Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Incidentally... (Score 2) 27

by fuzzyfuzzyfungus (#48650641) Attached to: How a Massachusetts Man Invented the Global Ice Market
The harvesting and storage of naturally occurring ice was so successful that, for a somewhat surprising amount of time, it made manufactured ice uneconomic and, for an even longer period, on-site refrigeration hardware a very niche item(even after ice manufactured on large scale ammonia based systems replaced harvested ice, it still fed the same local market of that natural ice deliveries had).

If memory serves, the scale and efficiency of the industry was such that Australia ended up with the first adoption of a refrigeration system on a commercial scale because it was one of the few places that had the necessary technology but lacked a frozen pond without about a zillion miles. The thermodynamics and the necessary hardware were more or less familiar to any region with an enthusiasm for steam power; but the economics just didn't work out.

Comment: Re: Why wouldn't it be? (Score 1) 175

by vux984 (#48650535) Attached to: Judge: It's OK For Cops To Create Fake Instagram Accounts

They can probably get around the criminal part by just creating a fictional person. It's only criminal if they steal a real persons identity. I doubt the cops care anything about civil law.

Maybe. But the computer misuse laws are so broadly written right now, that violating the "terms of service" is tantamount to "unauthorized use of a computer"...

For example...

http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2913...

Comment: Re:Why dashcams? (Score 1) 84

by hairyfeet (#48649705) Attached to: Seattle Police Held Hackathon To Redact Footage From Body Cameras

And we have seen the press cannot be trusted, see how the press doxxed witness 40 or 41 that testified for the officer in the Brown case, considering we just had 2 cops in NYC killed by someone wanting to retaliate for Brown and Garner? A reasonable person would have every reason to believe the press put that witnesses life in danger.

So while we should always have the unaltered footage accessible by lawyers and grand juries there are legitimate reasons why some things shouldn't be public.

Comment: Re:Not seeing the issue here (Score 1) 175

by Jane Q. Public (#48649359) Attached to: Judge: It's OK For Cops To Create Fake Instagram Accounts

Actually, there is.

There are exceptions, but in most states they are few and specific.

They can and have broken into buildings and houses in pursuit of suspects/criminals fleeing.

Ditto.

There is actually a long list of things- some of which even cause people to lose their life that the police seem to be absolved from which if you or I had done would be instant jail time.

"Seem to be absolved from" is not the same as legal. That's a straw-man argument. I wrote "they're not allowed". The dog is not allowed on the bed. That doesn't mean the dog doesn't get up there sometimes. Only that it isn't supposed to.

Having said that, again yes there are exceptions. But those exceptions are very specific and we know what they are.

Though they sometimes might not get prosecuted for breaking the rules, they sure as hell should. That's a genuine societal problem, not how things are "supposed to" be.

Comment: Re:And on the plus side... (Score 1) 328

by Jane Q. Public (#48649329) Attached to: 11 Trillion Gallons of Water Needed To End California Drought

I don't think that these two assertions are simultaneously possible. If "they" corralled the snow melt - all of it - then where did they put it?

"They" put it in huge reservoirs. I used to live there, and I know them well. Also the Central Valley, where a close relative owned a farm / ranch. I am intimately familiar with these things.

And don't ben an ass. "All"? Of course not. Being deliberately literal when I was not doesn't make for compelling arguments. It's pretty obvious that I was oversimplifying.

Still, the basic point remains. Stand at the mouth of the San Joaquin "river" most of the year and see how much water comes out. I have pictures of my grandfather with strings of large salmon caught in that river, back before it was being mostly used up. Now, it's not very common to see more than a trickle most of the year. And ask residents of L.A. about their "river". You've probably seen it in movie "chase scenes"... a vast concrete canal with seldom more than puddles at the bottom of it.

And don't forget groundwater: they've been gradually depleting the aquifers for generations, and they were aware of it.

Comment: Re:And on the plus side... (Score 1) 328

by Jane Q. Public (#48649271) Attached to: 11 Trillion Gallons of Water Needed To End California Drought

Can you figure out the rest?

Yes, I certainly can, and the answer is no.

Guess what? Oregon and Washington make use of that water. Shipping it down to California seriously diminishes quality of life for those who live there, not to mention the environmental destruction that would ensue.

Let California go broke. Hell, it is anyway. People can buy their food from elsewhere.

Comment: Re:I.D. Please (Score 1) 175

by Jane Q. Public (#48649229) Attached to: Judge: It's OK For Cops To Create Fake Instagram Accounts

And if so, what is the liability for the company if they do or don't make the account viable again.

IANAL, but my understanding is that you are not generally required to go out of your way to assist the police. You are not a policeman, you aren't being paid to be one.

Even phone companies insist on payment for allowing wiretaps, or government requests for information. And even those are only mandatory because there are specific laws that say so (such as CALEA).

Comment: Interesting (Score 2) 85

by fyngyrz (#48649225) Attached to: Cuba Says the Internet Now a Priority

It'll be interesting to see how they choose to go. Perhaps they'll actually get something set up that is owned by the people, as their social system alleges a strong preference for.

It'd be fascinating to see how it works without big corporations in there making choices for them on a constant basis, if they can manage to avoid that.

Somehow, though, I keep coming back to the fact that no socialist or communist system has ever been seriously tried without some kind of de-facto dictatorship making the end goal impossible to reach. Equality is fine until the idiots who disagree want to be equal, too... All systems seem to have that particular fundamental problem. Equal unless different, otherwise ostracized.

My cynical side tells me palms will be greased, corporations will heavily engage, and your Cuban surfer will have a pretty typical bill to pay. Be delighted to be proven wrong, though.

Comment: Re:here's a real-life case to explain criminal int (Score 1) 175

by Jane Q. Public (#48649209) Attached to: Judge: It's OK For Cops To Create Fake Instagram Accounts

Ignorance of the LAW generally isn't an excuse, but mistake of FACT IS an excuse.

Unfortunately, though, we now have far too many laws, including contradictory laws. Even if somebody had their own legal library, every year some things change. A hypothetical typical, reasonable citizen could not possibly know them all, much less be reasonably expected to. They wouldn't have time to do anything else.

So here's my question: since our common law system is supposed to be based on the reasonable man principle, and it is provably not reasonable to expect the average citizen to know most laws, much less all, how could ignorance of the law NOT be a valid excuse?

Comment: Re: Why wouldn't it be? (Score 2) 175

by Jane Q. Public (#48648825) Attached to: Judge: It's OK For Cops To Create Fake Instagram Accounts

I don't think anyone has yet fought this one in the courts, so it may not stand up to judicial scrutiny, but it is most definitely used as the "stick" to convince someone to accept a plea bargain.

Have you been living under a rock the last 5 years?

Yes, prosecutors have tried to use the TOS thing as an excuse to prosecute. But that is being actively fought by EFF, EPIC, and a whole alphabet soup of other organizations acting as amici to the courts, and with actual legal defense as well.

It is pretty clear that Congress never meant the law to apply to situations like Aaron Swartz, for example. Government prosecutors have been fighting actually getting that one to court though because they know they'll lose, and they want to retain the ability to threaten people with it.

Comment: Re:Not seeing the issue here (Score 1) 175

by Jane Q. Public (#48648791) Attached to: Judge: It's OK For Cops To Create Fake Instagram Accounts

Also, and undercover cop can smoke a bowl with you and still arrest your ass for having/selling/using.

No.

Police are not allowed to break the law in order to enforce the law.

I'm not saying they never do it, but if they do, they're just as much criminals as anyone else. There is no law or principle that gives police a pass for breaking laws.

There must be more to life than having everything. -- Maurice Sendak

Working...