Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Do not negotiate with criminals (Score 1) 70

intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it

As you advocate committing crimes, I can see where you're coming from....

The laws concerning marijuana in much of the US are still morally reprehensible, encouraging people to break those laws is worse than the crime(s) of breaking those laws.

The "society" where laws are ignored will end up being, arguably, just as bad if not worse than the brutal society where people are punished "too harshly" for breaking laws.

Comment Re:Indeed (Score 1) 385

IIUC, Amen is properly interpreted as meaning "So let it be" (traditionally "so be it", but subjunctive I is rarely used anymore).

As such, Amen is not the proper resoponse to an accurate portrayal of a historical fact. "yay verily" would be more accurate.

I was agreeing with this part of the quote:

You guys aren't fit to name the people who were there at the Internet's day one.

Sorry if I didn't make it obvious enough.

Comment Re:Indeed (Score 1) 385

... poperatzo is a douche

What to say?! "Takes one to know one!"? Or, perhaps, "So says the douche!"?

Disclaimer: I have no idea who poperatzo is! But He/She sounds like an adult being slammed by a bunch of juvies who have taken of the cry of "Don't trust anyone over 19!"

Comment Re:Indeed (Score 1) 385

No, you're not. You weren't born on the Internet's "day one". I was there on the other hand, and the people I knew back then would have had pieces of Gamergaters/MRAs/KiAs/and /pol in their crap. You guys aren't fit to name the people who were there at the Internet's day one.

If I was particularly religious, I would say "Amen". Ah, I'll say it anyway: "Amen"!

Comment Barbarians at the Gate... (Score 1) 97

This is another example of what I call "barbarians at the gate". I didn't come up with that phrase. I don't remember where I first came into contact with that phrase.

The idea, as best as I can recall, is something like this: The empire won't fall simply because of the increasing decadence of the empire. It falls because it eventually gets weak enough that the barbarians, ever-present at the gate, can bring it down with a simple raid.

These people are "barbarians at the gate". They don't care that they are trying to destroy the Internet. They are after chaos or, maybe, simply trying to "earn" a dollar. They are no different to ISIS. That group of fanatics trying to force the world to submit to their stupidly strict interpretation of Islam. Or to those hate-mongers in many forums who should probably have "Poor Impulse Control" tattooed on their forehead... i.e. Barbarians.

I think I first came across the phrase in a book by Larry Niven.

Comment Re:one should note: governments are same everywher (Score 1) 219

...government in US kill people in their homeland (cops killing innocent people)...

If you think this is any sort of "official policy", even remotely, a simple google search will correct that ignorance. well as abroad (bombing Middle East).

Well, the terrorists were targeting the US; now they are targeting each other. Not ideal, but, hey, they need to kill somebody!

to sum up! ...

You are silly.

"We don't care. We don't have to. We're the Phone Company."