Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
Take advantage of Black Friday with 15% off sitewide with coupon code "BLACKFRIDAY" on Slashdot Deals (some exclusions apply)". ×

Comment Re: Easy solution (Score 1) 453

Of course it's not. That's an absolutely retarded thing to say.

Standard of living doesn't include wondering every day if the government is going to take all your possessions on some pretext. Standard of living doesn't include not being able to access random websites because the government doesn't like what they say. Standard of living doesn't include imprisoned journalists, and the chilling effect that has on reporting.

Standard of living doesn't include how much or how little security you have in the knowledge that the police can't bust into your house without at least convincing a judge they have a good reason. And finally, standard of living -- at least as measured as GDP per capita or net income per capita -- doesn't take into account the fact that getting more money, like most all things, has a decreasing marginal return in its effect on one's happiness.

Comment Re:Not possible (Score 1) 324

Even in the UK, they must prove that there is a key and that you at one point had access to it in the past year. If they prove you had access to the key in the past year, then the burden shifts to you to prove that you no longer have access to the key.

It's a bad law, but don't spread disinformation about it. And the US situation is much, much better.

Comment Re:Not possible (Score 1) 324

Care to share some links? The only thing I'm aware of that you may be referring to is that the Windows implementation of TrueCrypt has a bug where it doesn't properly exclude the hidden filesystem from search indexing or somesuch. The concept is sound. And if you're using hidden volumes, you really should be using live CDs to inspect the hidden volumes anyway.

Comment Re:The real issue (Score 1) 363

You're talking out of your posterior, anonymous dumbass.

There's no such thing as a "senior" professor. There are assistant professors, associate professors, and full professors. Both associate professors and full professors have tenure and can't be removed except for very serious cause. Assistant professors don't have tenure and can be removed for budget reasons, poor performance, etc.

There's a stupid ritual for going from assistant to associate professor. There's typically a review after 6 years to decide if you're "worthy" and a vote on whether to keep you. If they don't keep you, you get a year to wind down your research and find another job at another school. If they do keep you, you get tenure and move to "associate" level.

Moving from "associate" to "full" is much less important than getting tenure and effectively just means a small to moderate bump in pay and a cooler title. It doesn't give you an extra vote in faculty committees, more privileges on how to run your classes, or anything like that. If this guy's an associate professor, he's a professor with tenure. Waiting until he's a full professor to have this fight would do exactly nothing to improve his chances of winning.

Finally, if this is really about academic freedom, theoretically he should be able to have this fight as an assistant professor. Everybody in the academic community, including students, is supposed to have academic freedom. How that works in practice -- well, that's why we have tenure for the people with the most to lose by asserting their academic freedom.

Comment Re:Liberals (Score 1) 585

I'm not going to argue over the merits of forcing colleges to hold kangaroo courts to prosecute alleged rapists. Whether it is a good idea or not (it's not), the point is that it is not a politically neutral thing to advocate for. This is a liberal cause. Advocates are going to frame the issue as combating discrimination against women and leveling the playing field for a disadvantaged group (women). That is how the left talks and thinks, not how the right talks and thinks.

Comment Re:Liberals (Score 1) 585

Nope, you're wrong:

They advocate (ab)using Title IX to force colleges into a law enforcement role by disciplining those accused of rape. This is a circumvention of due process: courts should deal with criminal complaints, not schools. But, if you make the school do it, you can get around pesky things like rules of evidence, beyond reasonable doubt proof standards, and innocent until proven guilty.

Comment Re:Liberals (Score 4, Insightful) 585

Bullshit. This coalition is not "liberals", it probably covers a large range of political backgrounds.

Umm, dude ... look at tfa, there's a list of organizations that signed the petition at the bottom. It's a list of organizations that you can tell are almost certainly squarely on the left side of the US political spectrum just by their names.

Now, to the know-nothings thinking of responding: no, the organizations don't usually explicitly say they're liberal in their names, and some appear at first glance to be single-issue orgs, like "End Rape on Campus", but here's what's going on: the way they want to end rape on campus is probably by gutting the due process rights of those accused of rape (who are members of the patriarchy, so they don't deserve rights) and expelling anyone who makes jokes they don't like ("no means yes, yes means anal"). And for good measure probably also disciplining people who protest by holding up posters of aborted fetuses on the campus lawn for being disruptive -- they're obviously at war with women for doing that -- while allowing protests which involve carrying a mattress with you to all your classes, because that's of course not at all disruptive. These are not nonpartisan things to advocate.

None of this has much to do with actually ending rape on campus -- I'm pretty sure not wanting people to be raped is a nonpartisan cause -- but if you think organizations with names like "End Rape on Campus" aren't liberal, and organizations with names like "True Americans for Growth" and "Patriots for Law and Order" (I just made those up) aren't conservative, you haven't been paying attention to US politics for at least, oh, 10-15 years.

In short, if you can at all hear the dog whistles of US politics, the orgs in the list are all whistling "liberal" very loudly.

Comment Re:CVS or Subversion (Score 1) 325

Dude, wow. I've used both git and svn, and there's little wrong with svn. git is nicer for extremely distributed projects, yes, but 15 people is not extremely distributed. They'll probably have about 10 people working on the trunk and 1-5 people on experimental branches. That's not a situation that is going to require git's advanced branching/merging capabilities.

And in any case, get a grip. We're talking about version control systems, not insulting your personal honor.

Comment Re:Big Sister is watching (Score 1) 781

Corporations are extremely paranoid about not offending everyone ever -- well, any liberals ever, anyway; Google came out in support of gay marriage. ANYway...

If you want to read an account of a project handling offense-seekers in exactly the right way, read this:

That project tells the vigilante thought police exactly where they can shove it :)

Comment Re:Your laws ignore my rights (Score 1) 399

A weakness was that there was shadow control by the Communist party (Politburo) behind the scenes.

No, the "weakness" was that if you tried to run for election without the permission of the Communist Party, you would immediately be arrested, convicted in a show trial, and murdered. Once this stopped being the case, in 1989, the country quickly disintegrated as its political system was not built to withstand the turbulence of democratic elections.

Numeric stability is probably not all that important when you're guessing.