Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Note: You can take 10% off all Slashdot Deals with coupon code "slashdot10off." ×

Comment Walls will not solve the problem (Score 1) 66

The issue with the Mexican and most Central American economies is graft and corruption at the Governmental level.

As if those things don't exist in the US....

Short of overthrowing those Governments - there's not a lot we can do other than what we've done (open markets - NAFTA).

Not even remotely true that we have done everything we can. Our relationships with countries to our south is anything but friendly or productive. A lot of those countries don't like us at all because our policies do nothing to help them.

Maybe we should try better border enforcement and encourage the local populace to institute change at home, rather than run away...

You can build the walls as high as you want and it WON'T MATTER. If there is money to be made they will keep coming. And frankly spending vast resources policing the border is hugely wasteful and will never solve the problem. They're ALREADY HERE in vast numbers. We have a far larger and less policed border with Canada and guess what? Canada is prosperous so there is no meaningful immigration problem. But the folks south of our border aren't white and don't speak English so we aren't so willing to help them.

As for encouraging the immigrants home countries to institute change is exactly what I suggested. You have to help them build their economies which in turn will spur changes. Right now the US trade policies are anything but helpful or friendly.

Comment Re:Veterans care (Score 1) 22

Anybody who ever served on active duty and handled classified information is just a bit hacked off at Her Majesty's cavalier attitude about, well, everything.

That's true, but comparing Hillary's sending and receiving emails that weren't marked as classified over a non-government server is absolutely NOTHING compared to Petraus' knowingly giving top secret information to someone with neither a need to know nor a security clearance. Remember Mata Hari? (I probably spelled that wrong)

Plus, his adultery is strictly against the USMJ code; people have gotten dishonorable discharges for that alone, and anyone else would have gotten time in Leavenworth for spilling secrets. Petraus got off not with a slap on the wrist, but a stern talking to.

User Journal

Journal Journal: Gimpy text and Mars

I use the Gnu Image Manipulation Program (GIMP) to design book covers. It's an excellent free open source program that has three weaknesses -- its menu structure is completely illogical (but can be gotten used to), I can't find a full spectrum palette, and its text handling is so poor as to be useless.

Comment Organized religion (Score 1) 66

I know your ravenous hatred blinds you, but churches have had the most success in making the world a better place.

I would say exactly the opposite. Organized religion is the foundation of countless wars, conflict and suffering. Organized religion is nothing more than a cynical means of controlling people and exercising power via irrational and unproveable beliefs. The fact that they do some charitable works does not begin to excuse the harm humanity has suffered because of the tribalism that results from organized religion. I don't care at all if people want to believe in some bizarre ideas of their own but they should keep them to themselves, particularly around children. I have a huge problem with people who think we should base public policy on their religion and who think I should have to share their weird ideas sometimes literally at gunpoint.

Most hospitals and universities were started by churches.

Demonstrably not true on both counts. Certainly plenty of hospitals were started by churches but demonstrably not the majority. 20% of hospitals in the US have a religious affiliation and the majority of those are catholic institutions. And most universities have largely secular origins if you actually bother to look. Furthermore these charitable acts by churches are anything but altruistic. They are nothing more than a thinly veiled marketing effort. They have the clear ulterior motive of proselytizing in order to swell the ranks of their tribe. It is usually a soft sell but it is a sell nonetheless.

Churches care about addicts, unwed mothers and many other people that the world throws away.

So do plenty of secular organizations. And the secular organizations don't do so with the ulterior motive of trying to convert people to join their superstitious cult exactly at the time when those people are most vulnerable.

Comment Immigration (Score 2) 66

In the past the right has proposed incremental changes to the immigration system

You mean incremental changes like self deportation, building a huge wall, etc? Yeah, let's not pretend the US political right has been anything remotely resembling rational about this issue - not to mention routinely racist (see Trump). Their general stance has largely been one of xenophobic hysteria with a complete disregard for why the problem exists in the first place or the economic consequences of their stance on the issue. Let's also not ignore the fact that most illegal immigrants coming into the US are Hispanic/Latino and that the Hispanic/Latino citizens eligible to vote tend to vote democrat and they (mostly) oppose the policies espoused by the US political right. The republicans will need the Hispanic vote but they keep shooting themselves in the foot on the issue.

Furthermore we DO need comprehensive immigration reform. The problem is that the left and right disagree on what the reforms should be and there hasn't been much willingness to compromise on the issue from either side.

People are coming to the US because there is economic opportunity. If there is economic opportunity where they are coming from then there is little reason for them to come. Want to solve the illegal immigration problem? Help Mexico and Central America build up their economy and it will (mostly) magically disappear. But illegal immigration is NOT what you should worry about. What you should worry about is if they stop trying to come to the US. That means economic opportunity has gone elsewhere.

Comment German software companies (Score 1) 54

I am not familiar with any German software companies other than Software AG and SAP (both which produce uniformly terrible software).

Then you haven't looked very hard. Plus there are tons of German companies that make software that are not pure software companies. Siemens for example makes quite a lot of software.

Comment Yes I want security issues blocked (Score 2) 117

Do we really want Google or Mozilla, or any other browser determining what content we can see or not see in a browser?

When it is a known security problem then I have no problem with it. As long as I have the ability to override the decision I don't really see it as an issue. Flash needs to die a hot painful death and this is probably the fastest way to make that happen.

What next, will they block? This seems like an awfully big slippery slope and people are just accepting it.

Not worried about it. If browsers start getting too exuberant with the blocking then market forces are almost certain to correct the problem.

Comment Re:Aha! (Score 3, Interesting) 434

Women definitely have the upper hand here in Western society.

There are YouTube videos where a good-looking guy asks 100 Americans and 200 European females if they want to have sex with him. I think he may have gotten ZERO in America and 2 in Europe but one was a prostitute.
As I recall, all of the men with gfs made a point of saying, this is my gf.
The implication is that some of them may have been willing.
When a moderately attractive girl tried that, she managed 30 out of 100 but in the early stages was doing MUCH better than only 30%, getting 12 positive responses in the first 26 tries.

Comment Re:"...need to be prepared..." (Score 2) 322

If you want to talk about paleo-climate, realise that the industrial revolution looks like an asteroid strike in the fossil record.
I will never understand why some people accept that "sea levels rose 125m in the last 10,000 years", but call BS when the same people tell them "AGW is a serious problem"? It seems to be related to the common religious behaviour where people pick and choose the bits they like, then labels the rest as BS?

"The fundamental principle of science, the definition almost, is this: the sole test of the validity of any idea is experiment." -- Richard P. Feynman

Working...