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


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Fundamentals (Score 1) 348

No, I'm for not making the military rules of engagement the same rules as your local law enforcement agency have to follow.

The people in Guantanomo Bay were not taken in military engagements. If they weren't wearing uniforms and weren't representing a government, but were busy trying to kill people with guns and bombs, they're just CRIMINALS. That's all.

There is no such thing as a terrorist, as a legal distinction. There are military combatants and there are civilians. If a civilian plants a bomb, he's still a civilian. He's just a criminal civilian. If a civilian shoots a bunch of people with an automatic weapon, he's still a civilian. He's just a criminal civilian. If a civilian gets together with a bunch of his buddies and plants bombs and shoots a bunch of people with automatic weapons, he's still just a civilian.

We even have a name for that. We call them mobsters.

Attempting to create terrorism as a legal distinction is stupid twice. Once because you're playing in to their narrative, giving them far more credence than they deserve, and twice because it's being used to foment fear and trample rights here at home. One is cowardly, the other treasonous.

Taliban, Al Queda, blah blah, these are just mobs. Organized crime. Treat them as such. The people in Gitmo are foreign nationals. Deport them. A bunch of Iron Age assholes running around in a desert on another continent are not a threat to me. If you failed to capture them via proper criminal procedures, you're just a fuckup. Releasing them is fixing a fuckup. If they are what you say they are, they'll reoffend, in which case they can be captured with proper law enforcement procedures, tried, and locked up legally. Meanwhile, you personally should stop defending the fuckups.

Comment Oh please let it pass. (Score 5, Interesting) 180

According to Michael Geist, TPP requires implementation of a DMCA-style take-down notice system, while eliminating the good faith belief requirement. Oh please oh please let it pass. YouTube? I'm sorry, it infringes. All of it. Vevo? Infringing. Take it down. Redtube? Infringing. Take it down. If TPP is implemented, it is our duty to see to it that no automated take-down system in any of the 12 countries will work anymore. And it will be legal.

Finally all those spam botnets will have a productive use.

Comment Re:Obligatory (Score 1) 667

Will everyone's ears bleed if they hear the word nigger or cracker or spic or wop or kraut or chink uttered?

With the exception of nigger, I don't think these kids recognize those words. I only come across kraut and wop and spic in historical fiction, and chink was on the way out when I was in grade school. And I'm not young. I've never heard cracker anywhere outside of the deep south, either.

Nowadays they call each other unclefucker. The ethnic slurs are tame in comparison.

Comment FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler proposed new rules (Score 1) 167

FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler proposed new rules...

Former cable and wireless industry lobbyist Tom Wheeler proposed new rules that is making the cable companies whine and cry.

They must be wondering what their money got them. I guess Tom plans to retire after this. He is 69 years old, after all. Between this and net neutrality, he's doing a fine job warming his toes with all the bridges he's burning.

Comment Re:Space Race! (Score 1) 132

spaceX is way ahead of the real players ... in the 1950's. SpaceX is 100% focused on extracting money from the government with gimmicks. Once required to say, actually comply with aerospace engineering practices and government contractor business processes (you know, that oversight thing) their prices will be just the same or higher (much more musk ego to pay for than boeing exec ego).

Says the butthurt ULA employee.

Don't worry, the welfare for mediocre engineers will continue. It's not like they were paying you for what you could do to begin with. They'll just stop having you pretend to make rockets.

Comment Re:Sweden worries about theirs too... (Score 1) 319

That's a bigger risk than people admit, especially over longer timescales. You breathe in dust all the time -- oops, this dust is plutonium-contaminated, and now the alpha emissions are inside your lungs. You pick some wild strawberries to eat on a picnic -- oops, the area is plutonium-contaminated, and now your stomach is getting the alpha emissions.

Sure, right now we have the plutonium-contaminated sites fenced off, but will we keep them fenced off for the next 100 years? The next 1000 years?

The part about nuclear that scares people like me is that dealing with the waste requires really long-term plans. How many programs started by the Roman Republic are still fulfilling their purpose today? For some types of nuclear waste, that's the kind of timeline we need for a management program.

Yes, you do breathe in dust all the time, and that's worth remembering. Every time a volcano erupts and emits an ash cloud, some fraction of that cloud is radioactive. It's a relatively small number, and that's what they're leaving out of all the scare tactics around radioactive nuclear waste. It's the same order of magnitude as that ash cloud.

No, we do not ever need a waste storage program of the longevity required to reach back to the Roman Republic, unless we also need that same plan for the ash of every coal plant and for every volcano on Earth. People who claim outrageously long storage times for nuclear waste subscribe to the No Safe Dosage theory of radioactivity interaction with biology, a theory which has been completely discredited.

Comment Re:Is this the same Forbes? (Score 1) 406

Is this the same Forbes that StartsWithABang is always linking to? I think timothy should find the person who keeps posting his stories and totally fire his useless ass.

I'll just leave this here:

How We Know North Korea Didn't Detonate a Hydrogen Bomb
Posted by timothy on Saturday January 09, 2016 @05:02PM from the still-weaponizing-fan-death dept.
StartsWithABang writes:

Comment Re:Editorial echo chamber (Score 1) 406

This means people will end up sucked into the echo chamber of one single publication's editorial bias.

So, exactly like it was for half of the 20th century, if not the past 3 centuries?

This is precisely what the desired outcome is. Old media still exists. Old media had so much money to start with that even the past 20 years of missteps means they're still wealthy beyond our understanding. That plus being part of media conglomerates that make movies that have been making billions means they're still well funded. And they resent having to share your mindspace with anyone else.

They want it all. They want to own you from top to bottom, eyeballs, ears, and brain. They want their messages to be the first thing you see and hear when you wake up in the morning and the last things you see and hear when you go to bed at night. (The 6:00AM news and the 11:00PM news.) They want to drum their message into you until you can't even imagine questioning it, let alone actually question it. They hate this Internet thing, and would like nothing more than to turn it into a series of TV shows (that you pay for) and magazines (that you pay for). They want you to pay them for the privilege of having your brain owned.

It remains to be seen if the Millennials will fall for it.

Comment So? (Score 1) 256

Weather Underground recounts several other records that accompanied the heat including the most intense hurricane ever observed in the Western Hemisphere, the ongoing agricultural fires in Indonesia — the most expensive disaster in Indonesia's history estimated at $16 billion in damages, flooding in America and India, and record central pacific hurricane activity.

So? Those are just weather. And possibly arson. They are not indicative of climate change of any kind.

Comment Re:The 1% can suck my dick (Score 1) 179

She reached for a coffee mug and pointed to her hairy legs. "This is what we really are! This is how we really should appear. Why hide it?"

And yet "neckbeard" remains a major pejorative here on Slashdot, both in usage and in negative connotation index.

Somehow, I suspect both sexes will continue shaving things for the foreseeable future.

Slashdot Top Deals

Breadth-first search is the bulldozer of science. -- Randy Goebel