Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:About Fucking Time (Score 1) 424

by Verdatum (#48620511) Attached to: In Breakthrough, US and Cuba To Resume Diplomatic Relations
Cuban cigars are indeed good. And in the 60s, they were pretty solidly the best. However, the embargo lasted so long, and cigar interest has had big enough explosions in the past 20 years or so that the other countries, and indeed the Cuban manufacturers themselves have figured out how to make cigars that are every bit as good in nearby regions. It'll be great whenever they finally return to the US, but it won't quite be the massive cigar-renaissance in the US that some people expect.

Comment: Re:Congressman Amash’s letter sent to Collea (Score 2) 379

Thanks for providing this, AC. I don't know what Mr. Amash is talking about. Section 309 doesn't grant any blessing of Executive Order 12333, or any other mechanism of collection. It just states that if any collection takes place without a court order, then it must be disposed of within 5 years with a few very-specific exceptions. The sky is not falling people. Do your research before you freak out based on alarmist stuff like this.

Comment: Cutting through the alarmist deceptive stuff. (Score 3, Insightful) 379

Here's the important part: "That type of collection is currently allowed under an executive order that dates back to former President Reagan, but the new stamp of approval from Congress was troubling, Amash said."

In other words, the only issue he has with this bill is that it acknowledges an Executive Order is in place. It doesn't even particularly bless it. Nothing is changing other than a slightly-less tacet approval of an order that has been around for decades. It's not a terribly long bill, check it out yourself

Comment: Wikipediocracy (Score 1) 274

by Verdatum (#48516845) Attached to: A Mismatch Between Wikimedia's Pledge Drive and Its Cash On Hand?
It seems like all of these articles trying to dig up dirt and spread controversy about Wikipedia come from It also seems like they are a very small group. All mentions of wikipediocracy in this comment section prior to this submission (under my default filter settings; forgive my laziness) are from two users, and one of them, the primary one, is the article submitter. I just have major trouble buying anything from a source whose entire mission is to criticize Wikipedia. That kinda just screams bias. This content is always coming out of wikipediocracy. I can't recall the last article posted to Slashdot critical of Wikipedia that didn't include a link from them. It feels like they are just trying to use the visibility of getting their submissions posted to Slashdot to build controversy. It isn't hard to write up a summary and get it accepted by Slashdot just by knowing to write a summary in the accepted style. People don't click the links often because it isn't very interesting, they just note "wow, people sure sound upset at Wikipedia" and don't notice that it's always this small group of people....

Comment: Transmetropolitan Adaptation (Score 2) 58

by Verdatum (#48311177) Attached to: Interviews: Ask Warren Ellis a Question
I don't know very much about comic books. With the exception of my parents' Mad Magazines and silver age Superman comics, I never got into them. Transmet has been one of very few exceptions. By about volume 3, I was rather terrified that this might get horribly adapted into a movie. I just couldn't imagine any way the story could be decently converted into a 90-120 minute format. The animated series adaptation idea, on the other hand, rather intrigued me. I was bummed to see it fall through; the animation looked quite promising (I seem to recall Chris Prynoski/Titmouse Inc. was somehow involved, but can't find confirmation on that). I realize nothing is currently in production, but is there any chance of another attempt at such an adaptation in the future?

Comment: Re: Moral Imperialism (Score 1) 475

by Verdatum (#48191403) Attached to: Manga Images Depicting Children Lead to Conviction in UK
You're more than welcome to get emotional about whatever you like. But, you are in the minority of popular opinion on this matter. Even among those informed enough to have looked into the concept, they appreciate that it is an implied power of the court (all the courts, btw, not just the supreme), it is a reasonable implication, and consider it congruent with the intentions of the drafters of the constitution.

I'm not sure I follow your claim about it only applying with the supreme rulers of the land decide it does. Not to say that various leaders didn't overstep their bounds. An easy example is Lincoln suspending habeus corpus, and then ignoring the judicial review against him on the matter. But this merely requires improved enforcement of the checks and balances in the system.

Our policy is, when in doubt, do the right thing. -- Roy L. Ash, ex-president, Litton Industries