Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Righthaven (Score 1) 66

What is right wing about filing a lawsuit to unmask a doe, suing that person, then settling for a much smaller amount. It seems this is used by many different trolls, and likely doesn't have any political ideology behind it. It is sleazy though. Filing a lawsuit with the intention of settling just to get a payout is wrong. It is short circuiting the justice system for personal profit.

Yeah that's neither right nor left, it's the universal language of greedy bloodsuckers.

Comment Re:Righthaven (Score 3, Interesting) 66

What is right wing about that process? The Democrats support the movie industry, not the Republicans.

The fact that Democrats support something doesn't negate the possibility of something being right wing. The Democrats are not ideologically pure, or ideologically homogenous, and very few of them can be considered "left".

To me, pretending that copyright is only about property rights, and ignoring the fact that copyright was also supposed to be about free speech and about making material available for free to the public after a limited time, is definitely "right wing".

Comment Re:DMCA needs to die (Score 1) 66

This has nothing to do with the DMCA, this is a straight out copyright infringement lawsuit being filed. The real problem is that the methods the copyright holders (or the copyright enforcement goons acting on their behalf) are using to identify torrent users aren't good enough and its good to see at least one judge willing to call these enforcers out on it.

Exactly. Would have been nice for judges to start doing this 11 years ago, but glad they've come around.

Comment Re:Hmmm ... (Score 2, Interesting) 112

So if our brains are hardwired with receptors for this stuff, maybe it's time to actually look at it and evaluate it for what is is instead of this bullshit moralistic prohibition which is there to keep a bunch of religious assholes happy?

Um, Puritanism is the State Religion in the USA. They offer platitudes about separation of Church and State, but all the evidence points in the other direction.

Puritanism is also considered Satanic by some serious theologists (assuming the premise).

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

Submission + - All Malibu Media subpoenas in Eastern District NY put on hold

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes: A federal Magistrate Judge in Central Islip, New York, has just placed all Malibu Media subpoenas in Brooklyn, Queens, Long Island, and Staten Island on hold indefinitely, due to "serious questions" raised by a motion to quash (PDF) filed in one of them. Judge Steven Locke's 4-page Order and Decision (PDF) cited the defendant's arguments that "(i) the common approach for identifying allegedly infringing BitTorrent users, and thus the Doe Defendant, is inconclusive; (ii) copyright actions, especially those involving the adult film industry, are susceptible to abusive litigation practices; and (iii) Malibu Media in particular has engaged in abusive litigation practices" as being among the reasons for his issuance of the stay.

Comment Re:Amazingly stupid comment (Score 1) 397

Way to completely (deliberately, of course) miss the point. You're (deliberately) confusing tactics and specific weapon use blah blah blah

Reality has a well known anti right-wing, anti-neocon, anti butthurt-American-Exceptionalist butthurt bias.

Oh, please. The Taliban had brutally taken over Afghanistan

After Reagan had given them money, arms and training to provoke the Soviets into an invasion. Not only was it a feature, not a bug, that they were violent fundies, it was the whole damn point.

and was harboring the group that had just killed thousands of Americans ... and refused to turn them over.

Wrong wrong wrong wrong, wrong wrong wrong wrong! Taliban offered to expell Osama bin Laddin if Bush had bothered to provide evidence that Osama was guilty. Bush didn't bother, because he wanted his illegal war.

And, Iraq? The UN authorized the use of force because

The UN didn't authorize force against Afghanistan, much less Iraq. This little alternative universe you guys live really is complete with it's own alternate history, isn't it?

among other things, Saddam never even TRIED to honor the agreements he made

You mean with his non-existent WMD's and non-existent yellow cake? Besides, if you're going to wave around the boogyman of Saddam, years after his death, you're going to have to do it to the people who put him in power in the first place. The people who put him in power in the first place and gave him weapons and intel to use in the Iran-Iraq war, which he started. The intel that allowed Saddam to use those gas warheads that caused much bedwetting amongst American Exceptionalists.

The Sea Aye Fucking Eh. Sensing a pattern yet? America creates a force to fight someone they don't like, only to become the new someone they don't like a few years later, someone who needs a good bombing. First it was the Taliban, then it was Saddam, now it's ISIS - who are still "freedum fighters", as long as they're fighting Assad and not Chevron.

the illegal war against Libya

You're deliberately pretending you can't tell the difference between "illegal" and "done poorly by an administration that doesn't know how to do such things."

No, as in fucking illegal, you incompetent boob. Constitution, heard of it? Declaring war is the exclusive purview of Congress, not the President. No, you can't weasel out of this with the War Powers Act or NATO treaties, as Libya was no threat to the U.S. or any NATO member, and the war went long past the time limit set by the WPA. If you were dropped on the head as a child, repeatedly, and need a picture drawn for you as to why the president is not free to take the country to war without consulting the legislative branch:

Imagine that Obama decides to resolve his spat with Putin by ordering the Russian President's plane be shot down on its way back from the recent summit. This naturally leads to reprisals, and nuclear war, and most Americans ending up fucking dead from the ICBM strikes or the nuclear fallout. Should one person be able to make that call, and one person alone - or should the representative branch have a say?

the bombing of even more countries that have never been a threat to us

Ah, the ol' hand-waving vagueness tactic. Again, how do you think this helping you to sound credible?

Are you naturally a complete idiot, or does this take practice? The United States has bombed Yemen, Syria and Libya, among other countries. What threat have the people of Yemen, Syria, or Libya posed to the United States? Hint: the answer is "None".

You mean, the Al Qeda and Taliban and ISIS tactics of putting very bad people and their supplies in and around local women and children specifically to make sure that such deaths occur?

Specifically, the "human shield" bullshit that just fell apart when you fucksticks bombed a hospital of doctors who speak English.

Then there's the fact that this BS never applies to buildings or facilities used by Imperialist Shitbags. Israel drops bombs all over Gaza because they claim buildings are used by Hamas militants, and any civilian deaths are the fault of Hamas for using "human shields".

Yet Israel put their national "defense" headquarters right in the middle of Tel Aviv, which is chock full of civilians. And their airports have both military and civilian plans landing at them. Tell me, BullshitCone - if some Arab country managed to carpet bomb that headquarters or one of those airports, would you accuse Israel of using "human shields"?

Comment Re:Amazingly stupid comment (Score 1) 397

Laughable neocon revisionist history is laughable.

The what? Yanukovych campaigned on a promise not to sell the country out to Putin, then promptly turned around and started to sell the country out to Putin.

You mean accepted a low interest, flat-rate loan from Russia over the crushing austerity measures demanded by the IMF in return for one of their loans? Do you also sneer at people taking a 6% interest rate from a credit union rather than 25% from a seedy payday loan company? Makes as much sense.

The people who lost the last election to him, and wanted those crushing IMF loans raised hell about this

FTFY. There's also the slight issue of Victoria Nuland, the assistant Secretary of State, getting captured on video, bragging about spending billions to bring Ukraine 'the future it deserves'? Would you be as blase if Putin had spent $5 billion to subvert the elected government of Canada? Methinks not.

and he fled the country after an illegal coup

FTFY2. This is an easy one, whether you are a right-wing imperialist Democrat, or a right-wing imperialist Republican. Because you can insert the names Reagan or Bush into this little thought experiment, or the names Clinton or Obama, since all four presidents ended their terms in office with Congress in control of the other party.

Imagine the $POTUS of your choice is six months out from the next elections. The opposing party in Congress impeaches him, but falls short of the Constitutionally-mandated number of votes to remove him from office. Rather than accept the fact that they lost - again - they fucking launch a coup and force your $POTUS to flee the country.

Would you have accepted that? Would you have accepted that when those driving $POTUS out of the country had taken billions in money from Putin to subvert the results of the last election, since they just couldn't win at the ballot box?

leaving behind an estate and mansion worth at least 100 million US dollars, which he somehow had been able to afford on a 2,000-dollar-per-month salary.

Obama could never afford to build the White House on his salary, either. WYP? And are you sure you want to throw stones in that corrupt glass house, when the son of the Vice President was promptly made a top exec at a Ukrainian energy company after the coup?

Comment Re:US didn't defeat Germany (Score 1) 397

Just that the Russians were the ones to send in underequipped soldiers en mass to overwhelm the enemy with numbers irrespective of casualties, killed a lot of their own people through purges and punishments

American Exceptionalist Bitch, please. American's would have gotten their asses kicked even faster at the start of WWII, if they had shared the same continent with Nazi Germany. No one was capable of going toe-to-toe with the Germans in a ground war at the start of WWII.

I'm not sure it was right, and it sure as fuck doesn't mean that nobody else was fighting Germany at the time.

That's sure as fuck attacking a straw man rather than deal with the fact that the Western and Pacific fronts combined were a sideshow next to the Eastern front, or that over 80% of German casualties came at the hands of the Red Army.

"Lead us in a few words of silent prayer." -- Bill Peterson, former Houston Oiler football coach