Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Three Cheers for Zoe Quinn (Score 1) 693

by Schadrach (#48873953) Attached to: Doxing Victim Zoe Quinn Launches Online "Anti-harassment Task Force"

She's also posted e-mails on twitter with names, return e-mails and IPs from people that were literally just people calling out her poor research, no swearing or threats, which is explicitly to have her followers harass whomever sent the letter. It's also doxing which is harassment. Criticism isn't harassment, encouraging your followers to attack people and posting private e-mails with peoples names that criticize you is harassment.

The irony is that HotWheels got a Twitter suspension for doing the same thing, but with complaints he'd received from his registrar when anti-GG folks were trying to shut down 8chan by having the domain name seized.

Comment: Re:misspelling (Score 1) 693

by Schadrach (#48873869) Attached to: Doxing Victim Zoe Quinn Launches Online "Anti-harassment Task Force"

The actual details of what happened is that someone else doxxed him and started a campaign to have people file false complaints against him (How to Report Mike Cernovich to the LAPD w/o a Single Deadlift). Zoe Quinn then retweeted the doxxing. To be fair, she has tens of thousands of followers more than the person who originally did the doxxing so it's not too surprising that some people saw it on her Twitter feed and assigned her credit/blame.

One of Mike's buddies (the somewhat infamous PUA Roosh V) has since turned around and got a photo of the original doxxer, her name, and some other assorted info and posted that info, and said doxxer has decided that that makes them stalkers.

Comment: Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate (Score 1) 693

by Schadrach (#48869301) Attached to: Doxing Victim Zoe Quinn Launches Online "Anti-harassment Task Force"

You're missing an important consideration -- when it broke, the people who benefited her career went to ground and tried to stay out of sight, she instead started crying about how harassed she was and where you could donate to her patreon (which something like tripled in just a few weeks).

Comment: Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate (Score 1) 693

by Schadrach (#48869229) Attached to: Doxing Victim Zoe Quinn Launches Online "Anti-harassment Task Force"

If gaming media had responded to the actual complaints of GamerGate right off the bat, it would have diffused in a week or two. All it would have taken is stating some new policy about disclosure and recusal in the case of conflicts of interest and then actually following that policy. Instead, they responded by calling their respective audiences wailing hyper-consumer manchildren and the like. Now, we're closing in on being half a year in.

Comment: Re:Who? (Score 4, Insightful) 556

by Schadrach (#48632675) Attached to: FBI Confirms Open Investigation Into Gamergate

I, and most other pro-GG folks you'll find online will entirely agree with you that everyone that has engaged in threats and doxxing against anyone need to be tracked down and punished. I'm not worried, because I haven't done those things, nor have most other GG.

I'd love to see some kind of evidence linking the USU threat to GG though, because the threat certainly didn't mention it, and a *lot* of people hate Sarkeesian that aren't part of GG. I know you want to make every time someone says something mean to a woman a case of GG being evil, but then you have all the women that are part of GG and also get harassed (and men, but I don't think you'd consider them important enough to care about as victims). Guess who's doing that harassment? Hint: It's not GG.

Comment: Re:Who? (Score 4, Insightful) 556

by Schadrach (#48632651) Attached to: FBI Confirms Open Investigation Into Gamergate

Not really accurate. Mostly because you're pretending that #gg is doing all the threatening and doxxing.

Even if we utterly "listen and believe" the folks who claim to have been threatened and then whip out their "donate to me to show how non-sexist you are" buttons that it's exactly as bad as they claim it is, you still have more people being threatened by anti-GG folks than by GG. Of course, many of those don't count because they have the wrong genitals to count as victims, and the rest don't count because women who don't agree with anti-GG folks aren't *really* women, such as https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Or to put it another way, no one in GG has sent filled syringes or dead animals to the anti-GG crowd, or called their employers to try to get them fired from jobs wholly unrelated to the topic at hand (this is actually a surprisingly common tactic from the SJW crowd when someone disagrees with them). The anti-GG crowd has done those things.

Though I'll admit, asshole that he is, I still find it funny how many times Roguestar has been suspended from twitter.

The only things anti-GG can claim against GG are people saying mean things over the internet, and a school shooting threat that both didn't claim to be related to GG (and let's face it, there are plenty of folks who hate Anita Sarkeesian in particular and feminist speakers in general who are wholly unconnected from GG), and was deemed not to be a credible threat by law enforcement.

Comment: Re:Good. (Score 1) 311

by Schadrach (#37939326) Attached to: Julian Assange Loses Extradition Appeal

That of course, depends on how you ask your questions. "Have you ever had sex after drinking?" is different from "Has a man ever bought you drinks in an attempt to have sex with you?" versus "Has a man ever rendered you unconscious or otherwise unable to respond/resist through application of drugs or alcohol in order to have sex with you against your will?" all yield wildly different responses.

A lot of the surveys that arrive at extremely high rates of rape classify things as rape that the "victims" don't.

As was said, generally rape victims don't brag about it the following day, nor do they follow up their rape by throwing a party to show off their rapist to their friends.

Comment: Re:Good job on behalf of the hacker (Score 1) 261

by Schadrach (#36649554) Attached to: Hacker Exposes Parts of Florida's Voting Database

Explain this. Oh, also assume that those engaging in said vote coercion are going to sit you down and ask you to verify your vote in front of them, so they can see who you voted for exactly as you would. Also, that they do in fact hold your career in their hands, so failing to do so entirely will be very, very unpleasant.

You'd need a system in which you could "verify" that you voted for a specific party even if you didn't, and without it being possible for a third party watching the process to know whether you were showing your actual vote or your "boss friendly" vote.

Comment: Re:Patents (Score 2) 249

by Schadrach (#36649496) Attached to: Google's Six-Front War

Patent's goal is exactly the opposite of that though, because to get a patent you are supposed to be required to divulge exactly how your $PATENTABLE_THING functions. The alternative is Inventors keeping their methods and designs secret until someone else figures is out, rather than being given legal protection for a limited period of time in exchange for divulging their methods and designs.

The amount of time that protection lasts might be too long (especially for copyright, somewhat less so for patents), and (in particular for patents) might have expanded to cover things that it logically never should have (business method and software patents -- software is essentially by definition a formal way of describing mathematical formula that can be interpreted by a machine; math is not patentable; q.e.d. software should not be patentable, let alone be protected by both patent and copyright [is this the case for any other kind of works?]).

In case of atomic attack, all work rules will be temporarily suspended.

Working...