. If you were to take the makers of Stuxnet to court, what law would you go to SCOTUS charging them with if you were Iran?

You can't just throw "not done under the rule of law" out there. That's some libertarian, "government can't do anything unless we spell it out in exact detail to them, with no wiggle room", jargon. And, you may very well be a libertarian and believe that. Unfortunately for that argument, neither the US government nor the courts nor China nor Russia nor many other countries with cyberwar programs take such a view on the law.

That leaves it as thinking is should be illegal, but that's opinion, not law.

Comment Goverment Crimeware? (Score 1) 260

And whether governments do it, or the RBN, it's still crimeware.

I think that's taking a fast and loose definition of "crime", isn't it? That would make tanks, bombs, planes, and even spy tech... all crimetech.

Spyware is taken, and Warware may not roll off the tongue as easy. But calling government cyberwar activities Crimeware just feeds the nutjob conspiracy theorists, as though no government has no legitimate self interest in spying or conducting activities against other countries.

As someone against the taking of human life, I find government cyberwar methods to be the best thing to happen to humanity since the bullet proof vest!

Comment Madness! (Score 1) 101

So, the main institution responsible for scientific groupthink is going to be the arbiter of what's libel and what isn't? Brilliant!

So, you're saying that scientists will be responsible for determining what science is? Madness! Next, they'll have doctors telling us what medicine is! And mathematicians telling us what math is!

Comment The Three Bears of Punishment (Score 3, Informative) 334

Mama Bear: To those parents that are completely anti-spanking... hey, good luck with that. Technically, a timeout is a short period of solitary confinement, which itself deemed torture, cruel, and unusual... So before you go overboard and compare a measured spanking to beating a child... just remember, you still torture them with solitary confinement, so what makes you parent of the year, eh? ;) I'm sure a few of these velvet glovers will turn out wonderful kids. I'm also sure they will put their child so high on a pedestal to scar their unique little snowflakes in worse ways.

Papa Bear: On the other hand, if a parent ever has to hit, leave a mark, turn something red, or use something other than the palm of their own hand, they're going to far. To that kind of parent: You are bigger, stronger, and in control. For you to use a hanger, belt, stick, wooden spoon, knuckes or other hard part of the body, or anything else on a child is abuse! You're beating your child to quench your anger, not teach a lesson.

Baby Bear: Appropriate measure and balance. My son will be 4 this summer. I'm adamant about teaching him not to grab from the counter, but let's say he goes to grab a knife. I will slap the back of his hand or his bottom (after taking the knife from him calmly, of course). This isn't time to "negotiate". My son permanently injuring himself will receive a swift sting somewhere. He's a small child. He's smart, but appealing to his intellect is completely wrong when it comes to immediate danger. He doesn't run into traffic in a parking lot. He doesn't grab at the stove. He doesn't put coins in his mouth. The key is being consistent, and rare. I think the more you spank, and the harder you spank, work against you. I don't want my child resenting me, or thinking I'm out to hurt him. If he does, then I've failed. But if he gets hit by a car, I've definitely failed!

Very rarely do I ever have to spank for another reason, and that's usually if he refuses to stand in timeout. It's measured, not harsh (I am rougher when he and I are rough housing and playing... so its more embarrassing than anything), and I give him lots of warnings. If I say what the consequence will be, I always follow up. Parents that threaten punishment, and don't follow through do their kids a huge injustice just as if they continually promised ice cream for dessert, and never deliver on that either. Parents that punish without explanation are causing more problems than if they did nothing.

Any form of punishment is followed by having him explain what he did that caused the punishment ("I got a time out because I didn't listen when you told me to put up my toys."), followed by me adding explanations for why what he did was wrong, followed by a big hug, wiping of any tears, a kiss on the cheek, and telling him to go up to anyone he was bad to and apologize.

My son, is healthy, happy, knows he's loved, and is a very sweet and polite boy. He's not mean to animals or other kids. Most of the time, I've found talking quietly and firmly to my son ends all that tantrum business while shopping.

Comment Re:Evolution in Action? (Score 1) 1007

$50K in California, but less than $9K spent on college students. :(

Prisons are fine... IF we reduce the current population by 75% by tossing out minor drug convictions and eliminating privately owned prisons.

The problem with the death penalty is that the cost of housing and fighting appeals skyrockets. It actually is cheaper to just go with a life sentence in most cases.

Comment Re:Evolution in Action? (Score 1) 1007

Maybe we should make them work in a pediatric care center as a janitor or something...I'm just tired of PRISON!! as the go-to solution all the time.

Kid dies... prison as go-to solution?

You know, I get your argument, I really do. But if your actions cause the death of your child... janitor doesn't quite make it on the list of punishments. Causing any person's death for any reason doesn't really need to be punished like a child that refused to eat their carrots.

I'll stick to prison, and consider it fortunate I didn't say death penalty. :)

Slashdot Top Deals

Get hold of portable property. -- Charles Dickens, "Great Expectations"

Working...