Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


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

Comment Re:6 months for a publicity stunt (Score 2) 430

"If you plan to do something and act in a way proving you know it's not permitted, cause harm and then continue anyway - yes, you fully deserve to get hauled into court and held accountable. If you can't do the time, don't do the fucking crime. Don't physically trespass, don't steal resources, don't harm system that don't belong to you, don't prevent others from accessing services they paid for, etc."

Some things are so true, the most you can do is quote them. If you don't DO the thing, you don't get prosecuted. Simple, really. Then your state of depressiveness is irrelevant.

Oh, and I'll add . . . gosh golly gee whiz Buffalo Bob, he was an "activist". Well that certainly justifies lawbreaking, doesn't it?

Comment Re:I am not defending the USA (Score 1) 325

Oh gee, guess what, you're wrong again. Following through the HuffPo link to the actual study, page E86, we find that the leading cause of death among ages 15-24 is, yes, Motor Vehicle Traffic Crash. Not suicide.

Seriously, you need to try reading before posting.

Comment Re:I am not defending the USA (Score 1) 325

I know this is difficult, but try to stick with me . . . slowly now . . . when you cite an age range for a stat, and you think you're providing a citation that backs you up, the citation has to use the age range also! See how that works? I also couldn't help noticing that your citation mentions dramatic rises in suicide in non-US countries; kinda detracts from your America-bashing, doesn't it? But don't let a few facts get in the way of your BS.

Here's my citation for ages 15-24.

As to your overall US suicide citation, do you think it adds to or detracts from your credibility when you cite an article that say right at its top "This article's factual accuracy is disputed"?

Now remind me who's right again, and who has stomped whom?

Comment Re:I am not defending the USA (Score 1) 325

OK, one more easy fact check . . . you claim that "The leading cause of death amongst 16-25 year olds is suicide . . .".

Unfortunately (for your credibility) the actual leading cause of death among 15-24 year olds is Accidents, with Motor-vehicle being the largest subgroup. After that comes "Homicide and legal-intervention". Then "Suicide."

I wonder what you think the leading cause of death among young, healthy people should be, anyway? Overindulgent Pez ingestion?

The USA has the second LOWEST rate of suicide, 10 per 100000, of any nation, industrialized or otherwise. Your concern would be better leveled at the Guyanans, Lithuianians, and Kazakhstanis, who are offing themselves at three times that rate. Ah, but Guyana-bashing isn't quite as much fun, is it? It doesn't give you that visceral thrill of raging against the machine.

Comment Re:I am not defending the USA (Score 1) 325

". . . whereas gay marriage isn't even a talking point in most of Europe, having been legalized long ago . . ." Do you think it's important to post things that are actually true, or is just posting a list long enough that no one will bother to check you sufficient for your purposes? I checked this alleged "fact", and, well, it doesn't check out. Unless your idea of "most of Europe" is one that doesn't include, France, Germany, Greece, the U.K., Italy, and I'm sure others that I don't feel like chasing down, and your idea of "long ago" starts, say, yesterday. Would I find the same level of truthfulness if I checked your other "facts"?

Comment Re:Chu! (Score 4, Insightful) 305

I agree. My first response to this article was "Oh, I see. Spend more money, and suddenly the laws of physics change by a factor of 25." Somehow I think not. It's not like private industry hasn't been doing research on batteries . . . the person/company who could achieve the kind of breakthrough that these idiots think throwing money at it will achieve would become very, very wealthy indeed. But the government will do it better at that level with a simple wave of its hand? I doubt it.

Comment Re:A confessional... (Score 2) 203

When I was younger I was taught that if you couldn't afford things, you went without. Your version seems to be "If I can't afford something, I'm justified in stealing it." Your ethics suck. Maybe you should have tried mowing a few lawns to pay for those movies you wanted so much. Or is you getting up off your lazy ass and doing a little work to pay for things you want just too much for me to expect? The next time you wonder why there isn't a sequel to a movie you liked, or why indie director X doesn't make more great films like the one you loved so much that you were willing to steal it, take a look in the mirror and you'll see the answer. (And to be clear, your "I have purchased plenty of indie films" doesn't exonerate you. I sincerely doubt you've purchased, or even rented, every one you've ever seen, judging from the proud declarations in your first post. And the producers of big films deserve your money just as much as indies; I don't see you saying you supported them. But there's no doubt the indies get hit harder by the actions of the unethical, since their potential market is so much smaller to begin with.)

If bankers can count, how come they have eight windows and only four tellers?