Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Rape trigger? (Score 1) 562

by Loser4Now (#43035245) Attached to: Controversy Over Violet Blue's Harm Reduction Talk

"Is it too much to expect the rest of the world to take some care and have some empathy in helping you manage?"

Yes. It really is. People have their own shit they need to deal with, and can't manage the internal baggage of the world. Expecting them to be able to recognize, at a glance and without any knowledge of every -other- individuals' unique and snowflake like bullshit, and then choose the appropriate response (oh, they want to talk about it, oh, they want me to ignore it, blah blah blah) is waaaaaay to much to ask.

"It's not too much to want others to help, and while you can't *make* them do so, they ought to."

Here's my problem with your statement: Yes, we should be willing to help others deal with their emotional baggage by not saying or doing shit that's going to cause them to have a nervous breakdown. But from my understanding of TFA, this isn't an "ought not" situation. This is a "being physically barred from doing" situation. That's the opposite of an ought not. That's a can not.

Incidentally, why the hell are you telling someone what is or isn't too much for him to want? It's like the whole tone of your post is YOU defining what others "ought" to feel, in addition to YOU defining how they "ought" to act.

The world is a big place with diverse people who have the inherent right to choose for THEMSELVES how they feel and act. If some of them abuse that and cause others to confront their own bullshit existence, then it is their RIGHT as individuals to make that choice (standard caveat about their fist and your nose). Westboro OUGHT NOT be pricks, but they have every right to be, and you trying to censor them makes you MUCH worse than they ever could be.

Comment: Re:Vindicated? Er, not so much. (Score 2) 961

by Loser4Now (#37212500) Attached to: Michael Mann Vindicated (Again) Over Climategate

Lacking any direct evidence of research misconduct, as defined under the NSF Research Misconduct Regulation, we are closing this investigation with no further action"

That's a far f*cking cry from exoneration.

Is #2 even true? My understanding is that the raw data is missing.

I'm confused. If I accuse you of murdering a girl in 1990, and the prosecutor lacks any direct evidence of misconduct and closes the investigation, does that mean that you're not exonerated? Does that perhaps imply that you DID in fact murder a girl in 1990, despite no direct evidence of misconduct?

As for any data missing, your understanding seems a bit shoddy at best. Citation Needed, please.

Comment: Re:Take some time and think (Score 2, Interesting) 537

by Loser4Now (#32034226) Attached to: Juror Explains Guilty Vote In Terry Childs Case

It's my understanding his boss's boss asked for the passwords over an intercom, with police and HR present. The boss's boss was authorized, those others, not so much.

I think Terry fscked up. I think he should have been fired. I don't think he should have served 2 years, with the probability of 3 more plus a lifetime stain of FELON for being a paranoid system admin. And apparently I'm not the only one.

My least favorite part about this whole trial is that they removed a guy who was going to vote not guilty. It doesn't matter why he was going to vote not guilty. They decided they didn't like his verdict, and replaced him. Talk about a fscking miscarriage of justice.

Comment: Re:Why was this "difficult"? (Score 3, Insightful) 982

by Loser4Now (#32018028) Attached to: Terry Childs Found Guilty

"We were not swayed at all by emotional opinion, because if we were we probably would have acquitted because we all agreed that the situation Terry Childs was put in was not called for. However, the facts in the case bore out the verdict we reached.

Quite simply, we followed the law. I personally, and many of the other juror, felt terrible coming to this verdict."

You just did what you were told to do. When one of your fellow jurors refused to go along, he or she was replaced.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment

"Ordinary people, simply doing their jobs, and without any particular hostility on their part, can become agents in a terrible destructive process. Moreover, even when the destructive effects of their work become patently clear, and they are asked to carry out actions incompatible with fundamental standards of morality, relatively few people have the resources needed to resist authority." - Milgram

You've punished a man for something you don't think was wrong. May those who judge you be of greater morality.

-L4N

Comment: Do I count the booze? (Score 1) 582

by Loser4Now (#30683216) Attached to: Best estimate of monthly spending on food:shelter

I mean, when I eat out it's a fine supplement to the dinner. When I eat in ( PB& J or a cup o' ramen ), it's damn near the main dish.

Regardless if I include it in the cost I move from the 1:4 to the 1:1 category. Damn you recent realization that alchohol can be tasty as well as the previously understood intoxicating.

... wow, synapse is the CAPTCHA. Slashcode warning me of my lush-y ways?.

Comment: Confusion about what qualifies as a USB drive (Score 3, Insightful) 412

by Loser4Now (#28762591) Attached to: Under my immediate control are X USB drives; X=

Do I count my PSP and DS? Both of which have music and movies, along with the plethora of games and get said data through a USB port?

What about my iPod? I routinely use it to transfer files to and from class, as well as movies and music.

Then there's the throwaway thumb drives which get used for sneakernet tranfers among friends. Not to mention the 3.5 hard drive used for serious bandwidth.

Which of these are USB drives? I honestly don't know, but I counted them all, which gave me the 6 - 10 answer.

Google

+ - Pwn2Own downs all but Chrome on Day 1->

Submitted by
Loser4Now
Loser4Now writes "During a contest at the CanSecWest event, security researchers competed to exploit vulnerabilities in web browsers. Firefox, Safari, and Internet Explorer were all successfully compromised, but Chrome was able to withstand the first day of the competition.
( http://arstechnica.com/security/news/2009/03/chrome-is-the-only-browser-left-standing-in-pwn2own-contest.ars )

The competition and related interview with Charlie Miller ( http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=2941 ) served to underscore the marketability of browser security, and the related commercialization of browser exploiters. "Vulnerabilities have a market value so it makes no sense to work hard to find a bug, write an exploit and then give it away," Miller told ZDNet."

Link to Original Source

Prediction is very difficult, especially of the future. - Niels Bohr

Working...