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


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Deal of the Day - Pay What You Want for the Learn to Code Bundle, includes AngularJS, Python, HTML5, Ruby, and more. ×

Comment And again this is what you and other misunderstand (Score 1) 228

"What Dawkins is talking about is the principle, the ideal of free speech. "

But even the most far out ideal of free speech DO NOT require private party to endorse and repeat your own opinion or speech. This is why free speech , freedom of expression , liberté d'expression and such like are always about governmental restriction. You and me and any other have no right to force other private party to carry our speech or get it heard. I repeat, the church, Dawkins, me aepervius or you nemyst have a right to express ourselves without governmental interference, but we have no right whatsoever to force a 3rd private party to carry our speech.

This is essentially why this is not a free speech issue no matter what you look at it. Private party may at any moment, or any time, chose what they publish or show (usually this become a bit more complicated when you look at communication lines and common carrier rule, but here with cinema it is clear cut).

Comment he should know better (Score 5, Insightful) 228

Free speech is only about governmental intrusion and obstacle to speech. This is not about private person (cinema) telling the church , "no we do not want your advertising". It is incredible how many people bring "free speech!" up in conversation where it is not warranted.

Comment hell yeah (Score 1) 582

Knowing the history and knowing the enormous breach of freedom this is, how can any presidential candidate not immediately answer "noooo! NO ! double no !" alone on the US and European historical precedent and the breach of constitutionality ? Remember they are supposed to uphold the constitution when elected.

Comment Yes indeed only west coutnry count (Score 3, Insightful) 202

"Or are you saying that only first world, western lives count?"
I am sorry, but when determining the territorial security of country (laws, police intervention) only what happen in that country should count. Citing that some terrorist in some country somewhere should make us drop our law , trample our constitution, and roll over the ground wailing, is stupid. Were you there to claim the genocidial Rwanda event should lead to some police change in the US/France/Whichever ? No ? then ISIL is no different.

Comment or it is a BS keyword (Score 2) 259

"Brennan also said the United States had âoestrategic warningâ about the terrorist attack in Paris, but did not provide details, other than to say it was âoenot a surprise.â He said he believed the attack was planned over âoeseveral months.â
  If they really had a precise they would have reported in the news article or to the relevant french department. That they use the unqualified keyword "strategic warning" is more like "somebody mentioned they wanted to attack apris a few time" and that is so vague as to be useless and probably happen for a lot of other country. The translation is more "we only had the regular gossips we catch all the time".

Comment Not comparable (Score 1) 728

At least in the case of Stalin and possibly mao, atheism card was more actually used against the local religions/churchs as a way to wrestle power from them. others used religion to get their goal and massacred christian or muslim. Others again used other way to get power. But make no mistake in all cases atheism and religion were used as an excuse for those in power seeking more. It may as well be anything else whatsoever.

Now let us look at the mob level. On the level of a mob (which terrorist are more or less) it does not function that way. You will need a reason to whip the people into a fury. That reason may be stupid to other group mind you. Religion (and other groups like politics and mostly racism or similar hate-ism) can whip such a group into a fury. Look at those persons getting killed because for example somebody said they burned a koran, or somebody said they were witch (look at people burned in africa nowadays !) or people were told to have eaten sacred crows. Whip a mob and kill them. There is no way you could whip into such a fury a group solely based on atheist and based on their core belief as atheist. Oh sure you could get a good lynch mob where *some* atheist would also participate for secular reason like lynching a pedophile murderer, but it would still be something which is not related to their atheism.

I defy you. Find us a mob of atheist which lynched somebody. Good luck on that. There is plenty current example of mob from *all* major religions lynching people. Heck ever remember the balkan genocide of muslim by christian ?

Comment Those were *armies* (Score 4, Insightful) 965

You are confusing terrorism with armies. Those who overran spain back in , what, the 8th century were armies, just like went sent whole armies in their land to conquer it (remember the crusade? By your own definition it was pure christian terrorism - especially knowing how they massacred the locals christian, jew and muslim alike on their way there).

Citation needed : terrorism having vainquished a modern country and a horde of terrorist having the power. Muslim terrorist have no chance whatsoever to conquer a country like France. The best they could achieve is trying to frighten people, but even back decades ago when tehy were setting bombs in the RATP people were not afraid. We were just mightily pissed off that all trashcans were welded shuts.

Comment critics (Score 1) 287

" but critics say patients are being given useless sugar pills" just call them like we call them all : doctor, chemist, physicist, any people understanding what happens when you dilute stuff to the point homeopathic scammer pretend they do.

Comment Cheapskate power 10 (Score 1) 406

Look I understand the desire to spare, but there are a heap of vendor which propose this exact service (I work for one !) and i doubt it is connected to anything for which tehre would not be an interface we handle already (from MATIP to other weird protocol), even going to change format for you, all on modern cheap hardware. having anything that run 3.1 when it should be easily to get for cheap such a service.... So if there is no incredibly rare hardware unknown protocol reason, then it is cheer stupidity.

Comment Note : 2014 (Score 1) 77

Roughly after the start of it. That means at that time it could indeed have a low noise during the study. The question is not whether it did respect the law back then, but what is the noise assessment today, and whether the fuel tank are properly secured. But i am not surprise the appeal court overturned the decision. Stopping the center and withdrawing allowance was stupid. In such a case you do a study first and recommend measure to stop or lower the noise. You don#t stop the shit out of the company.

Comment And he might kill his business (Score 4, Insightful) 190

The problem with small guy, is that if he does that, he will black listed by the sony alike. If he does not do his business with sony alike corp, then go for it. But if he does, it would be the quickest way to dry up. That is the power of corp. And mostly why I watch with dismay American thinking private business are better and more efficient. At least a government you can vote out. A corp ? They will crush you most of the time, baring very few rare exception.

Comment Arwe they going to lose money ? (Score 1) 168

The compound is basic organic chemistry. OK it is not that what you get in your kitchen, but they should be able to fabricate it for far less than the 1$ per pill (baring extremely exoctic and costly catalyzed reaction) most of it will be excipient anyway by weight. Packaging and advertising will be the highest cost. Packaging they will probably make it as cheap as possible, and advertising they got all that for free. So They may not earn a lot, but like all other which fabricate generics, they will not lose on price per pill. But they won't get ultra rich on it either.

The two most common things in the Universe are hydrogen and stupidity. -- Harlan Ellison