Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


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

Comment Re:Lovely summary. (Score 0) 1033

About as far from the truth as you can get. This was about diversity, but it is about equal opportunities and not equal outcomes. The Hugo's have in recent memory picked based on the author's sex, sexual preface, and other attributes that are not related to the quality of the work. The Sad Puppies have pointed this out in a manner that only the most ideologues fail to understand. You are right that this is a debacle, and it is showing how little the Hugo's matter. When Toni Weisskopf gets more votes than any other editor in Hugo history, but is denied because a group of Social Justice Bullies bought supporting memberships and urged people to vote No Award, this shows how bad the clique at WorldCon is.

Comment Re:Bad voting method, abused by Shmucks (Score 1) 1033

First off Larry wasn't an organizer of Sad Puppies 3, second it was people like Mary Robinette Kowal and John Scalzi that urged the destruction of the Hugo's. People learned that the Social Justice Bullies were playing in a tiny sandbox and using the reputation of the Hugo to nominate works based not on the quality, but if it was a "good message", bonus points if the SJB's could tie in a minority author. Mary went so far as to organize mass buys of supporting memberships for people who couldn't afford it, with the "wink wink" that they would vote No Award for anything Sad Puppy related. Mary and her ilk were happy to light a match and drop it at their gasoline soaked feet. All Larry has done is expose the hypocrisies of the "trufans".

Comment Re:The Sad Puppies won. (Score 0) 1033

Actually they proved that the Social Justice Bullies are a highly exclusionary group. It wasn't about politics for the Sad Puppies, it was about good books. The slate wasn't picked based on the author's skin color, or politics. It was based on if the organizers of Sad Puppies 3 liked the book. The backlash from the SJB's was to burn the house down around them and award a record number of No Awards, with multiple loud mouths for the SJB's calling and even organizing mass buys of memberships for the sole purpose of No Award.

Comment Re:Bad Summary, but ultimately point has been prov (Score 1) 1033

Where was the cheating? Even George RR Martin admits that the Sad Puppies did everything within the rules. The issue here is a clique of Social Justice Bullies have taken over the Hugo's and it was exposed over the last 3 Sad Puppy campaigns. Now we see that the SJB's will burn the house down around them to prove that they are a clique and hostile to fans that aren't "trufans".

Comment Re:From the hugoaward web site (Score 1) 1033

Seriously have you not read anything on the Tor editor blog called Making Light, or the numerous hit pieces by the media? Every attempt has been made to call Sad Puppies a conservative, misogynistic, and just plain evil group. If that isn't politics at its worst then I'd love to hear your definition of politics.

Comment Re:A Constitutional Rat's Nest (Score 1) 687

First off, from a Federal point of view, full auto firearms are legal. It is only some States that don't respect the 2nd Amendment that make it illegal to own them. The biggest problem with full auto firearms is that no new full auto firearms are allowed to be transferred to civilians since the mid 80's. This means that it is very expensive to buy one of the firearms that is transferable, it isn't uncommon to see a M16 sell for $20,000. The process to take ownership isn't all that bad. Fill out the Form 4 or might be Form 1, I don't remember off the top of my head. Get your local Sheriff to sign off on the paperwork and get fingerprinted. Send the forms to the ATF along with a $200 check. Then wait for the ATF to approve, which they routinely do. Then you can take ownership of the full auto weapon. I've done the process for a short barreled rifle, but haven't had the money to do an automatic.

As far as what should be legal, I'd say any single man portable firearm fits the definition of the 2nd Amendment. Which would exclude grenade launchers, missiles, but would include things like M4 rifles.

The 2nd Amendment doesn't need to be redefined to include self-defense. It serves a variety of purposes and only gun banners have tried to pigeon hole the meaning. It covers self-defense capabilities from criminals, self-defense capabilities from government, sporting purposes, and hunting.

The only line that has been crossed with the 2nd Amendment is by groups like the Brady bunch, Bloomberg and other vocal gun banners.

Comment Still good hardware (Score 1) 558

I rebuilt my PC about 1.5 years ago when I was working on my Master's and taking a digital forensics class where EnCase brought my old PC to its knees. I reused the case which is a grey Antec, also reused the blu-ray drive/dvd burner, I also kept the 2TB SSHD which is my application/data drive. Everything else was replaced and here is what I have right now. Intel i7-4770 Noctua NH-U14S HSF ASRock Z87 Extreme3 motherboard G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 32GB kit (4x8) Seasonic SS-660XP2 PS XFX Double D R9 2GB gpu Samsung 840 EVO 1TB SSD (OS / frequently used apps) Seagate 4TB SSHD I really don't have a need for overclocking these days so the i7-4770 was perfect for me.

When you make your mark in the world, watch out for guys with erasers. -- The Wall Street Journal