"I challenge you to find me some Men's Rights Activists who are doxing."

So, lemme tell you how this kind of shit plays out.

First, I google:
mra dox
Then I just link random shit.
Second, in each case, you claim "No True MRA Would Dox".
Third (optional), you make personal attacks on me if you can*

In some cases you'll be correct, of course- MRA has become a slur in a whole bunch of circles. It's just pretty much a catch-all, as the misuse at the top demonstrates, and it's a bogeyman- like, "you can't believe this, because some MRAs believe that".

Here's a case of reddit users trying to (and incorrectly) doxxing some woman unrelated to some trollish feminist:
http://www.dailydot.com/crime/...

This is also the very first google response, and I'd never heard of it until this moment. The second is literally from a subreddit called "against men's rights", which seems to have some data that you are more than welcome to pick apart (a subreddit with such a hateful title likely has plenty of unsubstantiated stuff, but it's a pretty long post- I bet some of it is real, right?).

Oh, the third response is AVFM justifying the doxxing that they admit to doing. That good enough? AVFM is an MRA website, right?

Now, for the first link (or any, really), you could go with:
1) "We don't know that these are MRAs"
2) "Technically, they didn't dox her, because they found the wrong chick (or other technicality)"
3) "They didn't act like the kind of MRA that I follow, so they don't count"
4) "Ok, but in this case, it was justified"

But it all misses the point (even if one or more is correct for any given case). The point is, you know full well that if you post some really well phrased, interesting, or extreme position in the gender war, a legion of anonymous people with entire skeletons to pick have a real chance of shitting all over you. Maybe you get a few bad emails, maybe you get some scary snail mail, or maybe you get SWATted, who knows, right?

*bonus points for my core point IF- you identify as "MRA" or "feminist" and already opened my username in new tab.... you know, just to check. Can't be too sure who is on what side of what is apparently a damned war, right?

Ads are harmful. They are a form of statistically-proven mind control that are legal for free speech reasons. The best thing you can say about ads is "we don't take down advertisers with guns, because we allow free speech". That's the strongest argument they can make. They hurt consumer choice, increase debt, create expectations of products that they don't live up to, push towards a version of society with defective bullshit, hurt popular opinion of home-grown solutions, lower mindfulness, and change the overall discussion to be about "why don't you drink X" instead of that not even being a relevant topic.

It's so insidious that I actually lack the vocabulary to even phrase the previous sentence properly, and it would take a well formed article to even express the opinion. Short version: advertisements already control everything. Even if you don't buy advertised products, that's a deviant choice and you have to defend it.

Now, lets take the tech side, and the property ownership side.

1)- You buy a device capable of doing your bidding.
2)- Instead of that, it tries to control your mind on behalf of third parties, who offer you no compensation, and only seek to harm you.
3)- This idiot argues in favor of you not having control of the device that you paid for, because he wants to control it, and you.

What a scam artist. I celebrate every ad blocked, I cherish every webpage rendered into content instead of horseshit.

NOT using an adblocker is immoral. It hurts you, and by becoming familiar with brands, you unwittingly become their agent- and thereby you hurt your friends and family. If someone were to ask you about some random shit brand whose only merit is that they advertised, your response will be something like "I dunno but their ads are annoying/funny/cute/dumb". That's a huge fucking win for some shit company. It should be "who knows, never used them". But it isn't. Because advertisers won.

I think this is the first time I've seen "MRA" in a slashdot headline (I could have missed some, but I do check reasonably often). It's certainly the first time Return of Kings attention-getting trollish posts (including stuff like "why girls with short hair are damaged" and "why to date a girl with an eating disorder") has baited slashdot, that I'm aware of.

But the bigger concern is- is slashdot going to really enter this territory? This is hugely controversial stuff. We've already seen "feminism Friday" become a thing- normally some genderwarrior-bait story near the end of the week, normally told from a feminist perspective- sometimes legit, sometimes not. One piece that is largely controversial on slashdot is the "should we bend over backwards to get girls in tech" thing, obviously built in controversy for a bunch of professional tech people, and we see it *over and over again*.

But this is beyond that. You would expect people to have differing opinions on that stuff, and whether you are opposed or in favor, it's pretty relevant. Random gender warring stories, such as this, are not.

I'll also point this out: the editorial staff seems to be pretty strongly on one side. It may be difficult to give MRAs a fair shake, but certainly, by calling RoK an MRA website, and by linking that as the first thing ever, they aren't even fucking trying. This would be like calling out "feminists" and then linking to some really ludicrous 70s-edge position as being the standard-bearer. A Voice For Men's website is probably a better place to start if you want to actually go find non-strawmen points to analyze / refute- they at least self identify as some version of MRA, not some reactionary / PUA crossbreed like RoK.

The people who discuss these gender things online tend to be full-on soldiers, on both sides. They will do or say anything to slam the other side, they will dox, they will make false claims, they are fighting a fucking war. And you want the slashdot commenters to be in on this? Gross.

Who cares?

If we have an option between "windmill that kills birds" and "windmill that does not do that", the second has a bit of merit because of that fact. It's in the discussion. Certainly, the decision to expand new windmills is affected by the bird-death argument: we could probably stand to use an order of magnitude more windmills, after all, and by your estimate, they would then by tying the cats.

Cats are atopical. I'm sure a bunch of crap kills birds aplenty. This is a discussion about windmills.

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

Where is the data on this?

Here's what I can find:
https://www.aavmc.org/data/ima...

This shows a HUGE ramp downward in men, and a giant upslope of women.

This shows 78.6% females in the most recent year.

I also can't find a thing showing the study you refer to- a massive group preference for men, and a switch when blinded.

Frankly, the Death Star was even too big for its own in-universe fiction. As something a fraction of the size of a moon, covered entirely in guns, in a universe where that's a pretty overwhelming strategy, the fact that it would obliterate a fleet is entirely given- hence the "send the little ships in" thing being the only hope.

But what if the law were a bit different?

In this case, there's no real doubt he did it. Same with the asshole from the Aurora shooting. And they killed like, a bunch of people each. Normal concerns about whether the DA is trying to kill some mentally retarded man, or find some way to execute whatever skin tone they have a beef with, are off the table.

It's interesting that no one is trying to raise the bar for crimes that can result in execution, given that people are a lot more ok with executions in these cases. I guess no one wants to go out and say "if there's X eyewitnesses and you kill Y people then..."

It sends the message "If you mass murder people, you yourself will be executed".

Not about hate. Justice.

But that's a self-caused problem. If someone is arguing about the cost, then reasonably they should be ok with reducing the cost. In fact, they never are- they are morally opposed to the concept of the execution to begin with, and are just grabbing whatever is nearby to throw instead of arguing for real. We could definitely envision a place where it's much cheaper to execute than imprison (cheaper lawyers, faster trials, less oversight, unilateral death sentences from masked judges- even actually reasonably conditions for our prisoners would push the calculus away from that).

It's not about the cost, and it's bullshit whenever anyone brings it up.

"Yeah, I'm aware that Muslim terrorists are waging war on three continents already, against people who ARE NOT arrogant, overbearing bastards with military bases located around the world."

The US isn't any more "arrogant" or "overbearing" than any other nation, and the US does a shit lot of good around the world.

Much more importantly- it's not "food for thought". It's fucking HORSESHIT. The damage done by violent Islamists appears roughly proportional to how much they are resisted with deadly force, and *no other fucking thing at all*.

Tolerant places? Blown up.
Their own places? Blown up.
Shia? Blown up by some Sunni extremist.
Sunni? Blown up by some Sunni extremist too.

The safest place from violent Islamists is the United States, because the US has the power and technology to defend its citizens. That's a fact.

Did you follow IS and A-Q declared jihad on each other or something? I don't think they are blowing each other up yet, but they will.

These are violent terrorists. They will give no quarter. They will not choose targets based on turning your fat stupid belly up and begging.

Plenty of OSes have, over the course of history, been written in assembly.

And all of them proprietary, just like this one.

Menuet is cool, but I don't see a compelling reason to use closed source assembly unless it demonstrates some really crazy superpowers. It's also an odd case of a GPL codebase switching to a closed source license a couple years before it becomes useful.

Kolibri forked from the GPLed 32 bit branch, but I don't think it's pure ASM at all.

Definitely lost a house in a hurricane and lived in hurricane country for years, so yes, I know what I'm talking about.

> Essentially, yes, you get some warnings.

"Some warnings" = Paper talks about it, all over the internet, all over the news, weather station tracks it a huge percent of the time, government issues statements.

You also have a huge window to evacuate in. This is not some sky-is-falling thing- the power of the storms are well known, their trajectory is iffy when they are mid-Atlantic but well known by the time they are going to make land (no, you don't know whether your building will take eyewall or not), etc.

Everyone. Fucking. Knows.

People evacuate. Valuables go with them. Pets go with them. If hurricanes weren't well known and had huge warning, the death tolls would be incredible. If you have enough time to evacuate huge swaths of population, you can grab your fucking SSDs on the way out.

"Businesses in that sort of situation would not expect any need to do something special because they've switched to SSDs."

Sure, and *you wouldn't let your hard drive ride out a storm either*. Certainly not if you give a fuck about the data in it. You can have A ROOF GO AWAY during a storm, and even if you aren't facing that kind of storm, it's reasonable for water to get absolutely EVERYWHERE. So no, you don't assume your HDDs are good to sit, you don't toss them in a little safe and bail, they go in the vehicles. So do the SDDs.

"Finally, to answer your other post: 100 degrees indoors in buildings without AC a couple of days after the hurricane is quite normal. "

It absolutely is not after a hurricane. Most big hurricanes hit in the fall, not the summer. You COULD get an August storm (unlucky), that is powerful enough to wreck the power (unluckIER, as those are normally less powerful), followed, not by cooling rains, but by clear days or other warm weather (even WAY unluckier, as the path of the storm normally will bring in some lesser weather over the next few days). Telling me that it can get past 100 in the tropics, not news. But saying that you that you would be really unlucky to have 100+ degree days after a serious hurricane is absolute fact.

Also, you'd have to get really unlucky to have 100 degree days right after a hurricane. It can happen, but it's by no means likely.

If the step 2 of your failure scenario is "hurricane", you...

1)- Have plenty of possible mitigation. Hurricans are trackable and reasonably predictable, and you could load your things into an evac van, or back them up, or have a generator. If you don't have a generator, it's super possible to acquire one- those things are sold by the side of the road after a real storm.
2)- Have a pretty good plan. A hurricane hitting your data center, house, or anything at all is certainly able to destroy it anyway, without a convoluted thing. Additionally, you'll have hurricane insurance, which will cover stuff like this.
3)- Got pretty much smited by a storm god. If that's your failure scenario, that's ok.