×

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

SCOTUS Says DNA Collection Permissible After Arrest

laughingcoyote Re:I knew it would be 5-4 (643 comments)

Much of the Constitution was deliberately written in broad terms, for reasons of futureproofing.

Certainly, not even the smartest attendee of the Constitutional Convention could have ever foreseen DNA tests or GPS tracking or electronic snooping. It wasn't even something they could have conceivably imagined at the time. But the Fourth Amendment is clear on the matter nonetheless:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated...

(emphasis added)

DNA is, perhaps, one of the most comprehensive pieces of information contained in one's body, one's "person". It can reveal everything from family lineage (ancestry, siblings, and descendants), to congenital diseases or conditions, to the color of one's eyes. It is not equivalent to a fingerprint, which in itself tells you next to nothing about the owner of that finger other than as an identification. The Fourth Amendment is clearly intended to restrict violations of one's person in that way without justifiable cause, even if the particular method of violation is one the Founders would never have conceived of.

about 10 months ago
top

Singapore Seeks Even More Control Over Online Media

laughingcoyote Overseas? (78 comments)

And exactly how do they intend to enforce this against sites hosted overseas, provided the owner of the site doesn't live in Singapore either? Do they plan to build really, really long canes?

about a year ago
top

Texas Poised To Pass Unprecedented Email Privacy Bill

laughingcoyote Re:Texas leads the way, again (262 comments)

Why are you asking "statute in Texas law"? I thought I was pretty clear it was a Supreme Court ruling. (I did use an unqualified acronym for it, SCOTUS, so if that's the source of the confusion I apologize.)

Anyway, Dover v. Kitsmiller is one of the well-known and recent ones, but never reached the SCOTUS. One that did, though, is Freiler v. Tangipahoa Parish Board of Education. That explicitly barred even the mention of creationism as an "alternative" to evolution, let alone its explicit teaching. That went all the way to the SCOTUS after the school board was ruled against, and the SCOTUS declined to consider a reversal, so that decision became final, and with the Supreme Court refusal to reverse, became caselaw for the entire land.

Since Supreme Court decisions are sovereign over Texas law, that makes it illegal in Texas or anywhere else in the US. That stems, of course, ultimately, from the First Amendment (government may not establish/endorse religion), and the Fourteenth (rights amendments applied to state/local law as well as federal). Those are ultimately the laws at play here. I'm not sure why you think Texas law would have anything to do with it.

I'm also unsure why you think "(my) personal definitions" have force under Texas law, or where you think I claimed that. But the Supreme Court of the United States, and the US Constitution, most certainly do have legal and binding force in Texas.

about a year ago
top

Texas Poised To Pass Unprecedented Email Privacy Bill

laughingcoyote Re:Texas leads the way, again (262 comments)

Even if evolution is "part" of the state standard, teaching of creationism in a science class is forbidden by both law and definition. It was ruled by the SCOTUS, long ago, to be a religious doctrine and not a scientific theory, and it is exactly that, as it is either unfalsifiable (old-earth) or already falsified (young-earth). Any "science" class teaching creationism, is not one.

If you really need a citation for the SCOTUS ruling, I'll dig one up. But yes, I absolutely have "something to stand on" here.

about a year ago
top

Texas Poised To Pass Unprecedented Email Privacy Bill

laughingcoyote Re:Texas leads the way, again (262 comments)

Sorry, managed to screw up the link in the last post somehow, will get more coffee. Here's the corrected one: Link

about a year ago
top

Texas Poised To Pass Unprecedented Email Privacy Bill

laughingcoyote Re:Texas leads the way, again (262 comments)

No, they're not. They have that law on the books, and then they wink-wink-nudge-nudge when it gets widely broken. Even the governor admitted that they do, in reality, http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2011/08/18/7407124-perry-to-child-on-creationism-vs-evolution-youre-smart-enough-to-figure-out-which-is-right.

So yes, I'm concerned with what's happening in reality. Do you really think that regulation is getting consistently enforced, and teachers who violate it disciplined or fired, when even the governor is saying the direct opposite? Regulations and laws only mean anything if they are, in practice, enforced.

about a year ago
top

Do Developers Need Free Perks To Thrive?

laughingcoyote Re:rather have money (524 comments)

At least in the US, you're way out of date. Lifetime limits became illegal in 2010, under the Affordable Care Act. Annual limits may currently be no less than $2 million, and will be outlawed entirely as of 2014.

about a year ago
top

Texas Poised To Pass Unprecedented Email Privacy Bill

laughingcoyote Re:Texas leads the way, again (262 comments)

Disagreeing with the above AC is one thing. Disagreeing with established fact and reality is quite another. It is not acceptable to teach things in school that are demonstrably false.

about a year ago
top

Texas Poised To Pass Unprecedented Email Privacy Bill

laughingcoyote In the style of Inigo... (262 comments)

"Texas! You did something right!"

about a year ago
top

PETA Wants To Sue Anonymous HuffPo Commenters

laughingcoyote Dear PETA... (590 comments)

You're a bunch of liars, hypocrites, and assholes. And do feel free to give it a shot, we have excellent anti-SLAPP provisions in my state.

about a year ago
top

Google Glass: What's With All the Hate?

laughingcoyote Re:Remember Bluetooth Ear Pieces? (775 comments)

At least in the US, jamming done by private entities is illegal. The RF paint? Maybe, but I can't imagine shoppers being too happy about going to a place their devices don't work. If I found out a store were doing that intentionally, I'd probably not return.

about a year ago
top

How the Smartphone Killed the Three-day Weekend

laughingcoyote Just Say No (232 comments)

I've made it exceptionally clear that I am not available 24x7. If my boss would like me to be on call for some period, I'm willing to discuss that, but it needs to be arranged in advance for a clear time period.

If some communication is coming in for work right now, I don't even know about it and I'll handle it on Tuesday, given the 3-day weekend. Weekends are not "extra work days", they are my time to relax, unwind, and come back to the office ready to do a much better job than if I were constantly tired, fatigued, and burnt out. Ultimately, that benefits my employer, too.

about a year ago
top

So What If Yahoo's New Dads Get Less Leave Than Moms?

laughingcoyote Re: Equal rights (832 comments)

Unfortunately, what people don't realize is that taxes actually do pay for things. I've literally been told by people, here in the US, that taxes are just "wasted" or "stolen" money and don't really do anything. When I ask them if they've ever driven on a public road, or attended a public school, or occupied safe and well-inspected buildings, or taken safe and well-controlled flights, they launch into rants about "inefficiency".

We live in a society, and we're supposed to care for one another, especially those most vulnerable. "I've got mine and %$)@*% you buddy" is not a recipe for a stable or pleasant society, certainly not one that I'd want to live in. And that's said as one who's at least to a reasonable degree got mine--as many of us here know, developers don't make bad money. But that doesn't ultimately mean much if society isn't kept stable and healthy.

It reminds me a great deal of Monty Python's "What have the Romans ever done for us?" sketch. Substitute "gubmint" for "Romans", and you've essentially got the same scenario.

And it boggles my mind that people think private companies bent on making as much profit as possible will provide services at a lower cost than an entity which need not make one.

about a year ago
top

Florida Teen Expelled and Arrested For Science Experiment

laughingcoyote Re:Playing the race card again (1078 comments)

Why do you think the Occupy movement scared the holy hell out of them? It wasn't because they set up tents in a few parks.

Really, neither side cares too much whether you favor the puppet on the left or the puppet on the right, so long as you're busy demonizing the other side and staying divided. That's just your required participation in the Two Minutes' Hate, citizen. But when someone came along and said "We know who's pulling the strings, and we're all here to talk to the puppeteer", well now, THAT had to be stopped.

about a year ago
top

Federal Magistrate Rules That Fifth Amendment Applies To Encryption Keys

laughingcoyote Re:The guy knows about Truecrypt (322 comments)

If the interrogator has already decided you're guilty, and is going to beat/torture you regardless, I fail to see how it makes any difference even if you really did have no idea the encrypted data was on the machine and have no clue what the password even is, or if you really do only have a single encrypted main volume because you handle, for example, sensitive data from clients and aren't hiding anything illegal at all.

So I guess I really don't see what the difference is. In that case, you're screwed even if you really are innocent. Maybe you really aren't doing or hiding a thing illegal, but how does even that help you in a scenario like you put forth?

about a year ago
top

Federal Magistrate Rules That Fifth Amendment Applies To Encryption Keys

laughingcoyote Re:Obligatory XKCD (322 comments)

The interrogator's imagination of what would happen: "Hit him with the $5 wrench. He'll give up the password."

What actually happens: "Ow! Ow! Alright, here's the password!" (Not said: To the non-hidden volume, which is seeded with things that are embarrassing but legal, explaining why I'd want to encrypt them.) Truecrypt can make an undetectable hidden volume, and the computer will behave totally "normally" if only the visible one is mounted. If anything is written to the hard drive with only the visible volume mounted, it may corrupt the hidden volume data, but it won't reveal it or show a smaller size than the size of the partition.

about a year ago
top

Federal Magistrate Rules That Fifth Amendment Applies To Encryption Keys

laughingcoyote Re:Last Sentence (322 comments)

The critical difference in Scenario 2 is not actually reasonable suspicion. The difference in Scenario 2 is that the authorities now already know the encrypted data belongs to you, because of your friend's testimony. Decrypting it for them will not prove that you're the owner of it, they already know that.

On the other hand, if they just suspected (even with probable cause) that the encrypted partition contained evidence of malfeasance, but didn't already have conclusive proof it's yours, requiring you to decrypt the data tells them something they didn't know; namely, that you have access to that encrypted data. That's exactly where the Fifth applies. They can get a warrant for the data, but they can't force you to admit it's your data.

about a year ago
top

TSA Log Shows Passengers Say the Darndest Things

laughingcoyote Re:Cool story bro. (427 comments)

...and stupid people take them seriously.

If they're stupid or crazy enough to joke about having a bomb in an airport, I'd prefer not to have them on the plane with me even if they don't have one.

1 year,13 days
top

USPS Discriminates Against 'Atheist' Merchandise

laughingcoyote Re:Maybe... (1121 comments)

No. It's possible that the two packages were split into 2 separate shipments due to truck capacity (as an example). Shipment #1 ships out on the last truck at the end of a business day. Overnight, a snowstorm could hit, causing Shipment #2 on the first truck out the next day to be delayed because of poor road conditions.

While that's certainly possible, if both the labelled and unlabelled package were in each case otherwise the same (sent on the same day, the same weight and size, near the same time, to/from the same location, random order whether labelled or unlabelled ships first), one would expect that, even if such splits or unforeseen events occurred, they would affect the unlabelled packages with delays roughly as often as the labelled ones. Instead, the labelled ones were affected far more frequently, to a degree that's easily into statistical significance.

1 year,15 days
top

Cyber Criminals Tying Up Emergency Phone Lines Through TDoS Attacks, DHS Warns

laughingcoyote Re:Police, Fire Brigade, Truncheon, Axe... (115 comments)

A civil court would be free to decide for example that it appears your machine was pwnd by a zero day; and there is nothing therefore you could have 'reasonably' done so you have no responsibility for any damage it was used to inflict. OOTH your machine hasn't seen a patch in four years and your firewall is no-existent or configured so as to be nearly useless you could be responsible as you were negligent.

Given some of the idiotic rulings on tech cases we've seen out of courts even at the highest levels with years worth of testimony to get a clue, do you really trust your local courthouse magistrate to make technical distinctions that fine? I sure don't. That's before you even get to the expectation that everyone who purchases a computer knows how to properly configure and maintain a firewall.

Just like you'd be negligent if you left your car in neutral without the parking break applied and it rolled in to traffic while you were shopping.

No, to stretch the analogy until it screams, it's more like you left your window down. Someone then reached into the vehicle, broke the ignition switch, took off the parking brake, put the car in neutral, and gave it a good push, rolling it into traffic. They shouldn't do that, whether or not you left your window down (or even if you also left the keys in the ignition), and it is their fault for misusing someone else's property in that way. You can still argue it's not a good security practice to leave the window down and the keys in the ignition, but that doesn't give other people a license to steal or misuse the car, nor does it make the owner rather than the interloper responsible if someone does.

Leaving an un-patched, unprotected box connected to the internet is a negligent (if not legally practically).

What about "developing and selling a highly vulnerable OS"? That's A-OK, but expecting the end users to be responsible when the product is flawed is reasonable?

1 year,15 days

Submissions

top

laughingcoyote laughingcoyote writes  |  more than 7 years ago

laughingcoyote writes "With a friend, I agreed to use Windows for six months on my new laptop. He swore up and down that by the time I was done I'd have found it so easy to use I'd never want to switch back to Linux again. What I found, though, is that while Windows has its advantages, it sure offers a lot of difficulty to the average user. We also agreed that I wouldn't ask him any questions, to better simulate the experience of a novice user to Windows.

Let's start with installation. I got the Windows CD through an "academic" program at my school. It took them several days to burn the CD and get me an "install key" though. When I asked them if I could just download and burn the CD myself, they just looked at me funny and told me they weren't allowed to tell me. They must just be worried about too much bandwidth being used on the distribution mirrors or something.

Well anyway, they eventually got me the CD, with an "install key". When I asked them if it was really a good idea to have someone else generate your initial crypto key, they looked at me funny again and told me it was to prevent "piracy." Now what a crypto key has to do with boats, I don't know. I'm not taking my laptop on boats, knowing my luck it'd get splashed! But they were quite convinced of this.

Well, now I had my CD, so I popped it in to install. There was already a "home" edition of Windows on the laptop, but they told me the "Pro" edition through the school's program was better. When I asked why you couldn't just upgrade through the regular repository, they had no idea what I was talking about. I decided not to press the issue and just upgrade from the CD.

Well, anyway, turns out the "upgrade" from CD formats the entire drive! While I didn't mind too much, this would sure be a nasty shock to a user that had important data on it! They really should encourage people to use a repository upgrade instead. I couldn't find a word on how to do this, even after several Google queries. Someone really needs to get to writing better documentation for novice users, I think.

Well, anyway. I got partway through the install process and was asked for my "key." I put it in, but apparently they'd given me the wrong one! I was told to call a phone number. Now really, why they couldn't just have you generate a new key at the time is beyond me, especially since it took me halfway to forever to input the long code into the phone system, and another half hour or so on hold. I was then transferred to a guy I could hardly understand. His English was alright, but really, they'd do better directing you to an IRC channel-accents don't matter there!

Anyway, as I learned to understand this guy, he kept asking me if my copy was "retail" or "OEM". I told him that my school had burned my copy for me. He then kept asking me the same question, and telling me that burning a copy was "illegal"-or that's what it sounded like. I finally read him the paper I'd been given from my school, and at that point he seemed to change his mind. He gave me a second code to put in, which finally allowed me to complete the install. Now, granted, I'm quite familiar with computers, but this would really have been a significant frustration to the novice user.

Well, after that the install seemed to go through alright, and I removed the installation CD and rebooted. I noted with some dismay that I had not been prompted to create a password, and wondered if the system would do so after the reboot. However, after the reboot, I was let right in without a password! Later on, I came to find out that this "passwordless" user is the default! I certainly would be hesitant to keep any important files on such a system with such a basic flaw in its security model.

Well, of course this was unacceptable, so the first thing I did was attempt to open a shell. I first looked under "accessories"-nothing. I then used ctrl-alt-F6 to attempt to switch to a virtual console-and again, no result. I tried "system," and every menu on the system, but was just unable to find a shell altogether.

Well, eventually, after some Google searching, it turns out you must hit the "run" button and type in "cmd" to open a shell. Now that's a bit arcane, but that's not the worst of it! Turns out, the default shell does almost exactly nothing! After trying "passwd", "password", and several other variants, I did some more Googling in search of the correct command. Turns out it's not even possible to set your password from the shell! (I was wondering at this time how a remote SSH user would possibly manage, but it turns out it's not even possible to log in remotely to a shell via SSH!) Well, anyway, I finally found the "control panel", and managed to get the password set.

I noticed at this time my user was set as a "computer administrator"-this seemed quite odd. After yet more Google searching, it turns out that not only does Windows create a passwordless account upon install, but this account has root privileges! Not only that, but any further accounts created have, by default, root access as well! Do you really think the average user, setting up a child's account, for example, would have the sense to downgrade that user's privileges? It may seem a little thing, but it's this type of reason why Windows is simply not ready for the average user's desktop.

Finally, I had absolutely NO luck figuring out how to use the Windows repository. No amount of Googling could get me the answer, and on the Windows forums I posted on the users seemed not even to know what I was talking about. Generally, you have to go out on the Internet, and find -every- program you wish to download! Really, Linux solved this problem years ago!

Well, I figured I'd set up a way to log in remotely, though I was a little leery of this given the seeming lack of security. I did find a way to do this, called "remote desktop"-though one must log into a graphical environment. However, this type of login has a serious bug-a remote login kicks any other user offline! And if the local user logs back in, the remote user is similarly kicked. I quickly gave up on this, there's no telling what other bugs might be present in such an obviously flawed application.

So, overall, while I did enjoy some of the Windows games, and it was a different experience-overall, I'm sure glad to be installing my nice familiar Linux environment, as the six months are up today. Maybe in five or ten years Windows can be overhauled to be ready for the desktop, but right now? It's not even close.

"
top

laughingcoyote laughingcoyote writes  |  more than 7 years ago

laughingcoyote writes "President Bush admitted today that secret CIA prisons have been used by the United States to detain terrorism suspects. Bush states that 14 suspects were moved from these camps to Guantanamo Bay, including Khalid Sheik Mohammed. He denies any wrongdoing and states that interrogation techniques at the facility are "tough but not torture. While the existence of these facilities has been implicitly understood for some time, what effect will this open admission have on US relations with European allies and the rest of the world?"

Journals

top

This is not my America.

laughingcoyote laughingcoyote writes  |  more than 7 years ago

I will say this in short, because the incident speaks for itself.

This does not happen in my America. Those who did this are criminals. They need to go to prison and never get out.

And for anyone who disagrees? I'm sorry, but you're guilty too. Anyone who would tolerate or defend the torture of anyone, but especially a totally innocent man, needs a nice tight cell too.

top

My Windows experience

laughingcoyote laughingcoyote writes  |  more than 7 years ago

With a friend, I agreed to use Windows for six months on my new laptop. He swore up and down that by the time I was done I'd have found it so easy to use I'd never want to switch back to Linux again. What I found, though, is that while Windows has its advantages, it sure offers a lot of difficulty to the average user. We also agreed that I wouldn't ask him any questions, to better simulate the experience of a novice user to Windows.

Let's start with installation. I got the Windows CD through an "academic" program at my school. It took them several days to burn the CD and get me an "install key" though. When I asked them if I could just download and burn the CD myself, they just looked at me funny and told me they weren't allowed to tell me. They must just be worried about too much bandwidth being used on the distribution mirrors or something.

Well anyway, they eventually got me the CD, with an "install key". When I asked them if it was really a good idea to have someone else generate your initial crypto key, they looked at me funny again and told me it was to prevent "piracy." Now what a crypto key has to do with boats, I don't know. I'm not taking my laptop on boats, knowing my luck it'd get splashed! But they were quite convinced of this.

Well, now I had my CD, so I popped it in to install. There was already a "home" edition of Windows on the laptop, but they told me the "Pro" edition through the school's program was better. When I asked why you couldn't just upgrade through the regular repository, they had no idea what I was talking about. I decided not to press the issue and just upgrade from the CD.

Well, anyway, turns out the "upgrade" from CD formats the entire drive! While I didn't mind too much, this would sure be a nasty shock to a user that had important data on it! They really should encourage people to use a repository upgrade instead. I couldn't find a word on how to do this, even after several Google queries. Someone really needs to get to writing better documentation for novice users, I think.

Well, anyway. I got partway through the install process and was asked for my "key." I put it in, but apparently they'd given me the wrong one! I was told to call a phone number. Now really, why they couldn't just have you generate a new key at the time is beyond me, especially since it took me halfway to forever to input the long code into the phone system, and another half hour or so on hold. I was then transferred to a guy I could hardly understand. His English was alright, but really, they'd do better directing you to an IRC channel-accents don't matter there!

Anyway, as I learned to understand this guy, he kept asking me if my copy was "retail" or "OEM". I told him that my school had burned my copy for me. He then kept asking me the same question, and telling me that burning a copy was "illegal"-or that's what it sounded like. I finally read him the paper I'd been given from my school, and at that point he seemed to change his mind. He gave me a second code to put in, which finally allowed me to complete the install. Now, granted, I'm quite familiar with computers, but this would really have been a significant frustration to the novice user.

Well, after that the install seemed to go through alright, and I removed the installation CD and rebooted. I noted with some dismay that I had not been prompted to create a password, and wondered if the system would do so after the reboot. However, after the reboot, I was let right in without a password! Later on, I came to find out that this "passwordless" user is the default! I certainly would be hesitant to keep any important files on such a system with such a basic flaw in its security model.

Well, of course this was unacceptable, so the first thing I did was attempt to open a shell. I first looked under "accessories"-nothing. I then used ctrl-alt-F6 to attempt to switch to a virtual console-and again, no result. I tried "system," and every menu on the system, but was just unable to find a shell altogether.

Well, eventually, after some Google searching, it turns out you must hit the "run" button and type in "cmd" to open a shell. Now that's a bit arcane, but that's not the worst of it! Turns out, the default shell does almost exactly nothing! After trying "passwd", "password", and several other variants, I did some more Googling in search of the correct command. Turns out it's not even possible to set your password from the shell! (I was wondering at this time how a remote SSH user would possibly manage, but it turns out it's not even possible to log in remotely to a shell via SSH!) Well, anyway, I finally found the "control panel", and managed to get the password set.

I noticed at this time my user was set as a "computer administrator"-this seemed quite odd. After yet more Google searching, it turns out that not only does Windows create a passwordless account upon install, but this account has root privileges! Not only that, but any further accounts created have, by default, root access as well! Do you really think the average user, setting up a child's account, for example, would have the sense to downgrade that user's privileges? It may seem a little thing, but it's this type of reason why Windows is simply not ready for the average user's desktop.

Finally, I had absolutely NO luck figuring out how to use the Windows repository. No amount of Googling could get me the answer, and on the Windows forums I posted on the users seemed not even to know what I was talking about. Generally, you have to go out on the Internet, and find -every- program you wish to download! Really, Linux solved this problem years ago!

Well, I figured I'd set up a way to log in remotely, though I was a little leery of this given the seeming lack of security. I did find a way to do this, called "remote desktop"-though one must log into a graphical environment. However, this type of login has a serious bug-a remote login kicks any other user offline! And if the local user logs back in, the remote user is similarly kicked. I quickly gave up on this, there's no telling what other bugs might be present in such an obviously flawed application.

So, overall, while I did enjoy some of the Windows games, and it was a different experience-overall, I'm sure glad to be installing my nice familiar Linux environment, as the six months are up today. Maybe in five or ten years Windows can be overhauled to be ready for the desktop, but right now? It's not even close.

top

Yet another fundamentalist tactic

laughingcoyote laughingcoyote writes  |  more than 7 years ago

Our favorite fundamentalists are at it again! This time, they're trying to push through a bill called the Public Expression of Religion Act. This bill, if passed, would prohibit plaintiffs in cases of even blatant violations of church and state separation from being reimbursed their attorney's fees.

I've included a sample letter, which I already sent to my Congressman on the issue. It also outlines exactly why I object to the bill. Please feel free to use, modify, or do whatever you like with it.

Dear Rep. ________,

I am writing to you to urge you to vote against the Public Expression of Religion Act.

While the Act purports to end a "chilling effect" on public officials' expression of religion, this is untrue. No public official has ever been successfully sued for attending church or promoting religion on their own time.

On the other hand, public officials are barred from either promoting or prohibiting religion in the course of their public duties. This prohibition does not come from a "chilling effect" of litigation, but from their duty to uphold the Constitutional principle of separation of church and state.

In many cases, it is difficult for the victims of religious discrimination to show actual damages. In this case, the recovery of attorneys' fees allows them to still be able to bring a suit in these cases.

Even when this happens, attorneys' fees are only awarded to the plaintiff when they are correct-when the rules, laws, and Constitution really were being violated! This is entirely right and proper.

The "threat" of a successful lawsuit against any government entity over an unlawful religious display can be avoided with one very simple tactic: Follow the rules in the first place.

top

Constrained Writing Exercise

laughingcoyote laughingcoyote writes  |  more than 8 years ago

Constrained writing exercise, as conceived by ShadowWrought.

This should be a fun and quick exercise. What follows below are ten words randomly generated, you must them all in your work, though not necessarily in the order in which they are listed (though you do get bonus points if you do;-). The limits on the writing is simple:

  • For prose, no more than 5 paragraphs.

  • For poetry, no more than 20 lines.

  • For a play, TV script, or screenplay, no more than a single brief scene.

And the words are...

  1. Spacecraft
  2. Parasite
  3. Refugee
  4. Volcano
  5. Boiler
  6. Generator
  7. Jam
  8. Photograph
  9. Boxer
  10. Onion

My submission follows in a comment.

top

Anarchocapitalism debate

laughingcoyote laughingcoyote writes  |  more than 8 years ago

I recently got into a very interesting debate with a self-styled "anarchocapitalist". I've read von Mises' works, and to me, they seem so full of inconsistency, supposition, and half-baked ideas so as to be totally unrealistic. But what do you think? Can anyone out there coherently defend this philosophy? Does anyone else agree with me? I put this here rather then linking directly so as not to spam up a public discussion with offtopic posts (well, more then has happened, anyway.) Your thoughts?

Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...