Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Omissions are not discrimination (Score 1) 360

by AK Marc (#49608927) Attached to: Bernie Sanders, Presidential Candidate and H-1B Skeptic

Please, cite the relevant law I'll be accused of violating and any existing precedents of prosecutions (successful or not). I'll wait.

Blonde is "race". If you discriminate against "fair haired" people, that will be considered under race. There are thousands (if not more) of cases on race.

Comment: Re:Time (Score 4, Interesting) 98

by drinkypoo (#49608483) Attached to: Tesla's Household Battery: Costs, Prices, and Tradeoffs

I think electric vehicles will start showing up at the unexpected places.

I think the place they will dominate first (and next, I guess) is motorcycles. The only thing missing from most current electric motorcycles is top speed. Most people don't ride long distances on them, so it's an ideal kind of vehicle to hit next.

Comment: Re:Large herbivores were doomed from the start (Score 2) 114

by hey! (#49608019) Attached to: Empty Landscape Looms, If Large Herbivores Continue to Die Out

Err... really? Sixty million American Bison disappeared from the Great Plains because they were big? Then why did the passenger pigeon over the same period go from the most numerous bird in the world to extinct? It's true that the largest baleen whale -- the Blue Whale, is listed as "threatened"; but the smallest baleen whale, the pygmy right whale is either extinct or very close to it.

It's not as simple as big == headed for extinction. Sometimes bigness is a factor in extinction, sometimes it's a factor in survival.

Comment: Re:and I suppose you blame abuse victims (Score 1) 360

by AK Marc (#49607501) Attached to: Bernie Sanders, Presidential Candidate and H-1B Skeptic
The shutdown was caused by the veto, not the passing of the bill. The passing of the bill was valid and would have resulted in a working government, then Clinton took an action that caused the government to shut down.

I don't see why it matters so much to you. What does it matter who you blame for the shutdown? It was a good thing, not a bad thing.

Comment: Re:Omissions are not discrimination (Score 1) 360

by AK Marc (#49607483) Attached to: Bernie Sanders, Presidential Candidate and H-1B Skeptic

There are no laws defending blonds or red-heads against discrimination by brunettes either.

Yes, there are. If you discriminate consistently against blonds, then you will be open to legal action. You are using a strict definition of "race", and the application of the laws doesn't work that way.

How about folks, whose name begins with "Mi*"? There is not a law anywhere in the world (!) explicitly protecting us — how do you sleep at night knowing of this ongoing travesty?

Has there ever been a documented case of someone discriminating against a Mi based on name? No? Then why do you think you deserve special laws?

Oh, well, if we start counting omissions, we can get really far.

I've seen some that explicitly list LGBT (as a non protected class). That's not an omission, but a license to discriminate. Is that any different?

Comment: Re: Hahah (Score 1) 210

And you're telling me you and your friends never did anything stupid? When you were 15 you were as sober as a 30 year-old?

Or maybe treating kids like nothing they do has consequences,

This is what is called a false dichotomy. You don't treat kids like adults who have misbehaved; you treat kids like kids who have misbehaved. Or do you think that a 12 year-old who starts a fire playing with matches should be treated like a 40 year who starts a fire playing with matches, because in the end they did the same thing?

What I'm saying is take the age of the offender into account in how you punish them. This isn't some kind of radical new liberal idea. It's how this country operated until the end of the 20th C.

Comment: Re: Hahah (Score 1) 210

Yours apparently has some way to go. Or maybe it's too far gone.

The brain isn't one big ball of mush. It has different parts that perform different functions. You get injured in your Broca's area and you won't be able speak or write. I've seen it in stroke patients; it doesn't matter that the rest of their brains is just good as new, they don't have any expressive language. Likewise if your orbital frontal cortex is damaged or not fully developed yet, you're going to act like an ass. Doesn't matter how smart or well-meaning you are.

Teenaged brains can be misleading, because in some ways they're at their lifetime peak. But at the same time they suck at certain things. A smart fifteen year-old can explain the difference between right and wrong, between a smart and stupid action. But he can't be trusted to act in accordance to that kind of knowledge, because among other things the OFC isn't finished yet. This is why parents get fooled into thinking their wonderful children won't do dumb things. You simply cannot expect a teenager to act intelligently because he has knowledge. The knowledge helps, but it does't determine behavior in a fifteen year-old as it does in a thirty year-old.

Comment: Re:Hahah (Score 1) 210

He did the crime (actually several), he must do the time.

If he wants to play big boy games then he must accept big boy penalties. Fuck your PC "Oh but he's a kid with his whole life ahead of him!" bullshit, he's chosen his path, let him reap the consequences.

That's just a straw man argument. The actual problem with treating him as an adult is that that is contrary to fact. He is not an adult.

In the state of Georgia a fifteen year-old cannot vote; he cannot purchase liquor; cannot obtain a driver's license, cannot hold a full-time job. The rules we have for minors assume they're incapable of making adult choices. It's logically inconsistent to believe minors are not competent to make responsible decisions, but then claim we should treat them as if they can decide responsibly because they've failed to do so. When have you ever used reasoning like that for anything else? I had a housemate once who decided to become her own herbalist. She went to the herb store and bought a lot of herbal shit and promptly made herself sick. By your logic I should go to her for medical treatment because (a) I previously had reason to believe she was not competent to practice medicine and (b) her subsequent actions proved my suspicions correct.

You don't need some namby-pamby PC mumbo jumbo to know that most teenagers have a penchant for doing spectacularly stupid things, but that *most* of them grow out it. That's common sense, and the law should take that into account. And science actually backs up common sense here. Most people's brains go through a development spurt in their "executive functions" (acting according to long term plans, inhibiting impulsive actions, directing attention) when they're around fifteen. That means there's roughly a 50/50 chance someone under sixteen is neurologically incapable of not acting like a jackass.

So both science and common sense tell us that treating children as if they were adults is irrational and serves no useful purpose. That doesn't mean you do nothing when kids commit crimes. That's a false dichotomy. It means you do something different.

Comment: Re:More like to his own parents (Score 3, Interesting) 143

Without skullduggery, we would know Bill Gates as "that embedded BASIC guy". And there would be nothing wrong with that, either. It would certainly be better than "headed corporation convicted of deliberate anti-trust actions", although he certainly is spending a lot of money to Rockefeller his way into a cushier spot in the history books.

As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error. -- Weisert