Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Radicalization (Score 1) 818

by TangoMargarine (#47560133) Attached to: Gaza's Only Power Plant Knocked Offline

Hamas won the election with only 44.45% of the popular vote, with about 25% of the eligible population abstaining (Palestinian legislative election, 2006 [wikipedia.org]). You're blaming all Palestinians for a choice made by less than half of the voters, which is hardly fair.

No, we're blaming it on 69.45% of the population because that further 25% you mentioned either didn't care enough or was too intimidated to vote.

Comment: Re:What about my right to search? (Score 1) 183

And quite frankly speaking, for the cases this law is intended for (let's ignore all the examples that don't support my point), the right of an individual to not have their life ruined by, say, completely made-up allegations of child abuse and rape quite clearly trumps your right of finding information I've decided I don't like.

You rephrasing the problem to cast the best light on your viewpoint does not eliminate all the people in this very comments section who are arguing the exact opposite viewpoint; ergo it is not "quite clear" at all.

It's trying to fix a social problem with a technological solution instead of a social one. Maybe people need to learn the definition of ACCUSED vs. CONVICTED. And for a lot of cases, stop and examine why cheating on your wife suddenly makes you incapable of exercising judgment in any other possible area of your life.

Also if you're a frequent Slashdot reader, you should know damn well that "what this law is intended for" and "what they use it for" are hardly ever the same. This is not new news.

Comment: Re:Correct yet misleading (Score 1) 183

Those looking for damning information should therefore look for news that the person in question was CONVICTED of X, not CHARGED WITH X.

Or we can just be incompetent twats and force Google to do our homework for us. Obviously that's the better choice.

I wait hopefully for the Pirate Bay-type website that will inevitably pop up where you can find lists of all the blocked terms.

*acquitted

Comment: Re:1 or 1 million (Score 1) 271

What exactly is keeping you from enacting your plan exactly as advertised? I'm genuinely curious.

Maybe you'd need some special kind of strip club zoning or something? Because it's legal for people to take their clothes off there, for money even. And I guess there's some requirement for that kind of thing to not be visible from the street, so you'd have to cover the windows, too.

That you might enact the changes and immediately lose most of your revenue is beside the point. If city hall gave you the necessary permits 'n whatnot, it would be your prerogative as a business owner.

To address your original argument, the legality of contracts has been a field for a very long time so apparently somebody somewhere is watching the system and wants it the way it is. Phone companies can put all the shit they want up on the screen in fine print. Not calling them on it is implied consent on the part of the regulatory agencies.

So I guess my point is that when you said, "I can't just put up anything I want and have it be legal," yes...yes you can, if you're a telecom company and nobody calls you on it. That's the pragmatic truth.

Comment: Re:War that cannot be settled (Score 1) 503

I'm kind of curious why splitting it in half is unworkable. Both sides want the fertile land, or what? So divide the fertile land in half already.

If you look at my recent posting history from last Friday you'd see more of how I see the conversation but if I post it again I'm sure I'll get in another lengthy shouting match :-/

The universe does not have laws -- it has habits, and habits can be broken.

Working...