Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Deal of the Day - Pay What You Want for the Learn to Code Bundle, includes AngularJS, Python, HTML5, Ruby, and more. ×

Comment Re: Litigious Much (Score 1) 780

Entrapment is when you solicit someone to break the law, and then arrest them for it.

There was no solicitation here. There was a certain behavior that violated the "norm", and, arguably, socially accepted standards, but not the law and not the spirit of the law. Even if it was done on purpose, there is no justification for handcuffing someone, let alone a kid.

And we do allow the police to pose temptations in order to apprehend criminals. We send undercover police women dressed in min-skirts to catch rapists and people soliciting for sex for money. That is far more "entrapment" than what this kid did.

The bottom line is this. This kid did nothing wrong, and was harassed, handcuffed and arrested. This means the police, for sure, and the school, probably, fucked up. If he was an activist fighting for his right to bring weird shaped electronics to school, and not an innocent kid (which, again, I am yet to see evidence of), the police and school still fucked up.


Comment Re: Litigious Much (Score 1) 780

While I agree 15M is overboard, I still wouldn't call what they're doing "terrorizing". Both the school and the police fucked up royally. There is no other way to look at it. Furthermore, they refused to acknowledge their fuckup. This is true even if he was coached to behave as he did (for which I'd love to see evidence). In the end, the way he behaved did not warrant the response he got.


Comment Re: Litigious Much (Score 4, Insightful) 780

That's because people are ignorant.

The learning process starts where he did. Take something apart, try to put it together. Hailing him as a genius was being carried away, but labelling him a terrorist was even worse. This is how children learn. It's how we want children to learn.

Anyone who expects a child that has never learned proper electronics to build an electronic clock from scratch on first attempt is simply ignorant.


Comment Re:Why (Score 1) 965

Actually, it just circles back to giving excuses to justify terrorism.

There are no reasons. Terrorism isn't an effective tool to achieve goals. No one converted their religion because of it (the general kind. I'm not talking about gun to head conversion).

Repeated terrorism does put economic pressure on countries suffering from it, but I am hard pressed to think of a single case where that produced any effect that was productive to terrorism.

Clearly aim directed terrorism might have some effect (Irish underground attacks on Britain comes to mind), but those are not the kind of terrorism we typically see today.

So asking "why" is claiming there is a rational reason. That is flawed to its core. Assuming this is an Islamic terrorist attack (we don't know yet, but it seems like a reasonable assumption), this is more likely a clash of cultures than an aim directed campaign.


Comment Re:BackupPC (Score 1) 118

This has an additional problem, the Windows backups aren't encrypted. Not good if you have sensitive information.

<plug>Throw rsyncrypto into the mix</plug>

This has the downside of being a preprocessing step (i.e. - you need local storage for the encrypted form of the files), but solves the encryption problem better than your suggestion (which encrypts the transit, but not the actual backup).


Comment Re:This was not a screw-up (Score 1) 410

I'll leave the hospital incident out of it, because I know absolutely nothing about it.

2) If someone bombed a civilian/military airport in Israel with that very justification, would the United States describe that as a terrorist attack?

So far, nobody ever did. Not really.

In the mean while, Hamas is targeting completely civilian settlements (which are on land that was Israel's since before 1948, so not even that lame excuse exists), without the need to provide any excuse at all, of any kind. In fact, the only ones providing this lame excuse are people like you, who will search for any excuse whatsoever to justify acts of terror, or to try and make two completely distinct and obviously different situation seem the same due to some marginal, often made up, point of similarity.

International law is phrased around intent. Not body count (which is what everyone seem to point out repeatedly, and often mindlessly). Intent. If you don't like it, feel free to try and get it changed. You will find that anyone who actually understands war will tell you that the definition of war crime you idealize is something that no country in the world can afford to live up to.

You might say this sucks, and I'll wholeheartedly agree with you. You can claim this is horrible, and I'll point out that there is a reason we don't like war. If you try to claim that war should be conducted a different way, the burden of proof to show it is possible is on you.


Comment Re:This was not a screw-up (Score 2) 410

yet puts their own military headquarters smack in the middle of Tel Aviv.

And yet, you know exactly where it is. It is not used for civilian purposes.

I realize you are trying to make the two sound the same, but they really are nothing alike. Placing a distinctly military base in some proximity to civilians is not the same as using some poor shmoe's house as a weapon storage, and then instructing him and his family at gun point not to leave, even when the IDF is phoning in telling them they are about to bomb it.


Comment Re:At least he still has a sense of humor (Score 1) 206

Many very, very sad people can have senses of humor. I'm not saying Snowden is depressed or whatever, but ... I have read/heard about the apparent significant rates of depression when it comes to comedians. Funny != happy. I'm not depressed, either, but I know I can be quite funny even if I'm hurting. Partially, it's a way to hide the hurt/pain from others.

(again, I have *no* idea about Snowden. Just commenting on the idea of being sad being mutually exclusive with being humorous. :) )


Robots' Next Big Job: Trash Pickup 112

Nerval's Lobster writes: You've heard of self-driving cars, fast-moving robots, and automated homes. Now a research group led by Volvo, a waste-recycling company, and a trio of universities in the United States and Sweden want to bring much of the same technology to bear on a new problem: trash disposal. Specifically, the consortium wants to build a robot that will collect trash-bins from in front of peoples' homes, carry those bins to the nearest waste-disposal truck, and empty them. While that's a pretty simple (although smelly) task for a human being, it's an incredibly complex task for a robot, which will need to evaluate and respond to a wide range of environmental variables while carrying a heavy load. An uneven curb, or an overloaded bin, could spell disaster. Hopefully Volvo's experiment can succeed in a way that some of its other self-driving projects have failed. It's struck me, too, how the trash collection vehicles that come by my house are mostly piloted robots already; the humans are there to deal with problems and control the joysticks, but hydraulic arms lift and empty the garbage containers themselves.

"When it comes to humility, I'm the greatest." -- Bullwinkle Moose