Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Why? (Score 1) 392

In those circumstances 20k libertarian activists should be able to totally revolutionize the state's politics, which will in turn mean that the national political scene has to deal with libertarian ideas in a much more serious way then otherwise.

It should be noted that the major political parties in New Hampshire are already upset that the Libertarians are bumping into their turf and engaged in a backlash against the Libertarians. If a mass immigration of Libertarians actually happens, I would expect that pushback to only get worse with even funds from national committees to get dumped into the state politics.

It is funny to hear candidates complain about the "damn Free Staters" and how their cushy re-election campaigns are thwarted.

The backlash is overblown. Look at it this way:
The Free Staters are coming to NH because the decided it was the best, freest, most wonderful state in the country, and that the people there were great, but they want to make it better.

If somebody moved to your town and said "I love what you're doing here, but it would be great if you did more of it" would you be mad?

Probably if you were a politician. But a voter? Nope. Flattered is more like it.

Comment Re:Totally Revolutionize is a remarkable overstate (Score 1) 392

These are activists. I believe the estimate for the current number of activists in the state is on the order of 2,000, soi if 20k libertarians show up, get jobs, and start activisting that's a BFD. They're joining the big parties, getting appointed to boards, filling phone banks etc. Which means that a) the actual candidates owe them shit, and b) if those guys screw up most of the people who immediately come to mind as replacements are gonna be Free Staters.

So it will be a slow process, on the order of a decade, but if even 5k of them make the trip (and 2k already have), New Hampshire politics will completely change.

Comment Re:Why? (Score 4, Informative) 392

Two very important things:
1) Virtually no people.
2) A libertarian ethos.

In those circumstances 20k libertarian activists should be able to totally revolutionize the state's politics, which will in turn mean that the national political scene has to deal with libertarian ideas in a much more serious way then otherwise.

That's the plan. And if they all actually follow the fuck through it will work. The issue is that getting 20k people to click on an internet link saying "I will move to New Hampshire in the future" is way easier then getting them to move to NH, much less getting them to move to NH and all agree on a single political program.

Comment Re:APorsche Self-Drive? (Score 1) 204

Why would any poor benighted fool pay money for a Porsche that didn't need to be driven? The entire point of their ridiculously inflated price tags is they're a joy to drive.

er, no. The point for most buyers is to own it, talk about owning it, talk about how much better it is than brand-X, and be seen in it. The actual driving is done in stop and go urban traffic where the only joy would be a self-driving car.

And if you make it self-drive you lose prestige because you no longer get to talk about how great your driver's car is. You might as well be in a Lexus or BMW.

Don't get me wrong here, in the unlikely event I start to drive I'll strongly prefer a self-driver (long stretches of road tend to put me to sleep after about an hour-and-a-half, which is bad at 80 MPH), but I'm not the target market.

Comment Re:Oh good, a reason (Score 1) 320

And, interestingly enough, he's not the Republican candidate who got his start in the Dubya White House inventing that shit. That would be Ted Cruz.

The third wheel of the GOP trifecta-of-I-guess-Hillary-isn't-that-badism is the guy whose convinced that banning a religion from entering the country will pass Constitutional muster.

Comment Re:Oh good, a reason (Score 1) 320

Isn't that the point of democracy?

The logical implication of everyone having equal rights isn't that you get to vote for exactly the guy you want, it's that you get to be governed by the guy who compromised enough to get most of your neighbors to vote for them.

So, unless you're a boring-ass loser who has no opinions that are even mildly controversial, you will never have the opportunity to vote without holding your nose. And if you are said boring-ass-loser, then you'll probably hold your nose because you can't the level of partisan controversy inherent to the system.

Comment Re:Oh good, a reason (Score 1) 320

Interesting. For me the most blatantly obviously unelectable person is Clinton, but the bottom line is that all career politicians are as corrupt as hell and are all untrustworthy. They need to be to even get where they are.
At least Trump isn't a career politician and I think thats what is actually attracting most of his supporters to him. in Iowa, a state that is a very bad fit for Trump, he won second place and only a couple of percentage points behind Cruz who got caught putting a fix in, so I think your claim that Trump is so unelectable it hurts is very naieve, especially this early on.

Blacks hate Trump. His nativist shtik brings up some really bad memories. The passion has to been to be believed. He'd likely do worse in the black community then McCain, who got roughly 5%.

Latinos are mostly Mexican, and his nativist shtik involves a lot of bitching about Mexicans.

You add white progressives, and the GOP Donor class, and you've got a candidate who'd be lucky to break 40%.

Comment Re:How about we treat the rest of the world better (Score 1) 320

Girls schools are where girls learn to be independent women. That's too Western for many of the locals.

The guys blowing up the monuments are, by and large, westerners. Lots of French and Belgians, but also quite a few Brits and no small number of Americans. They are fighting in Syria and Iraq largely because the West has no use for young men who never went to college, and tends to be really hard on unemployed brown men. At least this way they can be more then a pothead.

All this said, I don't think there's a particularly easy solution for any of this. Supporting the destruction of Israel would help a bit, because the unsettled nature of Israeli borders causes problems everywhere in the region, but it's not gonna solve everything, and there are obvious moral issues there. Redrawing the borders sounds good when PhD idiots say it, but if it was actually as simple as un-drawing the map the WW1 Generation and Victorians hashed out why have there been more failures (ie: Somalia, Ethiopia including Eritrea, Senegambia, the United Arab Republic), then successes (Tanzania) when the locals try it?

Some magical economic policy that allowed us to a) employ all young men in jobs with $20k a year and benefits, b) provide sufficient economic aid to third-world countries to let them catch up to our level, without c) raising taxes would do the trick.

Comment Re:should be interesting (Score 1) 320

How did this get +5?

There is no such thing as "Federal authorities" in Sweden. The only authorities are agents of the National government, which is not a Federation. There has been no evidence provided by anyone that US Authorities are involved.

As far as the "it's not rape outside of Sweden" claim, here's what Assange's own lawyer said in British Court:
"Assange had stopped her from doing by holding her arms and bending her legs open and trying to penetrate her with his penis without using a condom. [She] says that she felt about to cry since she was held down and could not reach a condom and felt this could end badly."

So he admitted to fucking a woman who was fighting him so hard he had to hold her arms back, and physically force her legs open.

Comment Re:should be interesting (Score 1) 320

Citation needed.

If you'll recall the original Swedish Prosecutor actually declined to press charges, then the famous Marriane Ny over-ruled him. The appeal of the original decision was filed by the victims. Or, to quote wikipedia:
"The preliminary investigation concerning suspected rape was discontinued by Finné on 25 August,[7] but two days later Claes Borgström, the attorney representing the two women, requested a review of the prosecutor's decision to terminate part of the investigation.[7][10]"

Comment Re:New York Taxi Workers' Alliance (Score 1) 178

Yeah, but in the US "contractor" is a very specific legal term with lots of important legal implications. An NFL team are not contractors, even tho they all have individual contracts, so they can have a union. Uber drivers and Taxis are contractors, so they can't really have a powerful union under the US Legal system.

Comment Re:New York Taxi Workers' Alliance (Score 2) 178

Accountability is actually a major part of Uber's legal problems.

The difference between an employer/employee relationship and a contractor relationship is all about who has the control. With most taxi companies the Taxi Company's entire role is renting out the car, and then telling them "At 6th and Wilkins there's a guy who wants to go to the South Side. Show up if you want to. Or pay us to rent the car for 72 hours while you drive the it toi Vegas for a night of debauchery, and then come back. We really don't give a shit."

With Uber it's different. They pay you extra for working certain times (giving them an element of control over your schedule). They throw you out of the system if you're late or piss customers off (giving them control over your income). Note the "piss off customers." Since customers can be ridiculously petty ("This guy spoke ebonics while wearing a Pistons shirt! So fucking unprofessional! I'll give him a three!"), this means that it is very hard to name a single element of an Uber-driver's career Uber does not insist on having some influence over.

Slashdot Top Deals

It is contrary to reasoning to say that there is a vacuum or space in which there is absolutely nothing. -- Descartes

Working...