Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

Comment: Holistic (Score 3, Insightful) 33

by dreamchaser (#49515783) Attached to: How Security Companies Peddle Snake Oil

No point product or product line of point products is a 'security solution.' They are part of the equation, but only a holistic approach that encompasses user training, proper design, constant vigilance, and yes the right point products can really be called a 'solution', and even then I tend to avoid the term. I'll speak to solutions for particular problems, for example web filtering or fire-walling, but I try to lead my clients to understand that only a complete top to bottom approach will even come close to providing them with the security they need. Even then, it's a game of leap frog. The bad actors will always be back with sneakier malware, more artful attacks, etc.

Comment: Re: Idiotic (Score 1) 553

I didn't say anything about authoritarianism. That is your argument. I'm talking about proper legal due process.

Did the Nazis give the Jews they killed fair trials? Yes or no?

Am I an advocate of fair trials? Yes or no?

Okay... so kindly don't suggest I'm a Nazi like some fucking 12 year old that is having their FIRST argument on the internet and doesn't know that Godwin's law is actually a cautionary reminder that comparing people you disagree with to Hitler or nazis is a fucking ignorant and counter productive and childish thing to do.

Now... Try again... this time without suggesting that I'm a nazi just for saying that due process is a relevant factor.

Address MY argument about proper courts. The Nazis for example if they tried jews at all were using an unfair court system or a kangaroo court to convict the jews. If they had used a fair court system and only executed people that were convicted... it is not very likely they would have been able to genocide anyone.

Think about it.

If you have a problem with the US court system, then that is an important issue. Lets talk about that. But that discussion has NOTHING to do with executions. Once your issue with the court system is addressed, I expect that line of argument to be concluded. I also expect whatever standards you want applied to executions to be applied more broadly to the rest of the legal system. If your rules don't cause systemic collapse of the court system through inefficiency then possibly it is sustainable. If it does then obviously your standards are not practical.

Comment: Re:Idiotic (Score 1) 553

The US founders executed people quite freely so saying the constitution forbids it is a little rich. No official interpretation of the US constitution has been read to forbid executions in general.

So that's just bunk.

As to your notion that you're not a hypocrite because you ideology thinks executions are icky and have cooties, that isn't a defense against a hypocrisy charge. You need to cite some logic here. Saying "but I have beliefs and opinions!" is no defense.

As to limiting my statement, justice systems often don't have limits as to what they can do or rule upon. They limit themselves perhaps within their jurisdiction. But even then sometimes they presume to rule the whole world. It is the nature of justice that it is defined by the power and ambition of the people that wield it.

Comment: Re:Idiotic (Score 1) 553

As to people committing acts in the heat of the moment, then they are second degree murderers and not subject to execution.

We have tiers of murder.

1. Manslaughter:
This is where you didn't intend to kill someone and you didn't even intend to hurt them. You just made a mistake. Like killing a pedestrian with your car. Ooops. Manslaughter.

2. Third degree murder:
This is where you intend to hurt someone but not kill them. You get into a bar fight and punch some guy... only he dies unexpectedly.

3. Second Degree murder:
Here you get caught up in the moment and in a fit of passion try to kill someone on the spot without thinking about it. Say you come in on your wife or husband cheating on you and you decide to kill one of them on the spot.

4. First Degree Murder:
Here you methodically and deliberately plan someone else's death. This often involves poison, ambushing people, killing them in their sleep, etc.

Then you have aggravated murders which takes whatever degree the murder was and amps it up a bit. Think of it like a First Degree PLUS murder or a Second Degree PLUS murder. Anyway, this means the murder was especially nasty in some way. Maybe you cut the guy's head off, put it on a spike, and then danced around town with it? Something gross typically.

The people that get executed are the sorts that committed multiple first degree murders and often multiple first degree aggravated murders.

They are not misunderstood snowflakes. They will chew your face off just to hear you scream.

Comment: Re:Idiotic (Score 1) 553

Don't assume you know me. You're can't read my mind right in front me much less through the internet.

As to my logic being robotic... in what way? I could say with the same authority that your logic is fish like because it is slimy and stupid. :D

Make a falsifiable argument so that we can evaluate the value of other people's words.

As to your stab in the dark that I like being ordered around, to the contrary... I have been cited by many people as something of a rebel. I don't like doing what other people tell me to do and I even take some pleasure in doing what I want even if it does break the rules.

I'm a clever person. I'm very good at following the letter of the law but not the spirit when that suits me. Or following the spirit but not the letter when I feel the letter is bullshit. I also am quite good at simply not getting caught.

I'd be someone you'd not want to go evil. Because I'd probably get away with it. Take murder. I am always amazed at how bad so many murderers are in the news. I see what they did and how they got caught and I think "wow, what a bunch of incompetent boobs." I then go over the facts in my head for fun and find out the earliest mistake they appear to have made and rewrite the narrative not get caught.

Do I so much as hurt kittens? No. They're too adorable. I'm a nice guy. I just like a little independence.

Now why did you think someone like me was a big supporter of authoritarian governments? Because I explained what "murder" means which is a mostly legal concept which means the government defines what is and is no murder. It is a fact they define such things. I don't have to take it seriously but hat is what governments do.

Comment: Re:Surveillance Society (Score 1) 249

by Karmashock (#49514073) Attached to: The Upsides of a Surveillance Society

As to refurbished batteries, it is all about knowing what you're doing.

I believe what he did was change the battery chemistry. I can get you a link if you like. It appears to restore the batteries. I think they have lower capacity but they operate normally again.

It is apparently a very common thing to do to SLA batteries.

Comment: Re:Well done! (Score 4, Informative) 458

by Tokolosh (#49512907) Attached to: George Lucas Building Low-Income Housing Next Door To Millionaires

You understand that there is essentially no correlation between school spending and student achievement?

https://www.americanprogress.o... or try some googling.

The inflation-adjusted cost of schooling has tripled since 1970, with no discernible improvement in education outcome.

Comment: Re:The natural result... (Score 1) 165

The original statement was monopoly on "force", not monopoly on a specific type of weapon.

You are wasting my time.

The history of asymmetric warfare has shown us that one does not need the biggest and fanciest weapons to contest the government's ability to establish a monopoly on force.

And the history of asymmetric warfare shows that the weaker side usually loses.

Comment: They said their router would work with DD-WRT... (Score 1) 91

by Karmashock (#49511523) Attached to: D-Link Apologizes For Router Security

... It didn't. It installed sort of but it didn't work. The firmware was all screwed up and half the features had to be manually tweaked by modifying files using the terminal. Seriously pissed because the only reason I bought the damn thing was because they said it was DD-WRT compatible. Fuckers.

I'm burned on D-link for a good long time because of that.

Comment: Re:I'll let them merge... IF... (Score 1) 86

The only thing I care about is the wire itself. I care nothing for the tv service or the licenses. That's all dying anyway. The cable is all that is relevant. And what I want more than anything is for there to be a competitive environment for last mile ISP service. And for that, we need as much competition in the last mile as possible. I want more cable run... not less.

Comment: Re:Idiotic (Score 1) 553

Yep. That's how sentencing works. Same as with putting people in prison. I don't put someone in prison for what they will be but what they were and are. Same thing.

What if I told you that putting a young man in prison would hurt his career opportunities? That he might have been a famous poet or painter or scientist or politician. But you put him jail for knifing someone and now none of that is going to happen because he's going to spend the better part of his life in jail.

How sorry do you feel about that? That is precisely how sorry I feel about throwing the switch.

You commit multiple first degree murders... you're not a diamond. You're shit. Case closed. Stick your head in this noose and walk off that plank.

Next issue.

In a consumer society there are inevitably two kinds of slaves: the prisoners of addiction and the prisoners of envy.

Working...