Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:About Fucking Time (Score 4, Insightful) 424

by StevenMaurer (#48620517) Attached to: In Breakthrough, US and Cuba To Resume Diplomatic Relations

While starting completely new ones. Hooray!

Indeed, Hooray! (I'm glad you get it - so few kneejerk anti-American morons do.) The US is at its best when it is saving innocent people, like Libyans and Yhazdis, from genocide. It returns us to what is best about this country.

*cough* bullshit *cough*

Yes indeed! Your quote IS bullshit! I'm glad you noticed! You can't claim a policy failed by arbitrarily changing the yardstick. We've never measured by U6. No time to start now.

Hooray though, we added 300,000 jobs in the last quarter. The economy did that in most years of the 1960s, when the population of the United States was significantly less than today. Success!

Yet again, you are completely correct! This is an amazing Success! The economy in the 1960s was aided by the fact that most of the rest of the world was still recovering from WW2, and half of it was under the ideological sway of Communist regimes fundamentally opposed to economic reality. Further, the U.S. had many more controls in place in those days to reduce economic inequality, since people still had a long memory of what Republicans did to cause the Great Depression. Tax rates on corporations in the 1960s reached as high as 90%, with fewer loopholes. This allowed many states to give a free college education to anyone who had the grades to get accepted, no matter what their economic background. All which provided massive demand for U.S. employment.

Alas, we ended all that. Self-defeating "trickle-down" is now more or less a religion (except Jesus and his miracles can't be actually disproven, like all these bullshit Republican economic theories have), so now we're stuck with people voting in Republicans on grandiose promises that this-time-it'll-work-for-sure, the inevitable economic crash, Democrats voted in to fix it, and then Republicans again to punish the Democrats for fixing the Republican mess, because this-time-it'll-work-for-sure.

Comment: Please proceed... (Score 1, Flamebait) 440

by StevenMaurer (#48610035) Attached to: Federal Court Nixes Weeks of Warrantless Video Surveillance

I find it very amusing to hear from all these one-man Supreme Courts, constitutional scholars all, willing to declare in internet chat-rooms that the President has violated some part of the law, at least in their own mind.

But please, here's your chance. Quote the relevant case law that makes you think you know more than judges who have spent their lives studying this stuff.

Comment: This isn't writers' faults (Score 1) 368

by StevenMaurer (#48544363) Attached to: Overly Familiar Sci-Fi

Have you ever tried to get science fiction published these days? I have. I've learned that publishers don't want science fiction. They want fantasy childhood adventure stories, with a veneer of unscientific "sci-fi". You can't make it unless good and evil are delineated in clear, bright, lines, and your tv-tropes run thick and hackneyed.

These days, I write only for myself. But everyone I do a reading for says "Boy, that's interesting! Why don't you publish?". Then I explain.

Comment: Re:It was an almost impossible case to prosecute (Score 1) 1128

by StevenMaurer (#48460963) Attached to: Officer Not Charged In Michael Brown Shooting

In addition to there being witnesses (black males and females) who contradicted that statement, the autopsy of Michael Brown clearly contradicted it as well.

You are so completely wrong, it's laughable. First, the forensic evidence said nothing of the sort that you describe. Second, here is a link to video of the instant reaction of two bystanders seeing the event as it happened live. What do they say? "He had his F@^&#ING HANDS UP!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

This is a perfect example of cognitive bias in action. You want Wilson to be innocent, so you choose to believe rumors that are flat out untrue.

Comment: Re:Not as simple as teaching how to ... (Score 3) 328

I read the article you referenced. It's not as you describe it.

Installing secret compartments in vehicles when you know that its purpose is for doing something illegal, is itself illegal. Engaging in a criminal conspiracy to move drugs around the country is also illegal. Basically any time a drug dealer says to you "I need help to deliver this kilo of cocaine", and you say "Sure, as long as you pay me, I'll be happy to help", you're in some rather serious trouble if you get caught. The prosecutors were able to get one of the drug dealers to testify that he knew exactly what he was doing (in exchange for a reduced sentence). And the jury chose to believe the drug dealer.

You make this out as if the DEA somehow can throw people in prison for "doing nothing illegal". But the truth is that this fellow had a trial, a lawyer to defend himself, a judge to ensure that the law was followed, before a jury of his peers, and the jury chose to convict him.

I'm well aware that juries can make mistakes, but this doesn't seem at all like a miscarriage of justice. Not with the facts presented.

Comment: Re:"Threat actor" - buzzword du jour (Score 1) 101

by StevenMaurer (#48350951) Attached to: Espionage Campaign Targets Corporate Executives Traveling Abroad

Suddenly this is the new thing. You could simply say "the thief" or "the bad guy" or "the spy", but then you wouldn't sound all Matrix.

Lighten up, Slashdot.

That term is commonly used in the security industry, specifically because it is more generic than "virus writer", "thief", "foreign intelligence service", or "disgruntled worker".

Comment: More than a misunderstanding, it's a fake (Score 4, Informative) 105

by StevenMaurer (#48290243) Attached to: Video Raises Doubts About Attkisson's Claims of Malicious Hacking
http://crooksandliars.com/2014...

Attkisson's 'Hack' In a nutshell, Attkisson claims the government hacked her computers in December, 2012 and she reported it to CBS at the time. She claims a PC and her personal Mac were hacked, and the media has accepted this claim with no skepticism. Mediaite went with the assumption that she shot it in December, 2012.

But a sharp-eyed commenter over at Media Matters observed that Attkisson's video was shot during the Valerie Harper debut on Dancing With the Stars in September, 2013. Here's what WiscoJoe observes:

Attkisson shot this video on or sometime after September 16, 2013. The episode of "Dancing with the Stars" that is playing in the background features Valerie Harper dancing a Foxtrot to "Some Kind of Wonderful" and first aired live on the evening of that date.
According to Attkisson's own timeline her computer was 'hacked' in October 2012, she came forward with this allegation in May 2013, but then waited until September 2013 to take video 'evidence.'

Has Ms. Attkisson provided an explanation of when this video was taken or why she waited for a year, and until after she went forward with public allegations, to take video documentation of her computer being 'hacked'? Is this the standard of investigative journalism that she was doing while at CBS? If that's the case it may explain why she no longer works there.

Comment: Re:Libertarian leaning Republicans, actually (Score 1) 468

by StevenMaurer (#48288511) Attached to: Boo! The House Majority PAC Is Watching You

Where are they? Here on Slashdot. That's what I was saying.

Yes, slashdotters aren't typical Republicans Unlike most Republicans, their hatred of the word "government" isn't just a euphemism for racial bias.They actually believe it.

I would still argue that they're wrong. As organized power is the most effective form of power. you're going to get a government one way or the other. So it might as well be one that is beneficent. But their positions are at least understandable.

Comment: Libertarian leaning Republicans, actually (Score 1) 468

by StevenMaurer (#48285317) Attached to: Boo! The House Majority PAC Is Watching You

But I agree, there is really no substance to this post. Hell, in many countries, Australia for instance, voting is mandatory. It's a crime not to. (You don't have to vote for anyone, but you must turn your ballot in.)

But heaven forfend that anyone be asked why they didn't vote in an election, that's so.. so... so! A first-world problem to be truly outraged about.

Comment: Re:Let's all do the Chicken Little Dance (Score 1, Insightful) 495

by StevenMaurer (#48266453) Attached to: Imagining the Future History of Climate Change

Bawk. Bawk. Bawk.
The sky is burning.
Bawk. Bawk. Bawk.
Oh noes. Oh noes
Anything more need to be said?

Yes, there is one more thing that needs to be said: If the scientists who have studied this are even remotely correct, your great grandchildren will look upon your memory in a manner somewhat akin to the way that people speak of southern slave owners, and the way Germans remember the NAZIs

(I remember the days when Slashdot still had intelligent, intellectual, technically minded, conversations. And even when people disagreed, they brought facts to the table, not childishness.)

Comment: Not true (Score 3, Insightful) 179

No matter how "unlimited" a data cap supposedly is, if the bandwidth is limited, then there is only a limited amount of data you will ever be able to pull through it over a monthly period. So therefore it's limited, QED.

To posit an absurd example to prove the point, if AT&T advertised an "unlimited bandwidth" connection that could only download one byte per minute, your effectively monthly data cap would be: 60 (seconds) * 60 (minutes) * 24 (hours) * 31 (days) = 2.67 Mb per month.

Artificially throttling bandwidth is imposing a lower data cap, period.

I am not now, nor have I ever been, a member of the demigodic party. -- Dennis Ritchie

Working...