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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re: Change the law (Score 1) 1429

The problem with your statement is it ignores "winner take all" in the EC. That invalidates and marginalizes that part of a state whose wishes are for another candidate than the one who won the state overall.

There are many problems with our election system that are intentionally designed to disenfranchise huge portions of the population. That is why you have such a low voter turnout in election in the US.

The biggest elephant in the room has nothing to do with the structure of the election system and has been ignored in this topic. Namely, the baby boomers that are retiring with nothing better to do than visit the graves of their dead friends and family and vote. As people grow older, they tend to get to be more crotchety "get off my lawn" types (read conservative). The US will swing much more red as more and more of them retire.

Comment Re: entrapment (Score 1) 176

...properly authorized sting operations.

"properly authorized" still means they have to be clean themselves. For example, they can't have sex with you then arrest you for solicitations based on that sex. If the servers had child pron on them and the FBI was running them, then they broke the law themselves since simply possessing said porn is a crime. It surprises me that nobody brought up this little twist yet.

Comment Re:Google monopoly? (Score 4, Insightful) 75

And what exactly do you think anti-trust laws cover?

Antitrust laws cover more than just monopolies. It covers collusion and price fixing as well (usually in the same charge since it is almost impossible to have price fixing without collusion). It isn't illegal to be a monopoly. What is illegal is abuse of that monopoly. Also, it isn't required for a business to have an absolute monopoly to be considered as a defacto monopoly. It is called "market dominance" and abuse of that dominance has the same effect as if they were a monopoly.

Comment Re:Logic Says It Should Be Legal (Score 1) 396

I live in WV where Mylan CEO Heather Bresch (and her Senator father Joe Manchin are from) and they had on the local news just what you are describing. They said that the local ambulances stopped carrying the EpiPens because they were rarely used and tended to expire more often that they were used. It's a cost/benefit analysis the county did and they quickly came to the same conclusion as you did just now. Lastly, the schools here in WV all have trained nurses on staff that can administer the drug WITHOUT issues. In fact, just like Insulin, students have to surrender their drugs to the nurse upon entry into the school with a doctor's verification of the prescription. So I don't see the problem either with using a syringe.

Comment Re:Fuck ALL those assholes! (Score 0) 660

... The Orlando shooter was investigated by the FBI a few times and supposedly was reported by a gun shop owner for suspicious behavior attempting to buy ammo in bulk and body armor.

So instead of the government doing their fucking job and actively investigating these people that really seem to need a closer look they instead seek to take away rights from everyone else.

That is a non-sequiter...

In the first part of your statements you are advocating violating privacy and restricting 2nd amendment rights based on the amount of rounds and body armor. You them go on to say they are damned because they didn't violate his privacy enough! Please make up your mind...

And last I checked, inquiring about goods for sale isn't a crime. It only becomes a crime when those goods are used illegally. Otherwise it is just a rumor.

Comment Re:No. (Score 2) 262

If only sick/unhealthy people get health insurance, then the cost of that insurance has to be high, because they will have a higher rate of claims. Those who are fortunate enough to have great health might forego insurance, but on average most people expect to have some issue or other that might require insurance coverage, so on average most people will want insurance. So more people get insurance, and the average cost of insurance goes down because the average claims rate across the larger pool is lower.

The higher the certainty of people making claims, the less of a solution "insurance" is - insurance is intended to spread risk among a large pool. It seems to be very hard to get people to understand that on average, people cannot expect to get more out of an insurance plan than what they pay into the plan. If that were so, the insurance company would go out of business. As much as people may dislike insurance companies (and many insurance companies have earned the dislike/hatred of their customers), they provide a substantial social benefit when they perform their basic risk management function.

You forgot to mention that insurance is also designed to not be used. With out of pocket expenses, high deductibles, yearly maximum benefits and co-pays that make it unsuitable even every year doctor visits. Add in the high cost of medications and god forbid an ambulance ride to the hospital for an extended stay and you still have the threat of bankruptcy.

Comment Re:I prefer arbitration, lawsuits suck. Google pay (Score 1) 89

Agreements with binding arbitration clauses are strictly more limiting than those without. Without such clauses, both parties can either agree to take their grievance to an arbiter and agree that his decision is binding, or take their grievances before a court. With such clauses, both parties can *only* use an arbiter and are *barred* from taking their grievance before a court.

Given that the results of arbitration proceedings are almost always kept secret, that arbitration proceedings are almost always one-on-one, and that a decision reached by arbitration panels has no bearing whatsoever on any future decisions reached by any other panel (including the one that reached the decision), this *greatly* weakens our ability to publicise, punish, and (eventually) legally bar systematic corporate misbehavior.

You left out a MAJOR point.... The arbitrator is picked by the company. No arbitrator is going to bite the hand that feeds them.

Comment Re:Lawyer sense tingling (Score 1) 155

Or you can get a default judgment of $100K if you file suit and defendant does something inadvisable like completely ignore it.

There are many ways to get a default judgement one of them being the venue shopping these people do looking for a court that will not only be very favorable to them but that is likely out of the jurisdiction where the defendant lives. If the defendant wasn't served a subpoena, there is no possible way they could have answered it in a timely fashion. And like you say, the story doesn't say why he got the default judgement.

Comment Re:Simple question (Score 1) 605

Political discourse is something that nerds need to pay attention to,

That would be true if it was a discourse... From what I am reading, it is merely people frothing at the mouth and not doing one bit of true discourse.

and it's something that matters.

That remains to be seen! From what I have seen of American politics, none of it matters! Everything from the broken 2 party system to the media that feeds on the hate. From the totally unnecessary electoral college meaning my vote doesn't count for shit to the failures we are producing as candidates. From the corporate puppets we have in Congress to the fools that keep electing them always blaming some other fools Congressional choice for the total collapse of this discourse you talk about even in the halls where discourse is supposed to happen! Again, it doesn't matter.

Comment Re:Google becoming too powerful? (Score 2) 126

All of the issues you raise boil down to one line....

People are using hardware and software like an appliance no different from their toaster. As long as they get what they want, when they want it, they will give up any freedoms.

That is why every EULA out there is meant to strip consumers of their rights. Their right to sue is stripped in favor of "arbitration" which is weighted towards the company paying them, stripped of their right to copy even for backup via DRM, stripped of their right to be secure by all the tracking and "targeted" advertising. The list goes on and on...

Comment Re: Tor exit node (Score 2) 306

with a 28.8 modem from a payphone

They were using acoustic couplers taped to the phones in the movie. 28.8 baud modems were too new for that. I know, I had a 300 baud acoustic modem way back when...

From:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

The practical upper limit for acoustic-coupled modems was 1200-baud, first made available in 1973 by Vadic and 1977 by AT&T. It became widespread in 1985 with advent of the Hayes Smartmodem 1200A. Such devices facilitated the creation of dial-up bulletin board systems, a forerunner of modern internet chat rooms, message boards, and e-mail.

Comment Re:My my, the initials fly (Score 1) 63

Would you prefer that they sued AT&T for $100 million and then pocketed it all instead of giving out refunds?

No, I would prefer a suspension of their corporate charter when they break the law. Why should the law protect them from personal suits when they break the law? I say if they want to be treated as "people" then let's treat them as people with something real to lose.

And if you think that AT&T hasn't already calculated fines into the price of their services, I have some prime land in Florida called the Everglades to sell you. That is why fining does no good with corporations. That is why they are always getting busted with no real effect. Again, suspend their corporate charter and see how fast they come into compliance with the law.

Slashdot Top Deals

What is now proved was once only imagin'd. -- William Blake

Working...