Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Probable cause (Score 1, Flamebait) 213

Yes, it does include a freedom "from" religion clause. If you take the time to learn anything about the framers of the Constitution, you'll know that they were dead-set against allowing anything invoking divine authority to creep into the system of law and government which they were creating. Not all of them, but most, and that wisdom, thankfully, carried the day.

What language exactly are you writing in? It appears to be english but you appear to not understand english. I quote the first amendment.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

Where in that set of phrases do you see a freedom "from" religion? It enshrines the principle that the "government" can neither establish a state church or prevent the free exercise of any religion. It does nothing to protect atheists from having to live around non-atheists. You have to make that choice yourself and move elsewhere if you don't like your neighbours. It binds the government to prevent them from interfering and it does not grant you any rights as a citizen to lord over others who choose to practice a religion.

Comment: Re: Socialism is not working (Score 1) 710

by aristotle-dude (#47312725) Attached to: Workaholism In America Is Hurting the Economy

Why, because the US is the most socialist country in the West? What planet are you on?

Really high welfare payouts? Check. Significant amount of the GDP on military spending? Check. 1 in 4 of the workforce work for the government? Check. Vast amounts of government subsidized housing? Check.

Seriously, compared to Canada, the US is positively socialism even though republicans like to call Canada socialist/communist.

In Hawaii, you can get 60k on welfare.

Comment: Re:My Anecdotal Evidence (Score 1) 455

by aristotle-dude (#47267963) Attached to: NADA Is Terrified of Tesla

'Everyone' hates the car dealership, and I do too. But, in my recent, personal experience, they have provided me the benefit of price competition. I needed to lease a car and found the lowest price I could find. I then simply called the 'Internet Department' at each of the local dealerships for this particular model, and just asked if they could beat that price. One guy said he could, and I went to him. I don't know if this is possible with purchasing a Tesla. Can different dealerships set their own prices, or, since the dealership is the manufacturer, is the price the same across any 'dealership' within a given geographical area?

Don't know. Can your boss set your salary on a whim after asking a bunch of random strangers what he should pay you?

Comment: Re:Makes perfect sense. (Score 0) 376

by aristotle-dude (#47207555) Attached to: Theater Chain Bans Google Glass

They are banning their use for privacy of other patrons.

Their other patrons expect privacy in a public place? I bet the cinema has plenty of surveillance cameras already aiming at those patrons.

They expect privacy in the sense that there would be nobody (other patrons) taking photos or video of them within the theatre.

Comment: Re:Makes perfect sense. (Score 1) 376

by aristotle-dude (#47207319) Attached to: Theater Chain Bans Google Glass

If the device has flashing LEDs, bright backlights, etc., OK I see the point. If it simply bothers people that someone in there is a geek, then I'll just wait for someone to ban the gays, the blacks and my favorite annoyance, hipsters.

I don't own the device and it'll be a long time before I'm convinced it wouldn't make me sick, but "We don't want none of your kind here" isn't an emotion I sympathize with from any establishment for any reason.

I don't think you understand the problem. They are not banning them for piracy. They are banning their use for privacy of other patrons. They have to look out for the interests of the majority of their customers.

Comment: Re:It happens every day in my job. (Score 3, Insightful) 593

I'm a hiring manager for a Fortune 100 Tech company (my boss reports directly to WW HR VP) and have been told point-blank that all hires must pass the "if all else is nearly equal" rule. In other words, when presented with two applicants who are "nearly" equally qualified for a position, that we are to hire the one that best addresses a minority concern. Period.

So if Jack rates a 9, and Jane rates a 7 in our interview results, Jane will always be hired. Any manager hiring Jack over Jane in this scenario will not be one much longer.

So which racist and misandry company do you work for so we can all avoid buying their products and services? Tell us so none of you can be there much longer.

Comment: Re:non news (Score 1) 288

by aristotle-dude (#47081155) Attached to: HP Makes More Money, Cuts 16,000 Jobs

I really don't understand people who insist that a company should be forced to take a loss before they cut their workforce. It's the cost of being more efficient. Don't like it? get off Slashdot and write a letter to your local newspaper editor. Inefficiency creates jobs and your posting to Slashdot is putting your local newspaper owner, postman and lumberjack out of work. Stop being a hypocrite about it. Oh, any while you're at it be sure to deliver it down to the drop box in your horse and buggy. Your local whip manufacturer will love you for it.

I don't think you understand how healthy capitalism is supposed to work. Employees of HP are not only providing goods are services but area also potential customers of HP products and services. When you cut and cut and cut, you end up with nobody being able to afford the products your company offers. The lost jobs also have a ripple effect in the local economy. Why don't you stop being a hypocrite. You want to keep your job right? Why should you get to keep yours?

At some point, cutting jobs have a negative effect on your bottom line over the long run.

Comment: Re:Thank God Apple's e-book "monopoly" was crushed (Score 1) 218

by aristotle-dude (#47081131) Attached to: Amazon Escalates Its Battle Against Publishers

Amazon sells some books for less than cost and offsets that loss with other higher margin items from their massive selection. It that better than publishers making money selling books at Apple or elsewhere?

If a book is priced at 9.99 at Amazon and 12.99 everywhere else, how long will the "everywhere else" be in the business of selling books (When they don't have the higher margin items that Amazon does)?

I DON'T CARE. Their app on iOS sucks and I have no interest in any sort of kind. I don't live in the US so I don't have a "PRIME" account either. The US DOJ is making things more difficult for non-americans to access content.

Comment: Re:Thank God Apple's e-book "monopoly" was crushed (Score 1, Informative) 218

by aristotle-dude (#47077869) Attached to: Amazon Escalates Its Battle Against Publishers

You're comparing Apples and Crocodiles. Apple rigged prices with the collusion of the major publishers which is illegal.

I think you are confused. Do you work at the DOJ by any chance. The agency model removed control over pricing from the vendor and gave it to the publishers. That means that Apple had no control over pricing.

Comment: Re:I'll get flak for this (Score 1) 552

>If there is a creator of the universe, why wouldn't he/she/it listen to you? Because a creator of universes would be very unlikely to take an interest in some animals on one planet in one universe. It takes a massive ego to expect that a god would give a damn about you. I'd expect them to continue to make universes, not be a petty god that monitors the details of tiny lives like the absurd gods of man's imagination.

Wow. From the tone of your post, you seem to be a firm believer in extra terrestrial life and you have the nerve to critique a belief in god? Your attitude reeks of a low self worth and a low value for humanity in general. You are like a beaten wife of a stockholm syndrome sufferer who no longer thinks they are not worth the attention of a creator. Ironically, you equate the belief in a personal god as requiring a massive ego and yet humility is what is generally required of believers.

You apparently speak out on religion out of a great deal of ignorance. You seem to have almost no knowledge on the matter.

Seriously, your anti-human attitude is repulsive. There is zero evidence of life on any other planet let alone intelligent life and no evidence of other universes either. You seem to have an awful lot of "faith" in things you cannot prove for an atheist.

It is you who seems to have the large ego since you have taken upon yourself to define what a god should be and how that god should act towards humanity.

"I've seen the forgeries I've sent out." -- John F. Haugh II (jfh@rpp386.Dallas.TX.US), about forging net news articles