Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:It ought to be legal to scam ISIS (Score 3, Insightful) 206 206

If it was legal to scam them they would be flooded with offers from so many girls it would either bankrupt them or they would stop recruiting because of all the scams.

I would suggest the prosecutors exercise their prosecutorial discretion to not prosecute against people for non-violent crimes committed against overseas violent enemies/lawless violent groups.

At some point the noise of all the scammers/fakers could drown out those whom terrorist orgs could "legitimately" recruit, therefore interfering with those groups' ability to recruit.

Comment Re:Dubious assumptions are dubious (Score 1) 301 301

We shouldn't be spending shit tons of cash to placate irrational fears. What s next?

Who are you to define certain concerns as 'irrational'? A study or two definitely does not establish that.

What s next? Coloured neighborhoods.

In a de-facto manner, such things already exist, so it's little different than what we have. Often people of the same ethnicity tend to settle together and also aren't necessarily very welcoming of outsiders, either, but the attraction to neighborhoods where people look like yourself is enough to create neighborhoods where different ethnicities are concentrated.

And you definitely do get neighborhoods that are 99% X where X might be White, Asian, Black, etc, and such areas tend to stay that way more or less, and any small minorities tend to concentrate tightly, presumably for mutual support.

Especially where you will have landlords accepting, rejecting, or favoring prospective tenants based on age, Or they might be picking tenants based on criteria without saying as much.

In Tokyo, many, perhaps most neighborhoods and housing units the landlord has a No Gaijin policy.

So realistically, if you are a foreigner, or a person of X descent, then there are certain lists of neighborhoods where you are likely to wind up, and other places that might not be technically off-limits, but an "outsider" would not be welcome.

Comment Slashdot degraded into clickbait? (Score 1) 198 198

ARIN IPv4 Addresses Run Out Tomorrow

Not really.


Tunnelbroker or whatever site's "countdown gadget" is only an illustrative approximation anyways. The only entity that can really say ARIN IPv4 addresses run out is ARIN.

We are also guaranteed they won't run out tomorrow, since ARIN doesn't make allocations on non-business days.

It's also pretty unlikely there will be 200 /24 requests answered on Monday.

And even after that, there are certain reserved ranges that won't be run out.

As for having "unmeetable requests", the unmet requests policy first activated at the very beginning of July, that ARIN had requests for IP addresses that could not be met.

Comment Re:Balancing Act (Score 1) 231 231

The insurance will be split, for 100% autonomous cars it makes sense for the manufacturer to handle the public liability insurance

Not really..... only, for liability resulting from the manufacturer's negligence. Your autonomous car can still cause an accident and you be responsible for not ensuring that it is properly maintained and inspected, OR you chose to travel under somewhat hazardous conditions such as severe weather under which it is to be understood by you the owner, that are conditions where any driver is less capable and more likely to cause damage, And there is always a certain amount of risk involved which you accept responsibility for by taking that risk.

Also, people tend to keep their vehicles beyond their manufacturer's warranty, after which time, it is no longer promised to be fit for the purpose and free from defects, anyways. It is ultimately the buyer's responsibility to understand what they are putting on the road and to make sure that it is safe to their satisfaction, Because they have to take responsibility for it, OTHERWISE they would have no incentive not to run Autonomous vehicle Version 1.0 that has known defects, without upgrading, and without participating in a manufacturer software module recall on a timely basis.

Comment Re:Balancing Act (Score 1) 231 231

That is the devil's bargain they make for being the provider of a product required by law.

Only the liability insurance is required by law. The other types of insurance are optional, AND autonomous cars will still be subject to the other risks, such as the windshield shattering after being hit by debris, or being broken into, or being hit by another motorist.

Comment Re:Dubious assumptions are dubious (Score 1) 301 301

My wife and sister, in contrast, are now uncomfortable about things like getting a late train home and then walking back from the station in pitch black conditions

This could explain part of their result: In regions of reduced lighting, they found, there was no increase in burglary, auto theft, robbery, violence, or sexual assault

Switching the lights off in places reduced nighttime traffic in those areas, because people are now avoiding those areas when lights are off: such things did not increase so much.

The team found that brighter streets had no noticeable impact on crime, but they did make people feel better.

Should the gov't be saving money by making people feel unsafe?

Comment Re:"...the same as trespassing." (Score 1) 1176 1176

Texas is the only state that allows deadly force to be used in defense of property. This is a case where Texas is wrong and the rest of the country is right.

Not really.....

An otherwise law abiding person who shoots an intruder/invader that is definitely a criminal thief/vandal who was wrecking their life or making it not possible for them to enjoy their property/life for fear of everything being taken away definitely doesn't belong in jail.

To say otherwise is valuing the criminal's living state above their victims' lives.

A huge percentage of the people who would be willing to confront you and you need to defend property against are people who are also likely to take somebody's life.

It's much better for the criminal's life to be in danger and victims in their own home to have all possible self-help options legal and available, as this provides a stronger deterrent against committing crimes in the first place.

Comment Re:"...the same as trespassing." (Score 1) 1176 1176

I can use non-lethal force. There are lots of options available.

If you use non-lethal force, then the criminal can respond with lethal force, OR force that would require you to use lethal force in order to defend your life.

A claim of Self-Defense does not protect you from criminal prosecution in that case ---- if you instigated the threat against yourself by attempting non-lethal force, Then the option of claiming self-defense is no longer available, So this is even worse.... you would be putting yourself in danger with no lawful option to use lethal force if the criminal changes his mind and decides to kill.

Comment Re: "...the same as trespassing." (Score 1) 1176 1176

If someone throws a ball onto (or over) your property, is that person tresspassing?

If they intentionally threw it over, then it is an infringement. If they threw it over and they broke something, then they are responsible to pay for damages.

If they threw a ball onto your property then ran onto your property to attempt to go retrieve it, THEN they are trespassing, especially if they went over a fence or other obstructions at your perimeter to walk onto your property.

Comment Re:Third Dimension (Score 1) 1176 1176

That is too high.

Say instead: up to the level of commercial aircraft UNLESS the operator is a licensed airplane or helicopter pilot, or explicit permission is obtained from property owner in advance.

Also, the manufacturers should be required to adopt a standard that allows a property owner to place beacons at corners of their property and automatically deny entry to all automatic drones.

The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. But the opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth. -- Niels Bohr