tsotha

Martha Stewart was convicted based on an investigator's memory and the notes he had written in his notebook. It wasn't what she said, but what she said in someone else's words.

Do you really want to bet your freedom on the basis of someone else's interpretation of what you said?

Did you read the title of this post?

And yet the numbers back my interpretation.

The women I've known who "attempted" suicide weren't really trying to kill themselves. It was either attention seeking behavior or an attempt to punish people in their social circle. IMO it's more a question of intent than method.

That's why they call it "climate change" now, instead of "global warming". This way if it gets warmer - climate change. If it gets cooler - climate change. Bad weather? Climate change. Nice weather? Also climate change.

>But making the leap from that to "my code can't harm people" is a bridge too far.

Meh. My application is an internal app for a large company. It's basically scheduling software for a part of our business process. To even start to hack it you'd first have to break into the corporate network, and in the end you'd have data you didn't care about. Hell, I'm not even sure the people who use it care.

Worst case, a subtle bug (and it would have to be subtle for my users to miss it) might cost my employer a few thousand bucks.

Again, meh. There are a whole lot of internal applications that fall into this category.

My ethics are my own. I see no reason to make a public spectacle out of it one way or another.

It's odd that we never heard about that when the polar bears were supposed to drown.

>1) This is going to be used, fast, by the climate change denial camp to show "everything is OK", sad but true.

Seems pretty fair, doesn't it? I mean, any decreases have certainly been used by AGW promoters to show "the sky is falling".

I doubt there are many people entering prison who think they belong there.

I love the World Service. I just want to hear the news without gimmicks.