And the fact that this was moderated +5 Insightful shows why the industry has such a long way to go - men overreact and get defended, women overreact and get a tirade of abuse. (This is entirely outside the issue of whether any of the events in this story were appropriate).

I am close to giving up on Slashdot because it seems more and more filled with the rants of angry right-wing men. Is this because Rupert Murdoch's organs are now paywalled? Or is the United States slowly turning into Saudi Arabia, only without burkhas?

...constitute libel in the UK.

Citation definitely needed.

This is a pointless comment because (a) this was not in the UK, (b) English and Welsh Law jurisdiction does not extend to the United States, and (c) English and Welsh libel law is not normative for the United States. So why make the observation?

It seems that, just as when Russia was fighting in Afghanistan, the US is supporting the guys who include the Islamic fundamentalists against the people who believe in a more or less secular State. Assad may be unpleasant, but like Saddam he is trying to keep the lid on Shiite/Sunni warring.

If the US arms the rebels, they will be supplying equipment to units of the Taliban who will, as sure as day, subsequently use them against the West. It is hard not to be cynical and think this is all about arms dealers staying in business.

This reminds me of the system for translating Pravda:

Fraternal discussions - nobody got hurt
Friendly discussions - we're still at the talking phase
Frank and friendly discussions - we told you to stop doing that, now stop doing it.
Frank discussions - the tanks are rolling.

They have no experience of another system of government and most people are conservative. It's just like Americans being fearful of "socialised" medicine - unless they've spent enough time in Europe to get to know another system.

Didn't you get the memo? They've been written off almost as often as Apple has. Anyway, their new gesture based UI built on QNX isn't intuitive like the iOS that users have been learning for several years.

For 'people' read the bonkers Dionysius Lardner, a 19th century equivalent of a climate change denier.

In fact the human race as presently constituted is dependent on two pieces of technology: sharp edges and fire. Without those we are not going anywhere. With them we still nearly went extinct in the mesolithic ice age.

But also, as a self certified mystic, you do seem to write a lot of unverifiable tosh.

I don't think you understand how the moderation system is supposed to work. There is no 'disagree' moderation. And your opinion, Anonymous Coward, is no better than mine. (however, I would submit, having seen collegiality in action fighting an attempt to corporatise an academic institution, that you are wrong.)

I note I was down-nodded for an honest statement of opinion. It looks like a lot of people on /. approve of Big Brother. But you miss the point. Corporatism is giving rights to corporations that supersede what we in Europe call human rights. The existence of corporations does not imply corporatism if individual rights are protected.

As an example, the Netherlands has an army but is not militaristic. North Korea has an army, and it is.

Unique barcodes. Either the counterfeiter will duplicate an existing one - identified as dupe - or uses an invalid one -identified as invalid.

The point is whether, given the supposedly Enlightenment ideals of the Western idea of a university, they should have done. If they are just a corporation that educates people for money, that is one thing. If they are a university set up to stand for the possibility of a better society, that is another. Personally I prefer universities when they fight corporatism, not when they support it.

That would seem to be the new HP tablet that looks like a BlackBerry PlayBook but with a worse display and camera. What has that got to do with Harvard seeming to have forgotten the difference between a university and a corporation?

Why would I go to a right-wing, pro-Fascist science fiction novel full of grand guignol guff for advice on military policy?