McAfee Security founder wanted for murder in Belize
arstechnica.com
arstechnica.com
"John McAfee, who founded the antivirus software giant named after him, is wanted for questioning by police in Belize who are investigating the murder of a 52-year-old man, CBS reported today.
According to the report, police are searching for the killer of Gregory Viant Faull, an American expat. Gizmodo reported earlier today that McAfee was wanted for the crime, but CBS, quoting Rafael Martinez, spokesman for the Belize National Security Ministry, said it would be incorrect to call McAfee a suspect at this time. "
From: http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57548458-83/antivirus-pione...
There is plenty of smoke here, even a smoking gun but it would be premature to conclude McAfee handled the gun and if he did that it was murder.
My impression is that McAfee is a brilliant fraud, trying his best to communicate something he feels is of great value but constantly tripped up by some innate compulsion to embellish. On the other hand, he's one of the most articulate and lucid characters in the thread. While there are a few other mentally intact and highly intelligent posters, I picture him as the hapless 35-year-old sixth-grader in Miss Mandible's classroom: http://www.coldbacon.com/writing/barthelme-mandible.html
Is it more of a surprise that he's comes across as genuine, fully coherent, and rational, or that most of those consuming drugs made in their kitchen based on questionable mail-order supplies and loose online descriptions have to be reminded several times that baking powder is not the same as baking soda? My other main impression is that many of the journalists attempting to summarize the thread in various online venues share the reading comprehension level of the latter.
Long story short, these drugs would inhibit bacterial growth without creating resistances. If they pan out, they're a revolution in antimicrobial medicine.
He met Allison Adonizio (who introduced him to QSI) long after he moved to Belize. They managed to synthesize a compound that was already patented by a big pharm company, but produced no original research.
It is not hard to figure out John moved to Belize because of the lax drug enforcement and age of consent laws.
Like I said, that's the "publically stated" reason. Evidently it's just that -- bullshit smoke he's been blowing to cover up his foul play.
Lax drug enforcement, sure, but age of consent? It's 16. There are dozens of countries where it's significantly lower -- many 12 or 13. Don't see why that'd be much of a motivator, even if that's your thing; most US states are 16 too, IIRC.
Right, but it's 18 in California, where most TV shows and movies come from, so the unexamined idea in everyone's head is that it's 18 everywhere in the country.
TV Tropes (you knew this was coming) mentions this as an example of SoCalization. The infiltration of Californian idiom and assumptions into the global mass media is truly insidious. But hey, isn't Silicon Valley in California as well?
Not sure if that's true, but it might not be as altruistic as "antibiotic research".
> a stimulant that can produce similar effects to methamphetamine
That can describe many substances, both legal and illegal: street meth, Adderall, Vyvanse, Desoxyn, MDMA - the list goes on. Even caffeine could be said to produce 'similar effects' - both are stimulants and diuretics that have comparable in vivo half-life times (depending on the means of ingestion).
> It is illegal in the United States.
Well, that doesn't mean much. Methamphetamine is illegal, except when it isn't (prescribed). And the US drug scheduling (which determines the degrees of legality) is so nonsensical that it may as well be randomly generated for all it tells us about the relative dangers and harms of a substance.
My point is that this is a rather irresponsible journalistic statement. If they want to portray MDVP as a dangerous substance, that's a pretty terrible comparison that fails to get the point across to anybody who knows a thing or two about psychoactive substances.
Which is arguably a single digit percentage of ars readers.
My background in journalism has taught me to favor the former.
I don't think it's a coincidence that most modern journalism isn't worth reading, IMHO.
> Or you do, but it's just decades old from a time when the goal was to inform and not just get page views?
It's not decades old - I just like to think we did a good job of writing informative pieces instead of sensationalist nonsense.
At least, we made a very, very dedicated effort to follow journalistic ethics - I'll let others be the judge on how well we succeeded. :-)
When the story ends (likely by suicide or imprisonment unfortunately) somebody should really make a movie about it.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/story/2012/11/12/mcafee-be...