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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Why would you want this? (Score 3, Insightful) 178

>You will always be an addict. I quit smoking over 3 years ago, and I'm still addicted.

No you won't. It just seems that way because it's only been 3 years. I broke my 1-2 pack a day addiction about 15 years ago, and have been at the point where I can have one or two without getting out of control for about a decade. I don't anymore, since smoking is disgusting and makes you reek.

Comment Re:Steve Scalise did NOT speak to KKK group (Score 1) 420

His "facts" are wingnut deflection. Speaking to a smaller group of racists did not make what he did any better. Only deranged wingnuts who are caught in the distant past believe that democrats control the KKK. The monsters moved to the Republican party during the civil rights movement, which victims of right-wing media actually believe never happened. Republicans are not reality-based people. It's all about dogma, and fake-news with them.

Slashdot is pretty derpy these days, but not Breitbart-derpy, so no one is going to buy your absurd propaganda.

Comment Re:Christianity is just as bad as Islam (Score 1, Troll) 420

No, by educating superstitious people, and marginalizing would-be theocrats like the Republican clown-show.

People tend to realize that the supernatural is imaginary if we allow them a decent education. Unfortunately a huge regressive subculture wants us to remain ignorant and reactionary, so we make stupid comments like "Just like USSR, China and North Korea does, by jailing people for having a terrorist handbook called ... "the bible"" .

Comment Re:This is Slashdot, not Politico (Score -1, Troll) 420

Because it paints Klan members in a bad light, and racism has become far too mainstream in the Republican party. Too many Slashdot users are part of the ignorant, reactionary, wingnut subculture, and just can't cope with the fact that America is moving away from our racist, homophobic, just plain stupid past.

Comment Article author is confused (Score 1) 385

The author is confused. See this discussion on HN where a lawyer or two explain what is actually going on.

Basically, nothing is changing concerning the substantive requirements for a warrant. All that is changing is which judges can issue a warrant after the police have satisfied all the requirements of the Constitution and of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Suppose a crime took place in district X, using a computer in district Y. Before, the police would have to go to a judge in district Y. After the change, they will be able to go to a judge in district X if and only if something like TOR or VPN was used that prevents them from determining Y.

Slashdot Top Deals

All seems condemned in the long run to approximate a state akin to Gaussian noise. -- James Martin

Working...