Okay, and that'd be perfectly reasonable, if there was any way I was supposed to understand that source for the figures.

To put it another way, how was I supposed to know it wasn't armchair in the context of information available in this thread?

Flickr already missed the boat on being the social media image sharping app of choice.

So now they're missing the next boat by trying to be that instead. It's like the microsoft infinite loop, but now yahoo instead.

What thought process did you use to gauge your order of magnitude there? I'm generally distrustful of largish numbers thrown out in an armchair analysis.

Because you can just as easily say "millions" or "thousands" as you can "hundreds of thousands". What makes that number more right?

Honestly, what's wrong with just manually altering registers to initialize the OS? We could have little buttons that just turn individual bits on and off.

Regarding anti-vaccination: The Role of Conspiracist Ideation and Worldviews in Predicting Rejection of Science

Nonetheless, it must be reiterated that we found limited evidence for the rejection of vaccinations based on liberal or “left-wing” political leanings: When free-market worldviews are parceled out (and only then), people on the political left were less likely to endorse childhood vaccinations than people on the political right.

You gotta take the free market types out of the right wing to make it into a "left" phenomenon. This is a misconception that(as the study notes) derives from the fact that the most prominent public proponents come from the fringe left. But when it comes to the general population, rather than the promulgators, it's the conspiratorially minded, regardless of affiliation causing that particular problem.

I can't really endorse this either, because it basically falls into the general category of "tone argument". If the post has credibility, it should stand regardless of tone and ancillary statements about what other posters/mods might do.

This one fails on it's own merits. And that's all that should matter.

You're right that libertarians are more common than conservatives, and that they're loud enough to always be visible, and blindly ideological enough to mod people +1 agree or -1 disagree.

But even they, even combined with the paleoconservatives, don't seem to add up to a majority of users. The GP's post was pretty much just paranoid delusion and gross simplification.

1. As a liberal-as-fuck liberalite, libby lib, there is no malevolent conservative slashdot majority. This exists in your head and in your head alone. I post my totally correct liberal positions all the time, and only get modded down when I overly challenge people on specific subjects like misogyny.
2. While anti-intellectualism is a hallmark of the modern republican party, don't they don't even remotely compare in severity to paramilitary mostly uneducated third world anti-intellectuals.
3. Whether you're modded down or not, your statement is untrue on its own merits.

I don't know. Violent anti-intellectualism has a tendency to create shitty, miserable societies, but has more than enough historical precedent at lasting at least a few generations at some points in some societies' histories. Ancient China had bouts of it, so did Rome, and neither crashed as a direct result.

(It's obvious and you don't need to point out that ancient societies aren't modern societies, and the requirements for both are different). I'm just contesting the universality of the specific claim "A society that doesn't allow math won't last long."

Yes, but why the hell would modern hackers(who are after money, rather than bragging rights) give a shit about your air conditioner?

They wouldn't. Your email account is still the better thing to hack out of your device.

If you know how systemd works, go to another thread, please only reply if you're ignorant and want to have an angry, ill-informed debate.

Personally, I think you should be able to start and stop systemd when you want it.

Yeah, actually, when it comes to emotional manipulation, as a non-Scot on the internet, you pretty much only see the yes side doing that. I mean, I don't need it because it doesn't involve me, but I haven't heard even the most singular of pragmatic reasons for a yes vote.

Which makes me drop it in the same mental bin as "south will rise again" fuckwittery.

Please, if this whole debate has made one thing clear, it's there will be no compromise.

You'll think this is way off topic, and that's fine.

I just had to check, since the SFPD has made it clear that Sarkeesian reported exactly the threats she said she did, do you acknowledge you're wrong?

I read that news and decided to dig up the first person in the Sarkeesian thread who was saying that.

So... I'm reaching out to you, as one of the people who justified the shitbaggery that happened with that particularly idiotic line of reasoning, in the vain hope that you'll change your mind on exactly the evidence you demanded.

You are absolutely right that those things are detestable. I have no meaningful input to this discussion other than that I hate how marketing consistently misleads people.

I don't care if that comes out pro-apple or anti-apple, but modern marketing is ethically wrong.