Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Image

Woman Wins Libel Suit By Suing Wrong Website 323

Posted by samzenpus
from the close-enough dept.
An anonymous reader writes "It appears that Cincinnati Bengals cheerleader Sarah Jones and her lawyer were so upset by a comment on the site TheDirty.com that they missed the 'y' at the end of the name. Instead, they sued the owner of TheDirt.com, whose owner didn't respond to the lawsuit. The end result was a judge awarding $11 million, in part because of the failure to respond. Now, both the owners of TheDirty.com and TheDirt.com are complaining that they're being wrongfully written about in the press — one for not having had any content about Sarah Jones but being told it needs to pay $11 million, and the other for having the content and having the press say it lost a lawsuit, even though no lawsuit was ever actually filed against it."

Comment: How to defeat this (Score 4, Interesting) 206

by zymurgy_cat (#33099166) Attached to: Reading Terrorists' Minds About Imminent Attack
1) Train terrorists.
2) Put them in sleeper cells.
3) Set up weapons/equipment/etc. without their knowledge.
4) Run "activation" drills often so they don't know if it's the real thing or not. This will condition them. It can also test detection methods.
5) Activate them for the "real thing", but do not give details until right before they are to execute the attack. Emails, text messages, phone calls, coded written instructions left with equipment or plans can be used.
6) Those caught before receiving last minute instructions provide useless intelligence and can be used as decoys or sacrificial losses to tie up law enforcement and misdirect them. Consider using decoys (unknown to themselves) with false information to delay and confuse law enforcement.

Comment: This is why we need a carbon tax (Score 2, Insightful) 384

by zymurgy_cat (#33064414) Attached to: Chevy Volt Not Green Enough For California
As Frances Cairncross and others have argued, the best way to figure out this whole issue is a carbon tax. Tax fuels based on their carbon content. Refund it back through payroll tax credits (or other means) for lower income people who will feel more of an impact. Direct proceeds to mass transit or basic R&D for fuel efficiency/alternative fuels/etc. Then get the hell out of the way and let the free market work its magic. People saying, "Man, $5/gallon is expensive, maybe I should buy a more fuel efficient car or take the bus" is a hell of a lot more effective than arguing over whether this car or that car should qualify for this tax credit or that HOV lane permission.

I don't know why people don't like this. Conservatives can feel all warm and fuzzy about the free market and liberals can feel all warm and fuzzy about encouraging people to make the most environmentally friendly choices. Warm fuzzies all around.

Comment: Acquisitions aren't even good for shareholders (Score 3, Insightful) 156

by zymurgy_cat (#32804130) Attached to: Customers Question Tech Industry's Takeover Spree
Something like half of all mergers/acquisitions fail to generate the returns expected. In such cases, it's usually the shareholders of the company being bought that reap the benefit (assuming they can dump whatever stock of the acquiring company they receive as part of their payment).

Think about it. It's basically a coin flip that company A buying company B will result in any benefit to the shareholders of A. If shareholders were truly wise, they'd tell management to just give them the cash they would have spent on acquiring a company. They'd make out better in the long run.

Comment: Why stop with just outputs? (Score 3, Insightful) 288

by zymurgy_cat (#32135330) Attached to: FCC Allows Blocking of Set-Top Box Outputs
I'm surprised the MPAA hasn't asked for the ability to disable your friends' cars so they can't drive over to watch the movie at your house. That way, they'd have to pay to watch it at their houses. Obviously, for those without cars, they'd need a waiver to cap their knees so they can't walk, bike, or rollerskate over to your house. A waiver to jam sticks in wheelchair spokes should also be granted.

Comment: Do they do the same thing with vehicles? (Score 1) 369

by zymurgy_cat (#32008856) Attached to: Computer Competency Test For Non-IT Hires?
If they use/provide company vehicles, would they test potential employees to see if they know how to change brake pads or replace a timing belt?

Relying on some test to see if people know not to open an email from "Hot Sex Machine" with a "cool app you must see now" is lazy IT administration. I know that small businesses often cannot afford an IT person, but to rely on some test is bad management. Are they going to retest people every year to make sure they're up on the latest scams or social engineering techniques? Will they pay people to take the time to educate themselves on this stuff?

I'm sorry, but this would be like requiring employees to provide their own safety equipment, develop their own lock out/tag out procedures, and maintain their own confined space entry plans. It'd be like saying, "We don't have to implement safety guards because we test whether people know not to stick their fingers in moving machinery." Such things are the responsibility of management. If management provides a tool (a computer, a machine, a car) for an employee to use, it is the responsibility of management to maintain it and provide the proper training on it. Otherwise, it's just pushing the cost off to the employee.

I understand that as a small business, this may be a challenge for them. But if they rely on some test, they're going to end up with a hodge-podge of protection with some minimal baseline. This is not good management.

Comment: Re:The War on (some) Drugs (Score 1) 290

by zymurgy_cat (#28090127) Attached to: Cocaine Test Prompts Red Bull Removal In Germany
In other words, to get 1 kg of cocaine from Red Bull would cost $10 billion, not to mention the enormous expense of purification. And all this would only be worth $30,000. It would cost 340,000 times more for the Red Bull than the cocaine would be worth.

Yes, but we have to think of the children. Can you imagine some innocent child distilling all that Red Bull and then snorting the coke? If we save but one child, it would be worth banning Red Bull.....

Comment: Re:Can we (Score 1) 444

by zymurgy_cat (#28048825) Attached to: Original Cast On Board For Ghostbusters 3
story where the cast is middle-aged should have the plot that involves the drama that a middle aged person gets involved in -- kids, grandkids, getting old, missed opportunities, rectifying relationships, taking on responsiblities, coming to terms with your life, etc

I can see it now:

I am the Gate Keeper....now get off my goddamn interdimensional lawn, you kids!

You can bring any calculator you like to the midterm, as long as it doesn't dim the lights when you turn it on. -- Hepler, Systems Design 182

Working...