Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Where Does He Stand On the Issues? (Score 1) 119

by ScentCone (#48912667) Attached to: Fark's Drew Curtis Running For Governor of Kentucky

Either way - in the absence of authority, there is no reason to fear the abuse of authority.

That's not really a system of thought, though, because it doesn't define a system. It describes the way that some people may, out of pure irrationality, imagine the world to work in their childish fantasies. When you get a bunch of people together and decide (look, a group decision!) that there will be no group decisions (?) forming any sort of authority or formal structure governing how they all interact, you're basically walking away from civilization. At best, you're setting up for medieval feudalism. True, you don't have to fear abuse from an authority you establish ... instead, you have to fear abuse from anyone who feels like using force to abuse you, and you've got no recourse because you've already decided that recourse beyond your own ability to withstand the use of force against by one or a thousand or a million other people is too organized and authoritative for your taste. By not establishing authority, one cedes authority to anyone else who feels like claiming it. So, people espousing that point of view are basically twits.

Comment: Re:Where Does He Stand On the Issues? (Score 1) 119

by ScentCone (#48909141) Attached to: Fark's Drew Curtis Running For Governor of Kentucky

So even if you get 90% of the people to vote that all gays should be put to death on a funeral pyre the law STILL wouldn't pass because the 10% voting against it would include the gay people and because they are only ones affected, and the way they are affected is so extreme

Really? So, you'd be in favor of the government making sure they know who is and who isn't gay in order properly run skewed elections and referenda? How about simply having a clause in your constitution that says (as ours does) that everyone is treated equally under the law? Isn't that simpler than getting the government involved in keeping lists of who is on which part of a given spectrum of sexual orientation or skin color, etc?

Portables

Getting Charged Up Over Chargers at CES (Video) 27

Posted by Roblimo
from the slip-me-some-of-that-juice-Bruce dept.
First we look at Skiva Technology and their Octofire 8-port USB charger that pulled in nearly five times the requested amount from a Kickstarter campaign. (The 'pulled in X times the requested Kickstarter amount' is becoming a common product boast, isn't it?) Then, for MacBook owners who are tired of having their chargers or charger cords break, we take a brief look at the Juiceboxx Charger Case. These two power-oriented products and WakaWaka, which we posted about on January 9, are just a tiny, random sample of the many items in this category that were on display at CES 2015. Timothy was the only Slashdot person working CES, so it's shocking that he managed to cover as many (hopefully interesting) products as he did, considering that even the biggest IT journo mills don't come close to total coverage of the overwhelming muddle CES has become in recent years. (Alternate Video Link)

Comment: Re:A scientific hypothesis is not a guess (Score 1) 147

by Oligonicella (#48906009) Attached to: How Do We Know the Timeline of the Universe?
"Calling theories"... Hypothesis was used in the quote. In fact "theory" doesn't appear at all. So you're arguing against some other statement.

"... the simple fact is that much of the modern world would simply not work if the words "hypothesis" and "guess" were equivalent." Incorrect. Reality doesn't give a crap how words are used. You apparently do and are taking umbrage. Fine, just don't act like what you're writing is fact. It isn't.

"... rather than mysticism and magical thinking." Or hypothesis.

Comment: Re:Where Does He Stand On the Issues? (Score 1) 119

by ScentCone (#48902267) Attached to: Fark's Drew Curtis Running For Governor of Kentucky

You want to know who also agrees with you, terrorists agree with you, which is why they use terror to force people to do things that the terrorists want them to do.

Really? You equate our constitutional system of checks and balances to terrorism? Terrorism is the simple majority deciding that they can tell you what to do. Are you OK with 51% of the population deciding that you no longer get to speak freely, because they don't like what you have to say? That's democracy. A constitutional republic (which we are, that's not really open for debate, even when you confuse it with something else, like a monarchy - and you're very confused, here) has tools in place to prevent people like you from rallying 51% of the people who vote to do things like have the other 49% enslaved, or killed, or whatever you'd like to see done in the name of your having the majority of simple votes on the matter.

Democracy ie representing the majority

The majority is not always right, and the people who wrote our constitution knew that. It's why the country isn't run like one bit PTA meeting or a dog club. We have three branches of government, and the legislative branch is broken up in to two houses specifically to blunt the tyranny of the majority. You either haven't ever studied the basics of how the constitution is structured, or you have, and your pretending you haven't so that you can make your really bad analogies. Please try to get it straight.

Comment: Re:Where Does He Stand On the Issues? (Score 4, Insightful) 119

by ScentCone (#48899339) Attached to: Fark's Drew Curtis Running For Governor of Kentucky

Even if it is simply "I will hold public opinion polls and honor their conclusion"

So, you'd be OK with him supporting mandatory labeling on all foods that contain DNA? Because 80% of the population says they support their government helping them out with that.

I'd never support a politician who says he'll do what the majority say they want. We don't need mob rule directly, or by proxy, either.

Comment: Re:That makes sense! (Score 1) 109

by ScentCone (#48896591) Attached to: Bomb Threats Via Twitter Partly Shut Down Atlanta's Hartsfield Airport

Bringing a fighter jet to a bomb threat. That makes sense!

You don't have much of an imagination, do you? Or pay any kind of attention to actual events, pretty much ever?

Escort aircraft can make observations and help with communications and recordings that can't be made any other way. One of the threats suggested the bomber was on board, implying the possibility that he might make demands which could include, possibly, making that aircraft into a weapon aimed at a metropolitan area ... which might require destroying the aircraft before that could happen. Fighters are routinely deployed when other aircraft stray from where they're supposed to be, cease communicating, etc. Which you'd know, if you paid attention.

Weekend, where are you?

Working...