Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

Comment: let's face it (Score 1) 103

by Masked Coward (#48543355) Attached to: Neglecting the Lessons of Cypherpunk History
With most western governments being so intimately involved in commerce, in conjunction with (and because of) their deep level of corruption, no major player in the tech industry is going to take an antagonistic stance against the spooks. Particularly speaking of my country (US), the government's shadow agencies are going to get what they want. They hold all the levers of power, and therefore the means to determine the very existence of Apple/Google/MS as they exist today. Passing new laws, or perverting existing ones through parliamentary tricks, is already being used to put the screws to an array of "powerful" industries (healthcare, energy, insurance, financial, auto). The tech companies are no different - they will play ball or they will cease to exist. I'm not sure if there is a viable solution unless the vast majority of people wake up and resist. As long as people are camping out for 3 days in order to get the latest i-Phone, it ain't going to happen.

Comment: Re:DebianNoob (Score 1) 450

by Masked Coward (#48346051) Attached to: Joey Hess Resigns From Debian

Technical arguments being decided by the ignorant masses, versus the specific groups (which anyone from the GR can join) who have the specific job of making those decisions. At least that's one way to look at it.

As your sig says, often wrong but never in doubt. You know only Debian developers are allowed to vote, right? That pretty much blows up your 'ignorant masses' characterization.

Comment: Re:no dimocrats (Score 1) 551

by Masked Coward (#48302659) Attached to: In this year's US mid-term elections ...
This is the most illogical and hysterical response I've seen yet.

Nowhere did I say I'm an anarchist, or even a libertarian, yet many responses base off the premise that I did. I understand the natural tendency to use political labels, but on many individual matters, they're pretty misleading. Not only do these templates encompass a shitload of unrelated topics, but they can mean different things to different people.

And I do believe we need government, but there should be multiple (largely non-overlapping) layers of it, with the federal level only involved in the areas enumerated by the Constitution.

Speaking of the Constitution, which renders your argument completely invalid, where the fuck does the federal government would get the legitimate authority to carry out this "gay re-education?"

To preempt some potential criticism of the Constitution as "outdated" here's my position on that. It's a great document. Not perfect, but it's what we've got. You disagree? Then there are proper means by which it can be changed. Get behind a movement that seeks to do so.

Comment: Re:no dimocrats (Score 1) 551

by Masked Coward (#48297013) Attached to: In this year's US mid-term elections ...

See? both of us can play silly partisan games. If you believe the republican party didn't cease to exist in 1968, maybe a cluebat is in order.

No, I do agree with you there.

As stated before, there are only a small handful of Republicans I could support. My opinion is that as a whole, the R's are slightly better than D's, but that's not an endorsement.

They laughed at Einstein. They laughed at the Wright Brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown. -- Carl Sagan