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


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Issue is more complicated (Score 1) 921

Linus is deliberately taking an absolutist stance though, because he's king. Reducing common polite interpersonal discourse to "lying and backstabbing" is a logical fallacy. You can certainly be blunt without resorting to school yard insults. That so many in this thread are calling this woman a "whiny bitch" is very depressing. I've lost some respect for the slashdot community today.

Comment Re:This was not a screw-up (Score 1) 397

You got another solution?

Bombing cities on the other side of the world is not going to convince the inhabitants that your culture is better or more "moral". Let's try not doing that for a change.

stoning rape victims for adultery in God's name

I'm atheist and believe that all governments based on religion are the truest evil in the world. I'd like to see the Muslim extremists go too. That isn't likely to happen in my lifetime. At any rate, groups like the Taliban cannot keep returning unless they have support from the people around them. Afghanistan is not the U.S.

Now, what I would advocate for is to open our borders to refugees running from the wars we've started.

Your use of ad hominems is immature.

Comment Re:This was not a screw-up (Score 1) 397

Dude why are you so angry? Have a beer and chill out.

As this Kunduz debacle proves, it would be virtually impossible for a US-Air Force-free Afghanistan to keep the Taliban from taking over.

Obviously, the Taliban IS taking over. 14 years of bombing runs haven't prevented it. So, your suggestion is to keep bombing cities? It doesn't work.

their interpretation of the Koran is very heavy on the "kill them all and let God sort them out" principle.

Does that include bombing hospitals and then chalking it up to "collateral damage"? Because that's what we just did.


Comment Re:This was not a screw-up (Score 4, Insightful) 397

Backwards from your perspective.

It was Saudi nationals who attacked us over 14 years ago, not Afghani's. Bin Laden was found in a house in Pakistan over 4 years ago, not a mountain in Afghanistan yesterday. So I ask again, why do we still drop bombs on Afghani civilians? You're bringing up 9/11 like it just happened. It was 14 years ago. Over 2300 U.S. troops dead and over 22,000 U.S. troops wounded. Many thousands more dead and wounded Afghani civilians (children) caught in the middle.

We do have a moral reason to leave -- hospital patients are being bombed by American forces. Just think about that for a moment. Accident or no, if it were an American hospital that was hit, it would not be called "collateral damage" and you would be outraged. And of course, incidents like these make Daesh, et al., stronger not weaker. Backwards thinking indeed.

Comment Re:This was not a screw-up (Score 2) 397

I mean to say that there is clearly no real threat to the U.S. if:

a) the enemy is unsophisticated enough to seek shelter among civilians

b) it faces no domestic or international reprisals for bombing hospitals where it suspects those enemies might be (accidentally or otherwise)

We (the U.S.) have no moral justification for being in Afghanistan. I use the word "moral" because I suspect that the only reason we are there is because of money and/or international politics. Civilians are dying in horrific ways and we don't care because we are so far removed from the fighting that it may as well not be happening at all. There is no greater goal and I think the proof is that we have a current President and Congress who keep us committed to an endless and futile war from above instead of getting us the hell out of there.

Comment Re:Happily married? (Score 1) 286

Right. You're comparing covert extramarital sex to eating a cookie dough blizzard, but I'm naive.

We're talking about a website whose slogan is "Life is short. Have an affair.", and those who get caught using it without their spouse's consent. You can't do that and expect your spouse to remain committed to you.

Also, your google-fu sucks. You've described "polyamory", which is quite uncommon. You may have an "open relationship" with your partner, and that's cool. But it's not the topic of this discussion.

Comment Re:Happily married? (Score 1, Insightful) 286

not only do wives not give husbands the sex that they want, but they also hold husbands to not going out and getting it elsewhere

Barring obvious trolls, that's quite possibly the most misogynistic comment I've ever read on Slashdot. You clearly have no interest in being married (which is fine), so don't presume to know what it's like simply because you have some friends who wish their wives would "put-out" more or some other bullshit.

Comment Re:Not the best summary... (Score 1) 195

if you fear your kid getting a disease then keep your kid away from others or immunize them

Ignoring the shear absurdity of your suggestion, that's not the point. For the life of me, I cannot understand people who refuse to listen to science. The CDC is your friend. Seriously, please read this.

You need to learn about "hurd immunity". Here, I'll quote the NIH (another friend) for you:

When a critical portion of a community is immunized against a contagious disease, most members of the community are protected against that disease because there is little opportunity for an outbreak. Even those who are not eligible for certain vaccines—such as infants, pregnant women, or immunocompromised individuals—get some protection because the spread of contagious disease is contained. This is known as "community immunity."

We all love a good conspiracy theory, but this one has been thoroughly debunked. By advocating for non-immunization, you're putting innocents at risk.

Comment Re:Why would the festival cooperate? (Score 0, Troll) 134

No, actually it's quite apt to the subject. Nobody wants to be tracked by RFID, facial recognition, etc. Yet, these venues are incorporating them into their "products". They hide these policies in fine print wrapped in legalese for a reason. They're tracking you and harvesting every bit of information they can get so it can be sold to the highest bidder. Submitting to such practices makes us their product. That you don't particularly care about that fact is a moot point. And your ad hominem attack about 1984 was immature. Let's hear a real argument.

Comment Re:Why would the festival cooperate? (Score 3, Insightful) 134

Directly from their privacy policy on their website.

Information on your preferences. We may collect information about events you like or products you buy or enquire about (e.g. as part of a survey or from your review of an event). We may also hold information on interests and demographic categories inferred from your interactions with us in order to provide you a better service and to provide you with more focused information. For example, if you buy tickets to a certain show and lots of people who went to that show also bought tickets for a different concert, we might send you information about that concert.

Cashless payment wristband usage information. If you use a cashless payment wristband during one of our events, we may collect information relating to your use of the wristband such as check-in information and the purchases you make with your cashless payment wristband (i.e. purchase of products and merchandises).

Understand that you are NOT the customer here. You're the product.

Comment Re:Fair (Score 1) 126

I'm not sure if you're agreeing with me, or trying to one-up me here. The point is, once you've bought something, the seller has no right to dictate how you consume it.

Say a concert venue offers me VIP tickets at a price that is normally lower than what I'd pay for a nosebleed seat. I buy them, but then only stay for the opening act. Is that a better analogy for you? I mean, this isn't a difficult concept!

What this country needs is a good five cent ANYTHING!