Is that actually using i outside the loop, or are you just implicitly defining i after the loop? I don't know the answer, but based on my knowledge of JS, either could be the case. The latter is not a scope issue.
Destiny and me woke up at the same time the next morning. We cuddled a while, made love again, then made coffee and took a shower together while the robots made us steak and cheese omelettes and toast and hash browns. Destiny put on the news. There was something about a problem in one of the company's boat factories; some machinery malfunctioned and killed a guy. I sure took notice of that! They didn't really have much information about it, though
If we just put the trillion in the bank at 4% interest rate, you would get 40 billion dollars a year, It could pay 1 million people 40K a year. None of these projects ever create even a large fraction of a million jobs. Even if it uses the money to hire half million people to dig a trench and the other half to close it up it would provide greater economic impact to the economy than such boondongles.
As I and other have already pointed out, we are not blaming her for becoming a victim.
There's an entire thread titled "Why yes, we should blame the victim here", with the root post rated +5 Insightful. Yeah, people are blaming her.
Oh, well, and since we all know that a name is always 100% accurate and tells us everything...
Did you actually read the thread, or just the headline and thought "oh, that must support my position?" Because I read it, and some of them make a very good point regarding the context of this particular situation.
But quick, respond with a No True Slashdotter about how those are fringe elements and marginal and don't represent the views of a large portion of Slashdot.
Nah, I'll leave the strawmen and other forms of fallacious thinking to you, since you're so much better at it than I am.
She should at least sue Al Gore, since he invented the damn thing!
Before someone else jumps on this, the actual quote was "I took the initiative in creating the internet".
So, it's "created", not "invented". Pedants will take one to task for getting that wrong.
Yea, about that...
Can you sue automakers for car crashes not caused by defect?
Can you sue gun makers for deaths?
Can you sue the financial industry for losses in the market?
Citation, citation, citation.
Here, I'll get one for you:
The purpose of the act is to prevent firearms manufacturers and dealers from being held liable for negligence when crimes have been committed with their products. However, both manufacturers and dealers can still be held liable for damages resulting from defective products, breach of contract, criminal misconduct, and other actions for which they are directly responsible in much the same manner that any U.S. based manufacturer of consumer products (i.e. automobiles, appliances, power tools, etc.) are held responsible
So... why is it the people who upload and host this stuff do not have consequences?
I think that's a legitimate TOR angle, actually. In order to leverage the law you need to know where they physically are. TOR hides that, per design.
There's a case here, folks.
No there isn't.
Balaclavas hide identity, too, but you never see a clothmaker sued when someone robs a bank.
In US law it has long been recognized that private letters between two living people cannot be published without consent.
Consent from one party, or both?
I'd like to see that precedent cited.
If you are going to take nude pics, know how to handle data properly and securely. DONT take them with a device that is connected to the internet.
Polaroids and VHS, baby
Streisand Effect will fix that.
Probably already has.
Civil engineers are sued when they make mistakes designing a road.
Yea, but they don't get sued for the things people use the roads they designed for. Which is what's happening here.
Nobody's "giving a free pass" to the revenge porn site. We're just not talking about it, because the revenge porn people, in this particular case, aren't the ones making a public ass of themselves. "This woman" is, and thus, shall be the subject of our collective ridicule.
In that, hey, how sad is it that she's making herself look worse than a revenge porn site?
Read around a bit more. There are quite a few posts here that are putting all the blame on her
I've read plenty to know that even if a margin of the population here are doing that, you're still wrong to assume that's the general tone, as it appears you are doing.
Yea - a law student. Who apparently doesn't actually understand the law. Again, not helping her own case here, both literally and metaphorically.
No, she does not understand Tor, which is different then not understanding the law. Going after companies who seem to be aiding in crime or advertising services that make criminal activity easier or undetectable is well within the law. This is why you can go after companies that say sell devices for getting free cable.
She doesn't understand a thing, so she sues it. That indicates a piss-poor understanding of Western legal practices. A good law student would have done a tiny bit of research before going all sue-happy. Hell, a halfway intelligent person in general would do that. Only morons sue what they fail to understand.
You know, as a close relative of a victim of violent sexual assault, I take offense to your supposition that what my family member went through is exactly the same as what this woman is doing to herself. Don't bandy about the term "rape" for everything you disagree with, as it desensitizes people from the severity of that particular crime.
Ah yes, the old 'it is not as bad as rape so it is ok' argument.
Well, since I never said that, fuck you.
What I said is that when douchebags compare every-fucking-thing to rape, it desensitizes the public to the concept, which does harm to rape victims by marginalizing their suffering. Just because it happens to a woman doesn't make it rape, and if you disagree, go down to your local battered women shelter and ask them what they think about it. I'd recommend you wear a cup.
So how bad does something have to be before victim blaming is a problem?
You perceiving something one way does not make it so. As I and other have already pointed out, we are not blaming her for becoming a victim. We're blaming her for trying to resolve the situation in what is one of the most dumbass ways possible.
As someone who is also close to multiple victims of violent rape, I take offense at your attitude that anything not as bad does not count since it trivializes all other forms of crimes related to sex. Which also makes it easier to trivialize rape.
Yea, keep intentionally or ignorantly misinterpreting my words and meaning. That'll show me.
So if they go after Tor for a service someone else provided using Tor, isn't that like going after gun manufacturers for the murders their products help commit?
Not trying to start a flame war... I'd have a really good laugh if Texas set some legal standard for going after gun manufacturers in the US with this.
So much for not trying to start a flame war.
Anyway, the precedent is already set, at least in terms of firearms manufacturers: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P...
Short answer, no, you can't sue them for what people do with their products.