Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Comments

top

Anita Sarkeesian, Creator of "Tropes vs. Women," Driven From Home By Trolls

Ioldanach Re:*Dons asbestos suit* (1262 comments)

Oh my goodness we must do something...because everyone knows it's impossible with today's technology to fake a screenshot!

Yes, at this point in time we, the public, have little to go on and are playing the armchair quarter back position and the waiting game while we see if verifiable information, such as from a police investigation, comes out.

That said, this is the evidence in front of us, and we have no basis on which to confirm or deny it at this time.

about 2 months ago
top

Anita Sarkeesian, Creator of "Tropes vs. Women," Driven From Home By Trolls

Ioldanach Re:*Dons asbestos suit* (1262 comments)

That's very interesting. Of course, so is this: http://i.imgur.com/zHPLIan.jpg

Also interesting. Of course, that's also what it would look like if an intelligent person wanted to make a specific threat: Create a burner account, make the threat, be specific, don't make errors, delete the account.

I should point out that it is also what the victim's side would look like if they were signed into email but not twitter, saw the notifications coming into their email, and clicked on them to view the content in twitter.

about 2 months ago
top

Anita Sarkeesian, Creator of "Tropes vs. Women," Driven From Home By Trolls

Ioldanach Re:*Dons asbestos suit* (1262 comments)

That's very interesting. Of course, so is this: http://i.imgur.com/zHPLIan.jpg

Also interesting. Of course, that's also what it would look like if an intelligent person wanted to make a specific threat: Create a burner account, make the threat, be specific, don't make errors, delete the account. They probably also conducted their activity through a random open proxy server so it is untraceable. It is also what it would look like if the victim was on an alternate twitter account that they use for safety and didn't want to reveal that account for privacy reasons, so when they saw this tweet they logged out and took the screen cap.

There are plenty of opportunities for a figure such as her to screencap perfectly legitimate threats without needing to make one up. It would be somewhat more surprising if this were false than true, but at this time I'm holding judgement on either possibility until we find out more information.

about 2 months ago
top

Anita Sarkeesian, Creator of "Tropes vs. Women," Driven From Home By Trolls

Ioldanach Re:*Dons asbestos suit* (1262 comments)

The amount of actual evidence out there that Sarkeesian has been willing to lie about threats is zero

Please present it. I don't think you can.

How is someone supposed to present evidence of no evidence?

By providing evidence of the counterclaim.

Evidence that indicates a true claim of aggravated harassment does not preclude the simultaneous existence of false claims of the same.

As for evidence of the threats, here's a post she made on twitter highlighting an example of a specific threat

Yea, like that.

That proves (presuming we believe the screencap, which I do) that aggravated harassment has occurred. It does not prove that she has never falsely claimed harrassment, but it isn't necessarily possible to prove such a (ludicrous, I think) claim.

about 2 months ago
top

Anita Sarkeesian, Creator of "Tropes vs. Women," Driven From Home By Trolls

Ioldanach Re:*Dons asbestos suit* (1262 comments)

The amount of actual evidence out there that Sarkeesian has been willing to lie about threats is zero

Please present it. I don't think you can.

How is someone supposed to present evidence of no evidence? The OP cannot find any existing evidence that Sarkeesian has lied or is willing to lie about threats. I suppose they could present their search result pages, but that doesn't actually prove anything.

As for evidence of the threats, here's a post she made on twitter highlighting an example of a specific threat

about 2 months ago
top

FCC Warned Not To Take Actions a Republican-Led FCC Would Dislike

Ioldanach Re:Correction: (338 comments)

Cable tv/internet franchises almost always come with a build out requirement, or the cable companies would never do more than cherry pick profitable areas and build there.

Verizon received $23 Billion over 6 years to finance the build-out of FiOS. Their construction budget didn't change from what it would have been without the grant, they built FiOS out in highly profitable areas and then stopped, not completing the project and shifting their focus to wireless. Then they managed to get a roughly $2 rate hike in some places to offset their claimed capital expenditure cost. (which was supposed to come from that grant that didn't appear to change the construction budget)

And all of this was rubber stamped.

So tell me again how they have a build out requirement?

about 2 months ago
top

Pedophile Asks To Be Deleted From Google Search After European Court Ruling

Ioldanach Re:I beg to differ. (370 comments)

We are not talking about production or distribution. We are talking about simple possession. Your argument is invalid, and furthermore, please do feel free to tell me how drunk driving deaths and beatings from drunk mommies and daddies are less harmful than masturbating to a photograph of child sex acts. I'm all ears.

They're not, and if every single drop of alcohol you drank was distilled from a drunk driver beating a drunk mommy and daddy, you'd have a valid comparison.

about 5 months ago
top

Pedophile Asks To Be Deleted From Google Search After European Court Ruling

Ioldanach Re:I beg to differ. (370 comments)

Your argument would also apply to the consumption of alcoholic beverages, which results in far more harm than kiddie porn. Also note that if distribution of it is illegal but possession is not, such "fostering" is also generally illegal the second it involves transferring said porn to someone else.

How does consumption of alcohol, which occasionally produces a negative outcome, compare with the production of kiddie porn, which always produces a negative outcome, an exploited child?

Distribution charges are generally filed against the person providing something, not the person receiving something.

about 5 months ago
top

Pedophile Asks To Be Deleted From Google Search After European Court Ruling

Ioldanach Re:Ross Anderson (370 comments)

Ross Anderson posted an interesting thought about this decision and credit agencies:

The European Court of Justice decision in the Google case will have implications way beyond search engines. ... a favourite trick is to blacklist people with credit reference agencies, even while disputes are still in progress (or even after the bank has actually lost a court case).

While this finding impacts that problem, it is not the right way to tackle that problem. That problem consists of factually incorrect material that should not be there. This finding explicitly indicates that a party can demand that links to factually true reports that are still available to view online must be taken down. It goes far beyond the scope of reason.

about 5 months ago
top

Pedophile Asks To Be Deleted From Google Search After European Court Ruling

Ioldanach Re:I beg to differ. (370 comments)

The vast majority of kiddie porn is swapped freely among people on P2P networks/darknets. The people who would exploit children will do it anyway. Tell me again how it is that this encourages "more" exploitation of children? You clearly don't know what you are talking about.

Find a community of like minded people in which to share your interest fosters and normalizes your interest, whether that interest is antique cars, steam engines, British fine cuisine, or kiddie porn. There are some interests we do not want to foster and normalize.

about 5 months ago
top

Linux 3.14 Kernel Released

Ioldanach Oblig car analogy (132 comments)

You guys keep working on that. Meanwhile Apple will continue selling millions more Macbooks and Mac Pro's to hard core developers, scientists and engineers who have work to do and need a computer to get it done with.

  • Apple: sportscar; moves you around quick and looks good while you do it. Useful for a lot of personal tasks.
  • Windows: suv; a bit bloated and gas guzzling but reliable for basic user-level grunt work.
  • Linux: truck; From tractor-trailer on down to pickup truck, great at heavy lifting but it has to be fairly stripped down (e.g., android) in order to do useful user-level work. Most people wouldn't use the heavy versions of it, but for those of us who need it, it is indispensable.

about 7 months ago
top

Linux 3.14 Kernel Released

Ioldanach Re:WOW! (132 comments)

Also, my Macbook Pro is 7 years old and looks like new.

So?

And here we have the crux of the Mac v. Linux argument.

about 7 months ago
top

Homeopathic Remedies Recalled For Containing Real Medicine

Ioldanach Re:Homeopathic principles (173 comments)

So we might ask why they labelled it "homeopathic" when it has such a high fraction of active ingredient. Our guess is "marketing": The company that packages it wants to sell to the not-insignificant fraction of the population that believes in homeopathic cures. The doctors probably just grin, knowing that it's meaningless, but also knowing that a good number of traditional "folk" remedies are actually useful, as long as the problem is minor and precisely-measured medicine isn't required.

A "medicine" marked "homeopathic" is technically regulated by the FDA, but isn't tested for safety or effectiveness.

about 7 months ago
top

Homeopathic Remedies Recalled For Containing Real Medicine

Ioldanach Re:Homeopathic principles (173 comments)

If they aren't diluted, they aren't homeopathic. Holistic, maybe.

Why don't you simply google for homeopathic medicals and check yourself?

I'm well aware of the theoretical basis of homeopathic medicine, but even so I already refreshed my memory with google and a few sites both supporting and debunking it. I even included a link to wikipedia in my original. If you want to dispute my claim, provide a citation and not a "google it yourself" response.

Homeopathy is based on the idea that a substance that causes the symptoms in normal quantities cures the symptoms in smaller quantities. Hence the dilution.

Oscillococcinum, one of the most common of these quack remedies, typically comes in 200C dilution. A C dilution is a 1/100th dilution, so 200C is 1/(100^200) dilution rate.

Then it is not a "homeopathic" medical but nonsense.

Quite a lot of homeopathic products use the C dilutions, in surprisingly high numbers. Of course, there are also a number of products that use small numbers of X (1/10th) dilutions as well. The 3X-6X dilutions do result in a product that contains the active ingredient. Of course, if I started with a 1g sample of a drug, say, tacrolimus, and performed a 3X dilution on it, I'd end up with a 1mg product. This isn't homeopathy, because that is well with in the dose-response curve for that drug and the drug at that level produces a direct and specific response in line with its properties.

about 7 months ago
top

Homeopathic Remedies Recalled For Containing Real Medicine

Ioldanach Re:Homeopathic principles (173 comments)

That is wrong.

First off all plenty of homeopathic medicals are not diluted at all.

If they aren't diluted, they aren't homeopathic. Holistic, maybe.

Those that get diluted get repeatedly diluted by a factor of TEN not HUNDRED.

And this is NOT repeated 100 times, the maximum AFAIK is 23.

Oscillococcinum, one of the most common of these quack remedies, typically comes in 200C dilution. A C dilution is a 1/100th dilution, so 200C is 1/(100^200) dilution rate.

about 7 months ago
top

AT&T Exec Calls Netflix "Arrogant" For Expecting Net Neutrality

Ioldanach Re:So what am I paying for? (466 comments)

What exactly does my cable bill give me then, if not access to services on the web?

It gives you access to services on the web, but they have to pay their connectivity bill, too. If the company they chose doesn't have a good connection to your company, though, then your experience with that company will suffer.

In Netflix's case, they chose Cogent, and Cogent wants to take advantage of peering arrangements that presume data will cross their links to other providers in both directions equally, but they want to send far more data than they receive. But they don't want to pay the transit fees that would normally incur.

about 7 months ago
top

AT&T Exec Calls Netflix "Arrogant" For Expecting Net Neutrality

Ioldanach Re:Not how it works? (466 comments)

"But it's not how the Internet, or telecommunication for that matter, has ever worked,' Hasn't that how the internet has been? If someone calls me to play a song they wrote over the phone should they pay a fee to provide me that entertainment over the phone?

They had to pay for their phone connection and you had to pay for yours. (We'll ignore the possibility of long distance charges.) If they went with a cut rate provider, though, their end might be choppy and not provide you with quality entertainment.

about 7 months ago
top

AT&T Exec Calls Netflix "Arrogant" For Expecting Net Neutrality

Ioldanach Re:It's not arrogant, it's correct. (466 comments)

Put another way:

* Netflix pays for their bandwidth * Customers pay for their bandwidth

And yet, AT&T wants more money because they think they have the right to charge Netflix more to pass through their tollbooth.

In a typical peering arrangement, both sides of the link pass roughly equal amounts of data to the other side. Netflix, however, gives Cogent so much data that the peering links are lop sided. Cogent delivers a lot of content, and receives very little. In such an unbalanced situation, the side with more data to serve typically pays a transit fee for the use of the other network.

Cogent doesn't want to pay the transit fee. If they had to pay the transit fee, they'd have to pass that along to Netflix, and Netflix would have to raise the rates they charge their subscribers.

about 7 months ago
top

California Bill Proposes Mandatory Kill-Switch On Phones and Tablets

Ioldanach Re:What could go wrong? (341 comments)

Actually, they don't need a kill switch for the phones to do this--there are a lot fewer devices to shut off if you simply shutdown the cell-towers in the area to cutoff communication.

But those devices don't render any video recordings you may have made inaccessible.

about 9 months ago

Submissions

Journals

Ioldanach has no journal entries.

Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?