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


Forgot your password?
Get HideMyAss! VPN, PC Mag's Top 10 VPNs of 2016 for 55% off for a Limited Time ×

Comment Re:And there it is, apologist for murderers. .. (Score 1) 393

None of which justifies his murder by police. Yet another example of unjustified shooting by US police.

Nice argument by you, too. 1. using definition of murder wrong. 2. Ad hominem. 3. 'Yet another' as an argument. 4. Not actually having to defend the things that led up to being shot.

Clearly using emotion to win an argument? Check. (that's an opinion by me of course, but I think it's rational?)

Comment Re:Prison for this not likely for anyone (Score 1) 1010

Since when is "intentionally circumventing classification handling procedures" considered 'being sloppy'?

Walking out with some papers off the printer might be 'sloppy', and even that could be messy. Walking in with a hidden USB drive could be 'sloppy', unless they can prove intent.

If I went home and wrote a book on my google drive about current classified mission data, and sent it to a few co-workers or friends I hired, I wouldn't be 'slapped on the wrist'. And they wouldn't buy the whole 'I didn't mark it classified so it's not' argument.

Comment Re:Delusion of "transgender" (Score 1) 766

Both sides of this argument are worth entertaining, I think. Yes, it's short-sighted to say it's always black and white. But it describes an underlying rationale that there is a benefit to society when the lines are clearly defined. Hopefully I'm not downvoted for trying to rationally play devil's advocate, but I guess I'll take the risk.

Individual freedom is constantly playing tug of war with what is good for society. Sometimes what is good for society trumps individual choice. But I think it's still important to understand why. Guns and sex are two obvious issues. Society can determine that two consenting adults can't legally have sex because it's not good for society, or that they can't arm themselves. Society has also had an unwritten contract for a while that, I think, is based on natural instincts. You see animals look a certain way to communicate with the rest of the species, and that's one reason why we also dress the way we do (obvious exceptions occur). Most people like to see something and know what it is and I think that seeing a man or a woman as such was just a way to make society easier. It's a form of communication, whether intentional or not.

The issue is when this trumps the personal freedom of how one dresses or prefers to appear to society. Those claiming this is black and white are being short sighted I think. Is it better for society that every man wears the same suit and every woman wears the same dress? We've decided not, individual freedom is more important. BUT not important enough to be nude in public. We're redrawing the line to protect a certain group of people, we should be more understanding of both sides (society versus individual freedom), even if some people are just being discriminatory (which again society likes sometimes).

Slashdot Top Deals

Those who can, do; those who can't, write. Those who can't write work for the Bell Labs Record.