Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
What's the story with these ads on Slashdot? Check out our new blog post to find out. ×

Comment Re:your speech borders treason (Score 0) 67

Oh, but I am willing to kill off corporations. Since corporations are the creation of the state, and are sanctioned by said state, the state has every right to dissolve the corporation for gross violation of public trust, trust the corporation is entrusted with by the state upon creation.

We do allow them too much authority over government, which is why I oppose corporations (and unions) from contributing to political causes, either directly or indirectly. We call these subversions of public servants "lobbyists".

I am not your envisioned version of Libertarian. I believe that corporations can and should be killed off. It is the only way to hold them accountable for their actions.

Comment Re:The Power of the State. (Score 1) 246

Your view, there are no rights except by convention (legal or otherwise), which are thereby granted by government, which can then take those rights it grants away by any arbitrary reason it can come up with. Which is exactly what Tyranny looks like. You're nothing but a slave to the tyranny you believe in.

Comment Re:your speech borders treason (Score 1) 67

We have great consumer protections on US made goods. Everything else imported not so much. China doesn't care if there is malware on phones, or poison in the pet food or anything else. The only fix for this is to hold the IMPORTERS and DISTRIBUTORS here in the US fully responsible, and put them out of business. The problem is, there is too much money involved in the politics of killing off corporations.

Comment Re:The Power of the State. (Score 1) 246

I beg to differ. Rights as I see them are outlined in gross form here:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted ...

Rights exist apart from governance. Governance is supposed to "secure" (protect) these rights. The fact that you don't understand how any of this works makes me sad for our society in the future.

But I understand, you remove "creator" from this, and there is nothing to base "rights" upon, and that leads us to tyranny. If there is no higher power than government, and mobs (power by force) then we are doomed to tyranny and mob rule.

Comment Re:The Power of the State. (Score 2) 246

A right isn't protection. I have the right to keep and bear arms. IT requires NOTHING from anyone to practice. It doesn't require government. It doesn't require anyone else to do anything. It exists on its own, apart from anyone or anything else. I have that right if I am alone on an island.

The point of government is supposed to be to secure(protect) the rights of individuals, NOT rule over men. The moment government compels someone to do something against his conscience, it is necessarily harming him.

Relating this back to the original topic, the "harm" caused by the boy sending dick pic to a girl was miniscule. It may have been unwanted and may have been a threat (implied or directed) or just clumsy flirting (bad taste), but that requires judgment, not rules of absolutes (zero tolerance). I oppose zero tolerance laws simply because the are an over reaction to bad judgements and end up worse position.

Comment Re:The Power of the State. (Score 1) 246

A right is something each individual has against the mob. Government is classified as a Mob.

This kind of thing is what happens when you don't understand what is, and what isn't a right. Rights exist and require nothing. You don't have a "right" to healthcare, because to give you "healthcare" denies the rights of someone else (Dr, Nurses ....) But hey, I'm a big fat mean libertarian who sees the tyranny as it encroaches.

Comment Re:"Mom and Pop" (Score 2) 468

mom-and-pop does code up an LDAP, who's to say the customer has it together on its end?

You see problem, I see opportunity. I see an excellent opportunity to expand your companies services, and earn additional revenue.

"We've coded our application so that you put your authorized LDAP query user name here, password here, the sever address here, the LDAP scope here ... Fairly simple process. If you don't know how to do that, we can send one of our consultants over and help implement LDAP in your organization, please see our Technical Sales group to define the scope of that project and get a quote together for you"

Comment Re:Programming (Score 1) 606

My take, is that all encryption is suspect. Maybe not that variation of that method right at the moment, but at some point, sometime in the future, it will have issues. When we get to quantum computers, many, if not all of the encryption techniques we have will fail.

That being said, we can agree, using informed consensus, what works for today. No, I don't listen to government only, or private sector only, or white hat only, or theoretical math guys only. I listen to all of them, and I apply the system that makes the most sense. I don't need the highest grade crypto service for my forum website. On the other hand, having the Secretary of State have a private email server being run out of a bathroom of a communal flat (apartment complex) with little or no crypto on it is problematic.

It is all about relative security with regard to the information that is being encrypted. Some shit is worth a lot more than other shit, take appropriate steps to protect the data. Whatever is "appropriate"

Comment Re:Major disconnect from layers (Score 5, Insightful) 468

I am assuming you've never had a C type person make huge IT decisions without having even consulted with IT.

In my 30+ years of experience, I've seen enough clueless C types make clueless decisions because some dude in a suit with a briefcase sold them a nice fat lie.

In our case "All it will take are a couple IP addresses and a server. No other IT is required" If it takes IP addresses and a server, it requires IT support. And in this case, the product was so fucking horrible that it requires regular (several times a week) IT support, just on back end crap from a product designed so bad that it just breaks every two weeks from design flaws.

Or this, "We've already bought it, you WILL support it" (with no additional IT funding for more IT help) multiple times over.

Or buying a mom and pop application with no Enterprise class requirements in its design. "What do you mean you don't do LDAP for authentication. There is no fucking way I'm entering 16,000 users by hand"

The issue with certain people is that they want "Shiny Pretty Technology" without caring, or wanting to know about what it actually takes to run. And it happens in enough organizations that I know that it is not an exceptional experience.

You're right, the C types don't know shit, which is why they should stay out of shit that they have no clue on. Yet they think they know better than the people who REALLY do know whats going on. In short, IT is a bastard child in most organizations, one that has more power than most of those C types actually know.

"Gort, klaatu nikto barada." -- The Day the Earth Stood Still