Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Comment: I have the answer (Score 1) 328

This is easily fixed. They can do it the same way they do every time they think they've got a case against someone, but screw up and realize the prosecution will fail. They just find some other scapegoat and charge them with obstruction of justice. The preeminent example is the Martha Stewart case. The feds were going after Peter Bacanovic for insider trading. When they discovered they didn't the evidence to indict, they looked at all the people they talked to during the investigation and decided Martha Stewart had lied, so they went after her for obstruction.

They can do the same switch in this case. Can't convict a suspect because their phone is encrypted? Charge some high-profile Google or Apple executive with obstruction of justice instead.

Comment: Re:Heartbleed (Score 2) 201

by Curunir_wolf (#48919177) Attached to: Serious Network Function Vulnerability Found In Glibc

At least in proprietary software, people are paid to do it.

If you really believe that is true, I suggest you provide a list of all the companies advertising on Dice looking for "source code vulnerability auditors." Can't find any? That's because companies pushing out commercial software don't give a crap. It's hard enough just getting the get-the-features-out-focused managers to get why you're spending time writing tests, much less doing code reviews to look for vulnerabilities. I've even heard them say things like "It's not necessary because I found this free tool on the Internet that scans all your code for that, so we don't need to do manual work like that."

Comment: Re:its a tough subject (Score 1) 660

by Curunir_wolf (#48905091) Attached to: Should Disney Require Its Employees To Be Vaccinated?

Am I supposed to be offended that you call me a "statist"? I think you need to define the term, because what I'm seeing there is "someone who thinks there's a role for the state in protecting an individual's rights". In which case, you are right.

From Webster's:

statism noun \st-ti-zm\ : concentration of economic controls and planning in the hands of a highly centralized government often extending to government ownership of industry

That's how it's been used since 1947 (it's not something newly made-up), and seems to fit your viewpoint. I only use it because there are totalitarians on the left and the right, and it seems to be the only term to fit both. It also implies the view that there should be no hard limits on the authority of the central state (like the Constitution was intended to impose), and that also seems to fit your viewpoint ("compromise" means the state wants control of 100% of your time, and when you object they "compromise" by allowing you to have some free time).

Comment: Re:Pope Francis - fuck your mother (Score 1) 893

by Curunir_wolf (#48903871) Attached to: Pope Francis: There Are Limits To Freedom of Expression

No, just NO. No one has a "right" for protection from insults, whether open, subtle, or anything else..

Totally agree, insults cause no harm and are therefore free speech. Even when someone insults children who have cancer by calling them "fails at life" (which I do often on internet forums), I'm expecting you to find that totally acceptable.

I find your statement disgusting and completely unacceptable. But I will defend to the death your right to say it. You'll probably have to start your own forum that nobody visits in order to say things like that though, as you will be summarily banned from forums owned by others. Exercising a right does not absolve you from responsibility or consequences.

Comment: Re:its a tough subject (Score 1) 660

by Curunir_wolf (#48902037) Attached to: Should Disney Require Its Employees To Be Vaccinated?

Because 99% of libertarians (at least 100% of the ones I've met) believe people have no rights, only property has rights, and all "human rights" are derived from property and property rights

That's some pretty crazy world view filters you have on, there. Libertarian ideas expressed in simple terms (for simpletons, like you), often use "you own you" to explain how property rights flow from individual rights. Your most important property right is your body. That doesn't mean the libertarians you've met think there are no individual rights, just that you can't get out of your own bag enough to grok anyone else's viewpoint. So you latch onto some phrase so you can create ludicrous interpretations of what they say in order to justify your hatred of them.

Comment: Re:What's the difference between China and EU? (Score 1) 209

by Cyberax (#48896921) Attached to: China Cuts Off Some VPNs
What? Are there any sanctions? Perhaps all major newspapers wrote articles condemning Latvia's actions?

Nope. These Nazi wannabes at most get silence from the official Europe, if not outright support. And yes, they really _are_ Nazi wannabes - there are official parades of Waffen SS veterans there (not joking, ). And just recently the official Latvia blocked a genocide exhibition in UNESCO: because it might have damaged Latvia's image (Holodomor exhibition a couple of months earlier was welcomed). Very freedom-of-speechy, I know.

So yes, I think that Europe should shut the hell up and first fix its own affairs first. There's nothing worse than outright hypocrisy.

Comment: Re:its a tough subject (Score 1) 660

by Curunir_wolf (#48894521) Attached to: Should Disney Require Its Employees To Be Vaccinated?

No, it's a question of degrees. If you think people are stupid now, do away with education and see how bad it gets. I guarantee you that eventually the population will make Honey Boo Boo look like a PhD.

So requiring state education (a.k.a. banning home schooling and private schools) is the same as "doing away with education"? How does that work? You SAY "it's a question of degrees", yet you reject any notion of individual rights. You clearly want no compromise at all, and have no interest in limiting the authority of the state. That's why I called you a statist and it's clearly completely accurate.

Comment: Re:Salary versus cost of living in each city (Score 1) 136

by Cyberax (#48894405) Attached to: By the Numbers: The Highest-Paying States For Tech Professionals
I lived in Mountain View and was paying $1500 for a 1-bedroom apartment in a nice (well insulated walls, washing machine, fast Internet) apartment complex, within 5 minute walk from a Caltrain station. I could have gotten a 2-bedroom apartment in the same complex for $2000.

Yeah, SV is pretty expensive compared with middle-of-nowhere states, but it's definitely worth it.

Comment: Re:Salary versus cost of living in each city (Score 2) 136

by Cyberax (#48894369) Attached to: By the Numbers: The Highest-Paying States For Tech Professionals
Ok, I'll bite.

I'm in that 'wealthy' category and being single I probably pay more taxes than a married couple with children. All of the taxes apply gradually, so there's no difference whether you earn $249999.99 or $250000.01. And my tax lawyer ($5000 for all the consultations and paperwork) helped me to optimize my tax by quite a bit. So in the end, my effective total tax rate (including state taxes) is a little bit less than 30%, this year it'll be close to 28% because I moved much of my income into capital gains.

Comment: Re:What's the difference between China and EU? (Score 1) 209

by Cyberax (#48894247) Attached to: China Cuts Off Some VPNs

Chinese model is about denying large portions of free speech, such as political non-threatening free speech of political dissidents to improve social cohesion of their society. How is it hypocritical to criticize this aspect of Chinese society from European point of view?

Apparently, quite a lot. On the very same day when millions chanted "Je suis Charlie" on streets, several Russian TV channels were banned in Latvia. Because of their "one-sided" view on certain events.

So yeah, I'm starting to think that European insistence on the 'freedom of speech' works only one way.

Comment: Re:Stupid names (Score 1) 178

by Curunir_wolf (#48887809) Attached to: New Nicotine Vaccine May Succeed Where Others Have Failed

I only read the journal abstract but it appears you're using personal definitions for those terms if you don't think it fits.

Well according to Wikipedia:

A vaccine is a biological preparation that provides active acquired immunity to a particular disease. A vaccine typically contains an agent that resembles a disease-causing microorganism and is often made from weakened or killed forms of the microbe, its toxins or one of its surface proteins. The agent stimulates the body's immune system to recognize the agent as foreign, destroy it, and keep a record of it, so that the immune system can more easily recognize and destroy any of these microorganisms that it later encounters.

So this is not a vaccine, unless you use a really lose (personal) interpretation of that definition to make it fit.

Comment: Re:its a tough subject (Score 1) 660

by Curunir_wolf (#48887787) Attached to: Should Disney Require Its Employees To Be Vaccinated?

How about we give no one authority over anyone except themselves, and everyone authority over their own body and life.

That's different from anarchy how, exactly? Who resolves conflicts between two people? Who enforces contracts? Who sanctions destructive behavior?

Oh, right, magically everyone will act with total respect for everyone else's well-being. Nobody will act selfishly to the detriment of others at all. I had forgotten that Ayn Rand was God.

Regardless of your ludicrous biases, I am not an Objectivist or anything like it. There is a difference between having a government respectful of individual rights, and one that justifies enforcing every aspect of everyone's life because they by claiming every activity affects all the taxpayers. You can have things like taxes that pay for education, without telling everyone their children will be wards of the state every day for eight hours or you go to jail, or that no one can smoke a plant because somewhere down the line the state has to pay for the consequences.

WTF ever happened to personal responsibility? Dismiss that, and you live under tyranny.

The Wright Bothers weren't the first to fly. They were just the first not to crash.