Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

Calling a Pink Floyd album "similiar to Division Bell" is a compliment now? Wow times have changed.

Sure there is. How do you think the Tamil Tiger rebels aren't a problem any more? Or Japanese militarists? Or Nazis? Or Communists for that matter, the Cold War was still a war.

BTW the Communists had a plan to win the Cold War too, one that included launching every nuke in their inventory in the first hour of the war. Never a word about that one, it's one of those there inconvenient truths.

I love how you totally ignore the fact that they lied their asses off about Obamacare because they knew we'd never agree to it. We have to pass it and THEN find out what's in it. Oh, it's full of lies...what a surprise!

Not a big surprise you're agreeing with nutbag extremists. Take axes to GPS satellites, that'll show them! This is why left-wing ideas sound so bizarre to people outside the bubble.

You might as well say that the KKK has a point. They're on the same side of the argument, just a bit different. The crazy is strong with both of them.

Earlier this week I put in a request for pen-testing a new server I had completed. I think it's secure, but that isn't my area of expertise, so I have the experts kick the shit out of my server to see if anything falls over.

"The Beginning of Wisdom is Calling Things by Their Right Names"

-- Chinese saying attributed to Confucius

Wow!

I have been using Pandora Radio at work for over a year now. I have "trained" one station such that I skip tracks only about once or twice a day.

It helps me focus. Perhaps it blocks out other distractions, I really don't know. All I know is that I have much better focus when the music is playing.

As for what music: it's quite a wide range. New Age/Celtic/Progressive Rock/Folk/Folk Rock, etc..

Because video game music is unlistenable drek that is pumped out by less-than-talented musicians?

The point at which you know you're getting good at a language: when advertisements start annoying you.

More doom & gloom from the 'no perspective' crowd. It's all words, it's what doom & gloom wishes were true.

If it were actually this bad, people would be mass emigrating to other countries. This is what happens in other countries that are actual cesspools instead of imaginary cesspools. Where do they come? America, yup. If they can get it. Funny enough, it's a pain in the ass to do it legally.

But they won't let you keep old citizenship if you decide to become a citizen of the USA.

That's absolutely not true. At one time ('80's I think), on becoming a natualized US citizen, you had to hand over your foreign passport. Not now.

Here is what the State Department has to say on the matter

You're kidding. Have you actually experienced them? The tax issues are mindboggling in their complexity because the US law is written for US institutions and concepts.

The complexity issue can be solved at a cost of <$1000/year.

Get an accountant to prepare your taxes. I am resident in the USA and have rental properties in the UK, so my taxes are fairly complex. If I had more income from the UK, the tax filings would be more complex, but really, it's not that hard as long as you are prepared to pay a professional.

Jizzbug is correct, you always have to file

umm, No (unless there are special rules that apply to non-resident citizens)

No. My equivalences are exactly the same. I am not applying state laws to an international framework, I am applying long standing international legal principles to a an international framework. when a country does something stupid, like you describe, you have two choices - International treaties and the penalties spelled out in them, or WAR.

Perhaps you have heard of it.

Which is exactly what is happening right now with ISIL. When countries get out of hand, we have two choices - diplomatic punishment or military punishment. You on the other hand, seem to think we can call their mommy and have them punish them.

Yes, the US works with Interpol to stop cybercrime. Bit you demonstrate total ignorance of how that works. You've been watching way too many movies and think that's how it works. If you were aware of how Interpol actually you would realize it proves me correct, as they take a lot of effort to avoid extra-territorial jurisdiction.

I am not outside of my depth, I work in the legal field, and my stepfather is a defense lawyer for international criminals. I have had long discussions about what is and is not legal - and which countries obey those laws and which countries ignore them.

So to educate someone that clearly knows very little about how international law works, particularly Interpol, here is a short education

1. Interpol is not some kind of magic international police. Countries - and not all of them - willing sign treaties, agreeing with a set of rules govern how it works. The participating countries then change their own laws to do what the treaty says. Note treaties, not national laws control Interpol. The treaties in question (like all such treaties) specify what happens if the country signs the treaty but does not change their own laws in a timely fashion.

2. Interpol does NOT HAVE ANY POLICE. There are no Interpol cops. No SWAT, not even traffic cops. They provide training and communication between national police. That's it. So when a crime takes place in say Sweden, committed by a band of criminals that reside in Finland, Sweden does not send cops to Finland. Finland does not send cops to Sweden. Sweden investigates, gets an extradition order, and sends information to their Interpol office. That office sends it to all their other offices, and notifies Finland. In Finlnd, the standard, regular Finish police go and arrest the criminals. Once the Finish cops arrest them, the criminals go through the Finish legal system, where they are either extradited to Sweden or a Finish judge say no.

You live in a movie based fantasy world that does not exist. There are NO EXTRA TERRITORIAL INTERPOL COPS.

While it's true that "The various US federal government agencies are all filled with *people*, all different kinds of people." this doesn't mean that they are trustworthy. The FCC, in particular, has done some rather vile things to support "its constituents" (i.e., the money making groups it is supposed to regulate). And the current chairman is not particularly trustworthy, being closely associated with the MPAA.

OTOH, the FCC has less direct reason to abuse the general citizenry than do the large monopoly ISPs. So while I hardly trust them, I still trust them more than, say Verizon, or AT&T.