Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Prep for the CompTIA A+ certification exam. Save 95% on the CompTIA IT Certification Bundle ×

Comment Re:Betteridge's law of headlines (Score 1) 264

According to Betteridge's law of headlines: No.

Yawn... years later, there are still oh-so-clever people kneejerk yelling "Betteridge" in response to every headline phrased as a question, not understanding what the original point of Betteridge's law actually was.

Hint; this isn't it, it's a (probably) legitimate question, and even if it was a crap attempt to kick-start a discussion by phrasing it in that form, it's still not an example of Betteridge.

Comment Re:Brought about by the internet? (Score 1) 714

Well, before you start foaming, let's try to find out what these laws entail and how these laws came into existence, shall we?

Germany actually has replaced its "original" Anti-anti-semite law with a more encompassing law against Volksverhetzung. Which is basically an anti-hate crime law. Sounds familiar? Maybe? Just in case it doesn't, you might want to read this.

Austria, on the other hand, didn't bother to invalidate and modernize its Verbotsgesetz. There you still have the original one in effect. It may be a little known fact that after WW2 it was not just Germany alone that was considered the criminal. Austria was in it too. Kinda like the junior partner. And just like Germany it was separated into 4 areas, split up between the four winning Allies, the USA, Soviet Union, England, France.

Another little known fact is that Austria, just like Germany, could not really issue any meaningful laws without the express consent of those "victorious powers". More often than not, laws came into existence on behalf of the four powers.

Austria was occupied from 1945 to 1955. That law came into existence in 1947. Now take a wild guess whose idea it was.

"But this one goes to eleven." -- Nigel Tufnel