Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×

Comment: Re:A case of out of control Liberals (Score 1) 177 177

There's no 75% tax rate

You're absolutely correct!

From TFL: "The overall rate of social security and tax on the average wage in 2005 was 71.3% of gross salary"

And that was in 2005. I'm sure taxes have dropped dramatically in France in the last decade, as they have across the globe. (/sarcasm)

Comment: Re:Try GoodGopher (Score -1, Troll) 424 424

tin foil hat wearing anti-vaxxer.

This is called an ad-hominem attack. You are no better than the people you are insinuating that you are better than.

You are attacking a person's search engine based on something that has nothing to do with their search engine. Why? Also, while they may be an "anti-vaxxer", I can't seem to find any evidence that this person wears tin foil hats. Source?

I honestly don't care what people do in their personal lives, vaccinate, don't vaccinate, wear hats made of foil, don't wear hats made of foil. How do people have so much energy to spend on hating each other based on the media's divide and conquer strategies? Either add something useful to the conversation (relevant to the discussion, which headwear and vaccination status most certainly aren't) or go post on your blog about how you hate everything not like yourself.

Comment: Re:Deliberate mismanagement (Score 3, Interesting) 96 96

Wrong, it's not a conspiracy if it's false. A conspiracy is two or more parties working together for an illegal, unethical, or otherwise undesirable means. A conspiracy is NOT the incoherent ramblings of a wild-eyed mental patient. That's what we call a crackpot theory.

However, the powerful elites and controlled media outlets have worked tirelessly for decades to further the narrative that anyone who accuses someone else of a conspiracy is a wild-eyed mental patient. When, based on the simple definition of the word conspiracy, everyone can admit that they surely happen every single day in every country on Earth.

Hence, the "conspiracy theory" becoming a label that can be easily applied to anyone who is calling out a group of two or more people who are up to no good and immediately discredit them. For the sociopaths that run the world, this is the best thing that could have ever happened to them. Anyone who can see that 5+5=10 is now a nutter! How convenient for them!

Comment: Re:Fear of guns (Score 5, Insightful) 535 535

would you be able to distinguish it from a real gun from 100 feet away?

No, and does it even fucking matter? Guns aren't illegal.

This guy's a moron, and maybe it's OK that they ran him in just to make sure he wasn't up to no good, but fuck pressing charges. And the principal? A pussy who has no business being in charge of anyone, let alone our children. And we wonder why kids are growing up so soft...look at these "role models" they see in schools! Nanny-state limp-wrists who soil themselves at the sight of a plastic gun.

Comment: Re:Meh (Score 2, Insightful) 830 830

Insightful? Are you fucking kidding me? Even the dumbest boxes of rocks I've ever met realize that there is more than one country on this planet. Now, if it was a lame attempt at the tired, old, worn the fuck out *hurr, durr USAians dumb hehe* humor, then at least fucking mod it as such.

Comment: Re:Why is this on Slashdot? (Score 1) 510 510

I don't recall anyone, ever, claiming that Martha Stewart wasn't a story. People were pissed about her case then, just like people are pissed about Hastert's case now. Yes, what Hastert allegedly did is egregious and vile, much more so than a stock tip. But why try and inject the "liberal women" card where it didn't need to exist. Why does every single fucking story have to turn into a goddamned story of oppression? Can you fucking people NEVER give it a goddamned rest?

Hastert is a piece of shit, and so are you.

Comment: Re:The Wild West of the internet (Score 1) 39 39

They don't know exactly who I am at all. That would take an IMEI number and a database that they don't have.

Completely untrue. When you sign in to Facebook on your device, they have access to your phone number (if you haven't already voluntarily given it to them) and device ID (not IMEI, but a unique identifier). They also get to have access to your contact list. All of your friends have also given them their contact lists. It isn't hard to correlate all those lists and numbers, combined with messaging histories and usage patterns, to know exactly who *everyone* is, even if you DON'T have a Facebook account.

That's the part that bothers me the most, is that even if I've never used their services, they still have a profile on me.

Zuckerberg was absolutely right when he called his users dumb fucks

Comment: Re:Rand Paul seems to get a pass here (Score 1) 438 438

I think you're absolutely correct. Why the fuck should I give up the only cookie I have (or anyone else has) left to some lazy, union slob (or the CEO or anyone else for that matter) without a fight? I wouldn't expect the union worker to give me his cookie. But yeah, fuck the middle class or something right?

Comment: Re:Fark is dead (Score 1) 127 127

This gubernatorial race is really just a ploy for attention to get someone, anyone, to go back to Fark after the pro-censorship PC police took it over.

Funny, because it used to be a decent place when it wasn't rife with PC nanny-staters.

You censor speech, you get routed around, end of story.

I have not yet begun to byte!