Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Wow ... (Score 3, Informative) 44

No, this article isn't a question of whether the NSA can spy on the UK (if we have the "national technical means", we can spy, if not, not), it's whether GCHQ can USE the take from NSA spying to get around BRITISH espionage laws. Answer: it CANNOT.

Incorrect. You have to get past the headline & read the article. The ruling was not that using the data was illegal. The ruling was that using the data without telling the public how you obtained it, was illegal. Now that they've explained how they got it, it is back to business as usual.

From the article:

The UK government issued a robust defence of GCHQ on Friday and said the judgment would not alter in any way the work of the monitoring agency. The prime minister’s spokeswoman said: “Overall, the judgment this morning is that the UK’s interception regime is fully lawful. That follows on from the courts clear rejection of accusations of mass surveillance in their December judgment and we welcome that.

emphasis mine.

Comment Re: Thanks (Score 1) 779

So would a law against armed robbery be considered racist if it disproportionately impacts poor minorities who, arrest records imply, are more likely to commit armed robbery. The law would equally apply to white millionaires, but 'we all know' that 'they' (rich white folks) aren't likely to commit armed robbery...

The effects are just one piece of the equation. The goal & motivation are also important. Who is protected by a law against armed robbery?

Comment Re:Thanks (Score 1) 779

That is not awesome, that is ultra-cheap. She's going to be one of those fools who dies with millions in the bank and living in poverty conditions.

Oh, no, she does not live in poverty conditions, but she is also not disconnected. I'm not doing the story justice. You have to know her. She is awesome.

Comment Re:Thanks (Score 1) 779

Do millionaires sleep on the sidewalk? No

Somebody hasn't been to Mardi Gras before!

:D My mother-in-law once got stuck overnight near SFO waiting for a delayed flight (She is a millionaire). She ended up sharing a piece of cardboard with a random guy. Even with millions she is still the type to say "It was only 5 hours, why would I waste money on a hotel?!" She is awesome.

Comment Re:Thanks (Score 1) 779

Oh absolutely. But see my followup post. Most people I encounter online discussing politics are absolutely dumb enough to make & believe such a statement.

I generally trust /. still on moderating such posts enough for meed to weed them out, but I browse lower... probably lower than I should with my emotional baggage.

Comment Re:Thanks (Score 1) 779

I am the OP, and I certainly had sardonic irony in mind. I am surprised by the amount of "whoosing" that my comment engendered.

Remember that over 80% of people support mandatory labeling of foods containing DNA.

Most (I am not exaggerating, I believe the number actually is > 50%) people are stupid and/or uneducated enough to be quite serious with comments such as yours. It is pretty safe to assume people are in the majority.

Comment Re:Thanks (Score 1) 779

I shouldn't have commented in the first place. Broke my own rule: don't comment on politics on Slashdot (or pretty much any place else, for that matter). I am primarily committed to sharing information, not opinion. Commenting on politics is rarely informative, always opinionated. One is reduced to sardonic irony, or worse.

I *should* do that.

So should most everybody else actually...

Comment Re:Thanks (Score 1, Insightful) 779

Granted; I see your point.

On reflection, the part that speaks to me is: "Conservatives are for equal treatment. For instance, a law against sleeping on the sidewalk should be enforced equally on both millionaires and homeless vagrants."

Thing is, that statement is just as much bullshit as the anti-liberal statement.

1. Sleeping on the sidewalk is a law that affects only 1 group. They make such laws knowing that the law will only or primarily affect the demographic they hate. Do millionaires sleep on the sidewalk? No. Passing a law that you know will only or primarily affect a certain demographic is discriminatory. The KKK could fuck over 2 of their hated groups by getting a law passed that says "curly hair is illegal." Such a law doesn't violate the constitution or civil rights laws at its face, so the conservative KKK says ". You have to look at who it hits primarily.

2. Entitlement programs. To me, giving a business a tax break is no different than giving an individual a tax break. Conservatives are all for tax breaks for their businesses & charitable donations. But give a poor person a meal and they throw you in jail.

Comment Re:Windfall taxes are a crap idea. (Score 1) 825

Does he get to use US Embassies?

How does one use an embassy?

As an expat, there are a very small number of reasons (I forget, maybe 4 or 5) that I will even be allowed into the embassy. Basically, my US passport will get me a ticket out of the country if WWIII starts, but other than that, the fact that the embassy exists is of absolutely no day-to-day use to me.

Embassy Services

That page shows a picture of a helicopter saving a US Citizen hurt in the earthquake in Haiti. US Citizens got helicopters, everybody else got Cholera. Sounds like a decent benny.

Slashdot Top Deals

Machines certainly can solve problems, store information, correlate, and play games -- but not with pleasure. -- Leo Rosten

Working...