Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Leap Towards a Career in Ethical Hacking with 60+ Hours of Prep Toward CISM, CISA, & More Certification Exams at 95% off ×

Comment Re: Truly Epically Dumb to Destroy It (Score 1) 286

Their position was that we should keep the samples...your "counter" to that is that we should keep the samples for a DIFFERENT reason than theirs.

As to whether or not your thinking is crackpot or not. I do not think it is crackpot, but those who are arguing for destroying all of the known samples of the smallpox virus would say that it is.

Comment Re: Truly Epically Dumb to Destroy It (Score 2) 286

I have to tell you that your comment does not actually counter the post to which you replied. They made an argument for maintaining the current stocks of smallpox virus. You proceeded to say their was a problem with their view by making a weaker argument for maintaining the current stocks of the smallpox virus.

Their argument was based on the assumptions being made by those who are promoting getting rid of all KNOWN stocks of the smallpox virus. You argued against those assumptions. Those who assume that the only places where the smallpox virus exists are the known stocks will ignore your argument as coming from a "crackpot conspiracy theorist" (I think they are wrong). On the other hand, at least some of them will be receptive to the OP's argument.

Comment Re:Shit me hard with a stick, people are dumb. (Score 1) 215

It is an individual right to the means of violence..that is, it is an acknowledgement that the government ought not have a monopoly on violence. That is a different thing than being about armed opposition to government. It means that an individual is recognized to have the right to use violence to protect themselves from violence

Comment Do people actually pay attention to "Trending"? (Score 1) 215

Hold on a second, this whole controversy suggests that people actually pay attention to "Trending" on Facebook. Whenever I see this mentioned I have to remind myself that this "feature" even exists. Then I remember it is that section on Facebook that has all of those annoying "headlines" that never have anything I am even vaguely interested in.

Comment Re:Shit me hard with a stick, people are dumb. (Score 1) 215

I understand that Europeans cannot see that the "left-right" divide in the U.S. is completely different than it is in Europe. In Europe the divide is about HOW to use government authority, both sides agree that the government has the authority. In the U.S., the divide is over how much authority the government actually has. A key to understanding this is the 2nd Amendment. In Europe, the government has an absolute monopoly on the use of violence (at least that is the principle under which its governments operate). In the U.S., the 2nd Amendment essentially states that the government does NOT have monopoly on the use of violence, the people have the option of resorting to violence if they are dissatisfied with the job the government is doing (at least that is the theory).

Comment Re:Enormous tax and administrative burdens (Score 1) 347

Some years back, Pennsylvania changed its law as to what was taxable. The previous law was confusing, but had been in place long enough that all of the special cases had been worked out. When they changed the law, they created a whole lot of new special cases (juice drinks are not taxed if they are over 10% juice unless they are carbonated, bottled water is not taxed, not even with carbonation, unless it contains sugar, but not artificial sweetener...I am not sure that those are the provisions, but they are that sort of thing, and whether juice drinks are taxable contains a couple of other categories that make over 10% juice taxable). One store owner could not figure out what was, and was not, taxable (some things, which previously were taxable were no non-taxable, and many more which had previously been non-taxable were now taxable), so he decided to just collect sales tax on everything and pay all of that to the state. He was prosecuted for tax fraud.

Comment Re:Enormous tax and administrative burdens (Score 1) 347

And who is going to maintain this database? Are they going to be liable when they get it wrong, because they ARE going to get it wrong?
There are states where 123 Main Street SomeWhere, SomeState 12345 has a different set of sales tax rules than 124 Main Street SomeWhere, SomeState 12345 and 125 Main Street SomeWhere, SomeState 12345 has yet a third set of rules.

It is workable for a physical store, they only have to know the rules for the address at which they are located.

Comment Re:Errrrrrr, NO (Score 1) 313

Yes, the "unalienable right to bear arms" is pushed by a political agenda...the political agenda who thinks the U.S. Constitution is a pretty good document for governing a country. On the other hand, those who want to do away with that right rarely, if ever, actually come out and SAY what they think of the U.S. Constitution. Which is that it is that it is terrible because it is designed to allow people to live their lives free of government interference. You appear to be one of the latter.

You clearly have no understanding about how the U.S. Constitution came to be. The first Ten Amendments (known as the Bill of Rights) were incorporated into the Constitution in order to overcome some of the opposition to ratifying it. In other words, without the first ten amendments the Constitution would have never been ratified by enough states to go into force. Further, the only reason the Bill of Rights was not included in the Constitution as it came out of the Constitutional Convention was because the bulk of the representatives at the Convention were afraid that the rights thus laid out would be seen as the extent of the rights citizens had, rather than just the most important ones in the eyes of the Framers of the Constitution. Everyone at the Constitutional Convention agreed with the rights laid out in the Bill of Rights, some of them just thought that enumerating them was a bad idea.

Comment Re:Errrrrrr, NO (Score 1) 313

Your original post was most certainly a troll, even if it was a call for repeal of the 2nd Amendment, because you were calling out as "ideological thought ahead of reality" someone who said that the idea of requiring "smart" tech on a gun was a bad idea (for most uses of a gun, "smart" tech is a bad idea because it introduces at least one more potential point of failure in a system where failure is life threatening).

Comment Re:Errrrrrr, NO (Score 2) 313

It is not an "ideological thought" to believe that the 2nd Amendment says that people have the right to own guns. Which therefore means that it is not an "ideological thought" that one has the constitutional right to own guns.
If you had said that the idea that the 2nd Amendment should not be repealed was an "ideological thought", you would have been correct.

Comment Re:LOL WTF no. (Score 1) 313

So, in another words, since you believe it to be true, it must be true. I find it highly improbable that such instances are under-reported considering that most news organizations, and most news "reporters", are strongly anti-Second Amendment. My suspicion is that the Gun Fail blog reports every story which is reported to them without making any effort to corroborate those stories (which will result in a significant portion of their stories being, for all intents and purposes, false).
As to gun safety being taught in school, I do indeed remember gun safety being taught. And I recall one aspect of that training being to make sure that those who were too young to know how to handle a gun would be unable to do so (by storing the gun out of their reach, or otherwise so that they could not get to it, and by making sure that you did not leave the gun unattended while it was out of storage). Of course, I attended a school district that closed on the first day of deer season (not because the school wanted to give kids the day off but because a large enough number were going to TAKE the day off that they might as well not try to have classes). Perhaps the problem is that it has been so long since we taught people how to properly handle a gun that we have multiple generations that have never learned proper gun safety (the children of my contemporaries have children).

Comment Re:LOL WTF no. (Score 1) 313

I am sorry, but what country do you live in where " Around once a day in this country, a child gets their hands on the unsecured and loaded weapon of mom/dad/brother/uncle/aunt/grandparent/etc and kills or wounds someone (or themselves) with it?"

All of articles I was able to find stated that, in the U.S., we have NO idea how often a child accidentally shoots someone because the data is not collected and the data which is collected is so subjective that attempting to find the answer is impossible (basically, our current statistics on what is, and is not, an accidental shooting is subjective...and cannot be otherwise).
Personally, I think the way we could best reduce the number of times that children accidentally shoot someone would be by going back to teaching gun safety in schools.

Slashdot Top Deals

MESSAGE ACKNOWLEDGED -- The Pershing II missiles have been launched.