Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Child harm? (Score 1) 103

Unfortunately, most people aren't going to take the step to figure out that their conservatism is just like the conservatism of the people rejecting them.

Most of those people don't care. If you see the world as "us against them," you don't really care how similar "them" is, as long as "us" is on top.

It's clan warfare, not logical fairness.

Comment Re:Very fuzzy. (Score 2) 30

A person is allowed to say baby-killing Satanists are bad. If that upsets the boss, tough.

In the US, you can be fired for freely expressing your opinion (source).

The recourse is to start a union. When employers start policing social media, or opinions in general, it's time to join a union.

Comment Re:Very fuzzy. (Score 3, Interesting) 30

It's not fuzzy, it sucks. It is true under the law that a person can be fired for expressing their opinion publicly.

However, it's also true that it sucks. Employees do have a life outside work, and should not have their freedom of speech impinged by a corporation. People have been fired by Google because they disagree with Google working with Israel, for example. Silencing people doesn't change the disagreement, it just breeds dissatisfaction.

Employees do have recourse, and this is when I strongly consider joining a union. Don't want to be fired unfairly? That's what unions are for. Unions have drawbacks, but that is not one of them.

Comment Re:Wait a minute (Score 3, Interesting) 63

"accuse the other side of the thing you yourself are guilty of".

That's basically what every teenager and every disfunctional relationship does.

"You never pay attention to me!"
"Well, if you paid attention to me, you would know how much I am dealing with!"

It doesn't matter if it's factual it just matters if you get the tone right.

Comment Re:This is why "responsible disclosure" isn't (Score 1) 38

They're too cheap, too lazy, and in too much of a hurry to make sure their products/services are secure before they start selling them,

If the company doesn't have a QA team, if the company doesn't have negative unit tests, if the company hasn't trained their employees in secure coding practices, if the company doesn't have a system to avoid SQL injection exploits, etc

Then the company is at fault.

Comment Re:No. Not at all. (Score 2) 38

You should give a 90 day window so you don't become an enabler of crime.

The company that wrote the bug in the first place is the enabler of the crime. In 99% of these cases, if you look at their unit tests you'll only see positive tests. Fail at best practices.

Announcing the exploit publicly allows people who use the software to take proper protections (like putting behind a firewall).

Comment Re:This post above brought to you by (Score 1) 278

Even more seriously though, California natives both more and less native than me (my father and I were both born here, before that the history gets Mexican, but that covered a lot of ground once) would be perfectly happy if the Hollywood and the tourism went away,

LOL everyone outside of LA hates LA. Dirt bag slutty water thieves.

Slashdot Top Deals

Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no substitute for a good blaster at your side. - Han Solo

Working...