Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

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: Simple example (Score 1) 768

by MaerD (#43941379) Attached to: Seeking Fifth Amendment Defenders

For some reason you are a suspect in a case, say murder. Now this murder you did not commit, but there is evidence that makes you a suspect, and the court is willing to try the case based on the limited evidence against you. Even if the evidence is failing to convice the jury of your guilt, they may try to put you on the stand to testify as to where you were on that night.

Perhaps you were engaged in some other crime (however minor), you now are compelled to testify and confess, and risk being charged with that crime. Doing so possibly destroys your credibility with the humans (who are automatically fallible) on the jury (remember, they may just go "oh he's a criminal anyway, he probably did this too") and secures a confession for whatever else you did. If you retain the right to remain silent, but it is allowed to be used against you: You've still destroyed your credibility and the jury can now weigh this while deciding your guilt or innocence.

Also, your FAIL3 doesn't really apply. Self-incrimination automatically assumes you have done something that would violate a law, but there is not enough/any outside proof. Possibly an unjust law.
If we had a perfect system where we only charged criminals, tried by an infallible judge/jury.. we wouldn't need the 4th or 5th amendments.

Comment: Re:Short yellow lights are a safety hazard (Score 1) 507

From my experience when I lived in florida, delays on lights all around were too short for the way traffic drives. In Florida it was typically a good idea to sit at a green light for a second to make sure traffic stopped moving, or you'll get creamed. In VA and NC that practice gets you honked at as soon as the light turns green.

Can Google just get self-driving cars perfected already?

Comment: Re:The game itself was Pirated from another game (Score 5, Insightful) 509

by MaerD (#43580861) Attached to: Cracked Game Released To Get Back At Pirates

Annnd by this logic Xplane pirated MS Flight simulator. Halo pirated Wolfenstien 3d. etc.

It isn't piracy. If the gameplay is exactly the same (such as some clones that ONLY change the graphics) you might have something. If the game plays differently, adds features, etc, it's just another entry in the genre.

Comment: Re:Not true. (Score 1) 984

by MaerD (#43138381) Attached to: Ohio Judge Rules Speed Cameras Are a Scam

Funny you should mention donating to a charity. Charlotte, NC threw the speed cameras out because they could not operate them at a profit. The State law required 90% of fines to go to schools, not to the city or the company operating the cameras (which is, as usual where most of the profits were ending up).

Not the same as "choice of charity", but it at least removes the incentive to try and use these things to line city coffers.

Comment: Re:License issues... (Score 1) 28

by MaerD (#43023923) Attached to: How the Open Invention Network Protects Linux and Open Source (Video)

Thanks, i missed that page. Still leaves open the question regarding oracle's limitation, or world one outside of the packages listed in the tables there. They are both general and specific in ways that suggest a company could argue the specific over the general. I would be more comfortable with a clear "open source software intended to run on Linux" as opposed to a specific package list.

Comment: License issues... (Score 3, Insightful) 28

by MaerD (#43019211) Attached to: How the Open Invention Network Protects Linux and Open Source (Video)

Sooo I see a few things in the license that raise questions for me. IANAL, but here's my short list:

1) "Linux System" and "Linux Environment Components" are both poorly defined. In the definitions section it states that a Linux System is as defined on the website, but I could find no further definition when I looked (albeit quickly) around the links from the front page. Does it mean the kernel only (which is actually "Linux")? Does it mean userspace? What if my application is cross platform (Linux, BSD, etc), or is GPL and someone makes it cross platform?

2) The "exchange of value" for a contract seems to be based on "You get all of our patents, we get all of yours". What if I have 0 patents, and never plan to patent anything? Could I be held to have not held up my end of the bargin and be undeserving of the patent protection?

3) Limitation Elections are not transparent. Oracle signed on, but exercised a limitation election (as has Geeknet, based on Which patents were excluded? If I sign on, how can I know which patents are explicitly not licensed to me via the OIN agreement?

Comment: Re:We took this guy apart last time. (Score 1, Insightful) 129

by MaerD (#42822585) Attached to: How To Stop Prediction Market Manipulation

I won't disagree. Many of the subjects outside of censorship that Bennett pontificates on make me roll my eyes and stop reading. But the question was "Why does this guy get front page exposure".. If Stallman decided to pontificate on electorate theory he'd probably make the front page just as fast.

Our informal mission is to improve the love life of operators worldwide. -- Peter Behrendt, president of Exabyte