Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Yes to Brexit (Score 2) 396

The irony is that the UK is a net beneficiary of immigration. Immigrants work in the UK, pay their taxes and then return to their own countries before they burden the UK for services that those taxes pay for - benefits, pension, NHS etc.

That isn't to say that all immigrants are welcome of course and some of them are decidedly unwelcome (trafficked slaves, criminal gangs etc.). But it's overblown by the media, particularly those adept at pushing the fear button on their readers like the Daily Mail, Telegraph etc.

Comment Re:Yes to Brexit (Score 1) 396

Bizarre. The EU has a European parliament with directly elected members from each country with legislative powers. And it has an executive European Commission where each country is represented by a commissioner that they appoint that sets policy (to be voted upon). Plus of course every country has national governments. And local governments. So yes it's a democracy.

It's also clear that you're skipped set theorem and logic when you leapt to the wrong conclusion about what I wrote.

Comment Re:Yes to Brexit (Score 1) 396

Scotland's independence vote was another example of rationality going out of the window. The SNP wrapped a saltire around a bunch of lies about oil reserves and the standard of living that independence would bring when the reality was it would have been economic and financial suicide. The same applies for the UK and leaving the EU. It might feel good to leave but it sure as heck isn't rational and many studies conclude that the UK's GDP would be permanently reduced if it did.

Ironically the SNP are pro-Europe which makes it all the more bizarre. How can union with England, Wales and Northern Ireland be bad but union with France, Germany etc be good? Same for Sinn Fein. So it's likely if the UK left Europe that Scotland would break from England and become part of the EU. I could see Northern Ireland doing the same. What fun that would be.

Comment Re:Yes to Brexit (Score 5, Insightful) 396

Most rational people recognize Britain should be part of the EU. Unfortunately UKIP spooked the Conservative party and they made a bunch of promises about negotiations and a referendum to leave.

Leaving would be economic suicide so I expect Cameron will extract some concessions to persuade people to stay in and dodge that bullet. Because if he doesn't it's likely that the UK will leave the EU and Scotland and Northern Ireland would leave the UK. That would be Cameron's legacy and he knows it as much as anyone. It's probably why the Conservatives are already trying to take the bite out of some of the pro-exit talking points by tackling illegal immigration at the moment.

Comment Re:cheap BLU phones (Score 1) 313

Yeah, we have 2 of these in our family, and they're fine. I do find that mine loses connectivity faster than other phones at low signal, but I mainly use it as an emergency phone (I still don't get the point of cell phone culture, never mind smartphone culture) so I don't really mind.

Comment Re:Machine learning? (Score 0) 184

I can't have a serious discussion with you if you believe racist things. No one intellectually honest and capable can have a serious discussion with a racist, because it is only possible to believe in racist things if you are of low intellect. Objectively true. To correlate skin color and intellect is gross prejudice composed of logical fallacies. It is ironic too (you need to be low iq to commit to the fallacies and believe this arbitrary link between skin color and intellect).

I can't have a serious discussion with a creationist or an antivaxxer or a ufo cultist either. Because to firmly believe these things is only possible if you are a person with a serious defect in intellect. I'm being 100% serious and sincere. You are a stupid person. Objectively true based on you having a racist belief. You are not worth the time of anyone serious, and you will never find the "fair" airing of your thoughts that you seek because everyone intelligent has discarded your entire domain. No one intellectually honest is interested in indulging and entertaining an idiot's idea. And that is exactly what racism is: the "thoughts" of the dumb people.

And if you want to improve the gene pool: don't have children. Again, I am completely sincere. You are a dumb person. To have a racist belief is only possible if you are.

Comment Re:Machine learning? (Score 1) 184

You disrespect people based on the color of their skin. Therefore you deserve no respect. You withhold respect for ignorant reasons. You see a skin color, and make a baseless judgment on intellect and character from that. Which, ironically, is proof you are unintelligent and of low character. Because to believe racist thoughts is only possible if you lack cognitive capacity in certain areas of reasoning and social intelligence, and if you have bad intent on society and individuals in general.

You're a disrespectful asshole, so you get nothing but insults and disrespect in return. You get what you give you ignorant douchebag.

Want to improve the gene pool? Don't have children. I mean that sincerely. The quality of your words here belies low intellect and low character on your part, objectively speaking.

Comment Re:Machine learning? (Score 1) 184

let us say, just for the sake of argument (i don't really believe your ignorance), that skin color and race are correlated somehow

it's a bell curve. you understand that, right?

so, for example, we have on one end one of the most cerebral presidents we've maybe ever had, at least since wilson: barack obama. obviously more intelligent than the vast majority of white people, as well as black people. more intelligent than people of all races, period

what is the value, exactly, of saying that because his skin is brown, that we have to ascribe some sort of negative modifier on how we perceive his intelligence, just because a bunch of other people who are brown are supposedly less intelligent on average?

intelligence is an INDIVIDUAL value. it does no good to class all people according to an arbitrary signifier. if you were interviewing a bunch of people for computer programmer, and disregarded the ones with brown skin because they were "less intelligent," you might have hired a dumb white person and disregarded the black genius. it does no good to you, nevermind black people, to use this shallow useless prejudice, because it doesn't actually help you. an INDIVIDUAL assessment is what matters

for example: most african americans have scottish, irish, english, etc. blood in them, because a lot of their forebearers were raped. therefore, a lot of white people were doing a lot of raping. therefore, according to racist "thinking," we should assume all white people are rapists, because we can prove they rape a lot ( i don't believe this, i'm just demonstrating your ignorance to you)

i'm not really sure this argument is worth having with you though, because i doubt you have enough intellectual capacity to appreciate the argument, since it requires a low iq to believe in racism. by believing in racism, and all of the logical fallacies that come with it, you have objectively proven to me that you are a stupid person. i don't respect you

Comment Re:Machine learning? (Score 0) 184

what i find interesting is that people who ascribe moronic connections: skin color and intelligence, for example, are, by definition of making that ignorant connection and taking it seriously, stupid people. you have to be low iq to be racist. so when they prescribe exclusionary social engineering to "fix" society of the problem of undesireables, they should take their own medicine and not breed, thereby vastly increasing the iq of the population. that's some good eugenics to improvie the "race"

besides, most african americans aren't really african: too many of them were raped. analyze any of their genetics and chances are you find german, irish, english, etc heritage

so, by the "logic" of how racists think, the real race problem is that all europeans are rapists. i don't believe that. i'm just demonstrating how fucking ignorant and low iq racist "thinking" is

Comment Re:Machine learning? (Score 0) 184

what's crazier than lame algorithms is trolls and racists having so much time and energy to devote to mental vomit generation

when attempting to understand something pathetic and useless, do not think "it has to be a machine," you give humanity too much credit. never underestimate how much of a depraved loser someone can become

Comment Re:Please? (Score 1) 116

no

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...

words drift in meaning all the time. nobody owns a language. what a word means is pretty much what people use it for. that's the only rule

as RC aircraft, especially quadcopters, have exploded in popularity, the term drone has come into common use to refer to this burgeoning sector

therefore, drone is a perfectly acceptable term now for this new generation of RC aircraft definition. no other authority needed, because there is no authority at all

neither you nor anyone else can say otherwise

people "misuse" the term hacker too. and certain mentally fragile and rigid, socially maladaptive folk get really upset about the semantic change for some reason. it's alternatively confusing and funny, that people get so upset at the simple and common notion that words change in meaning

don't be bad at adapting to change in your world. the word's new meaning continues on without you, your protestations mean nothing and simply marginalize you

languages are living things, get used to it

Slashdot Top Deals

"May your future be limited only by your dreams." -- Christa McAuliffe

Working...