Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

Comment: Re:I suggest a million dollar fine (Score 1) 331

by CauseBy (#49359907) Attached to: Amazon Requires Non-Compete Agreements.. For Warehouse Workers

I see what you are saying but personally I'm careful when comparing situations to slavery. There is no work situation where you are paid and have the freedom to quit -- even with hardship -- which is tantamount to slavery.

What this is, is a shitty work situation. Not all shitty work situations are 'actually slavery', even hyperbolicly.

Comment: Re:Airplane vs Satellite (Score 2) 103

by CauseBy (#49322645) Attached to: Finland To Fly "Open Skies" Surveillance Flight Over Russia

I don't know. Does Finland have a lot of spy satellites?

I looked it up and found this on Wikipedia: Finland's Aalto-1 Cusesat-satellite (3U) with solar panels is a funded by student nano-satellite project of Aalto University and Finnish Meteorological Institute [2]. When launched (plan was to 2013), it would be the first Finnish satellite. Launch has been procured for the summer 2015.

Comment: Re:Rock and Roll wouldn't EXIST without "stealing" (Score 2) 386

"Copyright is for dullards who add a few more man-hours to a few million man-hours of cultural development then mix in an egomaniacal sense of entitlement."

If you can help shrink this idea down to fit on a t-shirt, I'll send you the first t-shirt I sell with it.

Comment: Re:In other news (Score 1) 609

by CauseBy (#49243911) Attached to: Clinton Regrets, But Defends, Use of Family Email Server

I don't have time to read entire sections of government statutes. Luckily, though, the army of conservative reporters and activists do have that time! And yet, none of them have pointed to any broken laws. Huh.

And in fact I did go read one statue quoted to me by my super-conservative lawyer friend. It was his best effort and yet he himself agreed it was a stretch to apply that statute to this situation.

When Fox News quotes the broken law, including the text of the law which clearly applies to this situation, then I'll stop being skeptical of the claim that Clinton broke a law by using a personal email server. Until then this is just another Benghazi Death Panel Government Takeover.

Comment: Re:In other news (Score 1) 609

by CauseBy (#49243893) Attached to: Clinton Regrets, But Defends, Use of Family Email Server

I've had long conversations with my lawyer friends about the exact statutes you claim she violated. The text of the law doesn't support that claim.

Think about it, if she violated a specific statute, then why hasn't Fox News quoted that statute? Because they're too lazy? Because they can't read? or is it because the statute doesn't actually apply?

Comment: Re:In other news (Score 1) 609

by CauseBy (#49243875) Attached to: Clinton Regrets, But Defends, Use of Family Email Server

The underling was fired for using Gmail, a commercial system not under the user's control. That was the problem (a minor problem, on top of the long list of major problems with that underling).

The charge of hypocrisy is fair (or, it could be). If Hillary threw a spitball at Bush for doing this same thing, I wouldn't be surprised. I also wouldn't be surprised if there were important differences in the two situations. Either way, if your best charge is hypocrisy, then okay that's below my threshold for giving half a shit.

President Nixon wasn't fired, he resigned, and it was for way way more than sending emails.

Comment: Re:In other news (Score 1) 609

by CauseBy (#49243855) Attached to: Clinton Regrets, But Defends, Use of Family Email Server

Thank you for the article. The headline totally supports what you are saying! Luckily, the headline -- like so many headlines -- says exactly the opposite of what the article says.

Headline: Clinton private email violated 'clear-cut' State Dept. rules

Article: "Spokespeople for the State Department and Clinton stressed earlier this week that the agency had 'no prohibition' on the use of private email for work purposes."

Other key phrases: "general rule", "warn", "fuzzy guidelines", "should be", "except in certain circumstances".

That article supports my position. If it supported yours, it would say

"Spokespeople for the State Department stressed earlier this week that the agency had 'clear-cut prohibitions' on the use of private email for work purposes."

"I've seen it. It's rubbish." -- Marvin the Paranoid Android

Working...