In my 30 years of online life (yes, I'm 42 and I first got online w/ BBS's and UGA's cyber system w/ a 300 baud, acoustic coupler modem, when I was 12) - I'd have to greatly agree here. I have thought about this topic many many times, and after reading Jaron Lanier's great manifesto "You are not a gadget" - it was clear that I'm not alone in my thoughts about limiting anonymous posts. For the really really large part, anonymous posts bring very substance to most discussions. While I do believe there should always be a forum for anonymous posting of information, and there always will be - I have to admit that most forums that truly hold any amount of real thoughtful or insightful information have little or no anonymous posts allowed. This includes slashdot, I'm afraid. I personally would to have the option inside my profile, to turn off any and all posts by anonymous cowards, because of reiterated point: "Most anonymous posts have very little value". Btw, giving users this option, would then generate an interesting statistic of exactly how many users care NOT to see anonymous posts.

ahh - I like this: "No, but it does mean you have certain exclusive rights for a period of time, even more rights than the actual owner." These "certain exclusive rights" depend exactly on the terms as defined in the rental agreement. It also depends on what is being rented. If a landlord states in the rental agreement that there are going to be cameras around filming you (i.e. reality TV shows such as: Big brother, etc) - then they can do that, and it's not breaking the law. I think the real question here is: Is it within their rental agreement rights to put this software on a computer that they rent out.

Theoretically eh? bad logic. Apples and oranges here. You can't compare land versus a computer/tool. Renting / leasing land (i.e. the physical property where you reside,) is completely different than renting a complex tool. There's obviously a need for clear semantics here - and legal clarification. Thus, why the courts exist. Regardless, RENT OWN - no matter what spin you want to make of it. Until you have actually bought that property, condo or computer, you do not own it outright. If you get busted for manufacturing drugs inside a rental unit, the court does not take the rental unit away from you, because you do not own it. The company that OWNS the rental unit, takes it away from you. BTW, If you get busted for manufacturing drugs inside a house/condo that you own, the court CAN take that away from you, because you own it.

NO, it IS NOT. It may be assigned to you from the rental company, but it IS NOT your computer. It still belongs and is owned by the rental company.

Call sysadmin.rant(begin) { So I started reading the comments here and saw pretty much exactly what I expected. Most everyone here, is thinking from their own point of view, which includes owning their own computer – and not from the company's (the actual owner of the computer) point of view. As a sys admin, I see this all the time with employees on a company's computers. Users need to remember that the computer that they are sitting at, while they are being paid hourly to work, is NOT their own computer or personal plaything. This means: going to Facebook, twitter, etc. for personal use, watching porn, downloading random games, or playing online games, etc. is wrong! PERIOD. It's not YOUR computer. It belongs to the the company. In this case, users are bitching about software, no matter what it does, on a computer that is not their own. Deal with it. If you don't like it, don't RENT it. You really should have no say so, because it's NOT YOUR COMPUTER. YOU DON'T OWN IT. Renting does not mean you own it. This is like trying to create a lawsuit because you borrowed a friend's computer (whether you paid for it or not), and you didn't like the software on it. If you don't own it, you don't own it! It's NOT your computer – and you should have no say what is or is not, on the computer. It's NOT yours! A company, corporation, or person, should have every right to protect its assets. };

How is this "News for nerds"??? This crap belongs in the tabloids or something. And certainly isn't worth even being mentioned in tech news. The only thing disgusting about this, is that it was allowed to be a news item HERE. I don't read Slashdot to get the latest gossip / hearsay on political figures, living, dead or undead. pfft... now there's two main things I'd like to see Slashdot do: 1) Allow me to read Slashdot without any anonymous posts whatsoever. 2) Allow me to delete / hide any story that's completely off topic in the tech arena, esp. political, fashion, sports. 'nuff said.

Seriously, who is Snooki - and why is this on Slashdot?

hehehe.. that was actually very good! love that song!