Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Former Linux Developer Hans Reiser To Remain Locked Up

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by kcrudup View Post
    ... which is a good thing, IMO.
    Well, it's a sign of possibly a good thing, sure. I mean, if a community needs no moderation, that obviously is a good thing. But, hypothetically, if a community does not have moderation while still needing it... that's actually quite a bad thing. And, who knows, does this community need moderation? I don't think there is such a thing as an online community that needs absolutely no moderation.

    I've been online for decades now and I've not yet seen one.

    Comment


    • #62
      I can only imagine mixing some famous criminal names with the author names of some famous open source Linux/GNU related software, and wonder... would the software be as famous with the criminal related name.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by L_A_G View Post
        Looked up the sentencing guidelines in California and it sounds to me like he wasn't a very good negotiator or had Lionel Hutz as his lawyer. Absolute worst he could have gotten is first degree murder that carries a 25 to life sentence and that would have come with a non-insignificant chance of being found not guilty due to a conviction requiring proof beyond reasonable doubt.

        So in other words Weinstein would have walked free if he would be in a California court? Because he got sentenced without such proof. It was just testimony 1v1 in each case. For the sex with a underaged which americans strangly label "rape" which downplays sex with people without consent (and yes I agree that a 7 year old can't consent but a 15-17 year old can consent, in between this numbers we can discuss where the exact number lies but it does not lie at 18 and even then we don't need to use the same label, even if it is similar or even worse crime, because different things can have different names). So he would got have maybe if there was proof of his sex with a underaged 2-3 years in state prison if at all, because I don't know if there was more evidence for that if happend consentious sex.

        He had even emails that supported his site that it was all consentional, you can say that proofs nothing not without reasonable doubt true, but in a real legal system creating doubt would be enough for him, he would not have to proof his innocence. BUT in the reality that is at least I think it was in New York the Standard is now Guilty till proven innocent, and twitter decides who is guilty.

        Back to Raiser, it should not matter much how horrible his crime war, some said he is a psychopath if that is true, he should be send to a mental institution or it should be showed if that is fixable or managable, but I kind of doubt that this was a accurate description more a "he is a evil person because he did something bad" kind of statement, which of course is not true. So assuming that he is not mentally ill, the only question that matters is, is he really a danger.

        That the american System really rationally decides if he is still a danger I have my doubt, that does not even work in the EU in Germany as example, even psychotrists don't give green lite anymore because if they are 1 in 1000 cases wrong and the person does something they get blamed and sued. While they rather ruin 1000 lives and the huge positive impant 1000 people could have that would be much bigger than 1 person getting raped or something. Locking up 1000 people for live just to be save that 1 murder does not happen is A very expensive especially europeans prisons are not just slavery forced working and B we give up on 1000 people that could become positive members of society good husbands, in this case good Engineers. He is a good example why having people locked up for revenge does hurt society, it's not only him I have no big boner for him but again he is a good case to see why locking up everbody for 50 years for each crime like the US usually does is stupid.

        Weinstein got like 20-30 years or so for having a legal (sure morally questionable but legal) casting couch.
        Last edited by blackiwid; 03-24-2020, 06:28 AM.

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by cyclistefou View Post

          Since the Earth is flat, since a circle has 4 edges, since a fetus is part of woman's body, since best houses are built with cow milk butter... well with implications like that as the basis of an argument, you can justify anything.
          The fetus is literally connected to the mother, so it might as well be a part of her body, and even if you assume it isn't, it's inside of her.

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by DoMiNeLa10 View Post

            The fetus is literally connected to the mother, so it might as well be a part of her body, and even if you assume it isn't, it's inside of her.
            It is inside of her, sure! But how dare you claim it is a part of his body? I feel like I have to explain 1+1=2...

            The DNA of the fetus is different from the mother's, the blood group too (in most cases), etc... what is it you can't understand about it? I mean, why are we even discussing this? Come on, this is beyond ridiculous.

            So it is clear beyond any doubt that the fetus is not a part of the mother's body, hence a different individual, so the woman doesn't have a right over his life.

            But you know it. It doesn't take a smart person to understand the above. You know it, but the self-evident truth makes pro-abortion people uncomfortable because it's so practical to hit the "cancel" button when there is an unwanted pregnancy, that they repeat such blatant lies ad nauseam to justify killing innocents for preserving their career aspirations, comfort, etc.

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by cyclistefou View Post
              So it is clear beyond any doubt that the fetus is not a part of the mother's body, hence a different individual, so the woman doesn't have a right over his life.
              Even though the thread has been derailed beyond anything rational or reasonable and should be locked, I do feel like I have to point out that this argument of yours... is extremely, extremely thin. At best.

              First of all, the foetus is, quite literally, a parasite. Well, you wanted to get technical... so, let's get technical, shall we? The mother's body stands to gain nothing from a pregnancy, hence the pregnancy not being a symbiotic relationship whatsoever. Meaning it is parasitical. Hey, you opened this door. OK, so, now that we've established that there is an argument to be made for the foetus being a parasite... let's take another parasite as an example. Say, a tapeworm.

              Going to make a similar argument for people not having the right to take medication that is toxic to tapeworms, to clear their intestines of said tapeworm? Well, it's a different living entity. Some of which have a possible lifespan of 25 years. So, nothing to be sneezed at. What about the tapeworm's life?

              The argument that a foetus is a separate entity from its mother is extremely thin and always has been extremely thin. And it will always remain extremely thin. Because there are plenty of ethical reasons to be pro-choice. Do some research into the swathes of genetic defects that children can be born with. Quite a few of which leading to an extremely painful and torturous death. Some within months, some taking 2 decades but still leading to an inevitable death. At some point, you have to drop the "abortion is a sin/is bad"-card and take up the cause to alleviate suffering. It is only humane to do so.

              There are more reasons to be "pro choice" than against it. Literally millions of reasons. Why?

              https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1360426/

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by XI1YKaQsKJMZ View Post
                Even though the thread has been derailed beyond anything rational or reasonable and should be locked, I do feel like I have to point out that this argument of yours... is extremely, extremely thin. At best.

                First of all, the foetus is, quite literally, a parasite. Well, you wanted to get technical... so, let's get technical, shall we? The mother's body stands to gain nothing from a pregnancy, hence the pregnancy not being a symbiotic relationship whatsoever. Meaning it is parasitical. Hey, you opened this door. OK, so, now that we've established that there is an argument to be made for the foetus being a parasite... let's take another parasite as an example. Say, a tapeworm.

                Going to make a similar argument for people not having the right to take medication that is toxic to tapeworms, to clear their intestines of said tapeworm? Well, it's a different living entity. Some of which have a possible lifespan of 25 years. So, nothing to be sneezed at. What about the tapeworm's life?

                The argument that a foetus is a separate entity from its mother is extremely thin and always has been extremely thin. And it will always remain extremely thin. Because there are plenty of ethical reasons to be pro-choice. Do some research into the swathes of genetic defects that children can be born with. Quite a few of which leading to an extremely painful and torturous death. Some within months, some taking 2 decades but still leading to an inevitable death. At some point, you have to drop the "abortion is a sin/is bad"-card and take up the cause to alleviate suffering. It is only humane to do so.

                There are more reasons to be "pro choice" than against it. Literally millions of reasons. Why?

                https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1360426/
                Well, hello, and good-bye, you grown parasite. Your way of characterizing a fetus, a parasite, is like mental diarrhea.

                Call it a parasite you Hitler wannabe. I call it a child developing in mother's womb.

                Your opinions are at the same level than Himmler's or equivalent people. I don't even try to argue with that because you demonstrate beyond folly, your ideas are disgusting, and you're insane.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Interesting autistic threads from this article. Most coders when coding, are in an autistic (non-human) frame of mind. If the significant others try to bully our inner autist, we can all over-compensate. Murder? Very common with men, against other men & other women. It is often noted that the better coders are autistic types.
                  The "correctional" treatment of this once-talented murderer is another topic. As a coloured man in (white) Australia, I also have the proud experience of being imprisoned in our Australian prisons for "Six Years Hard Labour). Supposedly for "selling 501 milligrams of amphetamines. Never used illegal drugs, nor even caffeine, ethanol, pure sugars nor nicotine. "Corrections" of social deviates has been my long life vocation, since being born to "average, normal" parents.
                  This is the main point of the original article. What happens to "correct" undesirable behaviours of coding talent? Old technology meant physical environmental poverty. Modern technology now allows internet empowerment for allowing the "talent" to be actualised, even in one-off deviant behaviours.
                  PHORONIX is correct in this. How can we use our IT skills & interests to better "correct" deviant peoples? These deviants might be in a hospital, nursing home, prison, or third world locality. Can we use our advanced abilities to make this planet a better place? Not USA-style, but like us here in Australia, or those in the Scandinavian nation. "CORRECTIONS" is no longer harsh deprivation & punishment. PHORONIX knows this.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by gregzeng View Post
                    Can we use our advanced abilities to make this planet a better place?
                    We are, one challenge at a time. Currently this challenge -- https://www.tomshardware.com/news/fo...virus-covid-19

                    Was quite impressed with that development actually.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      puh...difficult.

                      "Let He Who Is Without Sin Cast The First Stone"

                      At which point the sin/crime disqualifies someone to contribute code.
                      First degree murder ok..Second degree murder?...Rape?....thievery?.... Racism?...domestic violence? ...avoidance of taxation?...Lying?....cheating?

                      Just by pure statistics there has to be more detestable crimes (covered/uncovered) under the devs.

                      This should not be any relativization - it just raises the question by which criminal activity we draw the line.
                      If we want to do it conclusive without bias we should exclude every sinner....but who isn't?

                      As said by others the legal system did already its job and thats why we have it.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X