Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Facebook is already in bed with the govt (Score 1) 150

by damn_registrars (#46799905) Attached to: Google and Facebook: Unelected Superpowers?
Look at how much of your data - that you posted thinking it was "private" or "personal" - they have already given away to the government. To say that they are partnered with the federal government is an understatement. Facebook might be the greatest gift the government has ever received from a company, excepting the massive contributions that come to all sides from the health insurance industry.
User Journal

Journal: Messages will be deleted ... whenever

Journal by damn_registrars
I thought that the message in the slashdot message system "messages will be deleted after 15 days" actually meant something. Apparently, no.

Messages over 15 days do remain if they aren't displaced (though the link leads nowhere)

Messages under 15 days are deleted automatically when the box fills, and cannot be recovered.

Comment: Undergrad, yes; grad school not so much (Score 1) 343

by damn_registrars (#46796549) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Hungry Students, How Common?
I was squeaking by in undergrad, working various part time jobs to pay the bills. I took longer than most to finish my BS but made it through without having to take out any student loans.

For grad school I was a married man, which helped. I was also given a tuition waiver and a $20k stipend which also helped. I knew plenty of people who did OK on the stipend living alone as well; not great but a tolerable existence. After all, the stipend is intentionally kept on the meager side to encourage you to get out of grad school.

Comment: North Korea is not a communist state (Score 4, Informative) 207

by damn_registrars (#46795189) Attached to: Russia Writes Off 90 Percent of North Korea Debt
It was founded by Kim Il-Sung, who had communist ideals, yes. However it has ventured far, far, away from those ideals. Indeed the present day US is vastly closer to being an ideal free-market state than North Korea is to being anything that can be approximated as being close to actual communism.

Comment: Re:Thank you for supporting my point (Score 1) 12

by damn_registrars (#46794061) Attached to: As long as we're quoting McArdle

I know you are, but what am I?

Smitty, that tactic may be cute when grade school kids use it on each other, but it smacks of desperation (at the very least) when adults play that card. You need a new strategy here; I suggest you try going back to discussing topics that you are knowledgeable - or at least interested in becoming knowledgeable - on.

Comment: Re:Don't over-credit King George III (Score 1) 20

by damn_registrars (#46792903) Attached to: Reality - Who Needs It?
I don't know if you are smitty, writing as an AC, or just some AC copying smitty (and his silly twitter tag that nobody else finds to be the least bit connected to reality).

That said:

I believe that what we are currently doing is not working and we need to try something else. I also believe that guns are a terrible choice for self-defense and we should do something about the mentality that tells so many people otherwise.

If there was any correlation between gun sales and gun violence, then the country should have already depopulated itself

There you go, making assumptions based on your own assumptions about me. Gun control means a lot of different things, and it does not mean they all have to happen simultaneously (or ever).

The fact of the matter is though, we have a lot of guns in this country. And they most certainly don't help to reduce our per capita crime rates.

When every mortal, perishable falsehood has failed, there is always the eternal truth of Christ.

Ahh, yes. WWJC - What Would Jesus Carry? I remember the New Testament book of Uzi where he mowed down those sinners, that was a personal favorite of mine. Let no righteous man go unarmed to the mall, and all that, right?

Comment: Re:Don't over-credit King George III (Score 1) 20

by damn_registrars (#46792879) Attached to: Reality - Who Needs It?

I'll take your topical tap-dance as: "I got nothin'".

You made more sense when you went for the one-word replies. I just directly pointed out how desperately you perpetuate a long list of conspiracy theories without concern for the confines of the legal requirements for removal of the POTUS or even the calling of a grand jury. This has been the most glaring weakness of essentially all of your arguments for the past 6 years - it is utterly transparent that you will stop at nothing to throw out any politician whose name is followed by a (D), regardless of whether or not there is a moonshot chance at getting enough evidence for a grand jury hearing on such a matter. You also have shown that you don't see constitutional protections as being relevant to anyone with that cursed fourth letter, and are willing to keep calling new investigations and new trials until well past the end of time.

Your bit about tap dancing is a far better description of you avoiding the failures of your own arguments.

I'm just glad that the criminal justice system in this country doesn't work the way you want it to, or our government would have gone broke on corrections costs many decades ago.

Comment: Re:Well (Score 1) 11

by damn_registrars (#46792857) Attached to: XKCD : Free speech

What the "balancing" boils down to is that you get fired if you are an apostate from the new progressive groupthink.

Isn't Eich in the same trajectory as Phil Robertson and Chick-Fil-A?

But again, why do you care about those issues when the person on the receiving end is a veteran of your conservative camp, and not at all when they are not? I'm willing to give you enough slack to say that maybe you weren't following the legions of other conservatives who were falsely blowing around bullshit about these being first amendment matters - although if that is the case then the question of why you are replying to this thread at all remains open.

I've no more argued that Eich is a First Amendment issue than I have the other two.

So then why are you replying to this thread? This thread is about freedom of speech as extended by the first amendment.

As usual, I wish you'd quit being an apologist for Conservatives, who are running around ranting about the Etruscan/Atlantean alliance, the planned over-running of the country with komodo dragons, and the threat of being enslaved by pygmies from Bulungi and forced to carve Easter Island heads from the Rockies, to be arrayed across the midwest so as to spell "Eat At Joes" when viewed from geosynchronous orbit.

If we replace "conservatives" with "progressives" that statement would read like a summary of the conspiracy theories that you have been advocating here.

Comment: Re:Thank you for supporting my point (Score 1) 12

by damn_registrars (#46792635) Attached to: As long as we're quoting McArdle
Well that was a textbook example of trolling, there, smitty. Maybe if you go back to school you could teach classes on how to troll people online.

You started by using an actual definition. Then you completely discarded it like yesterday's junk mail and inserted your own beliefs in its place. Pretending that using one fact at the start of a comment gives you carte blanche to make up facts for the rest of the comment - that's epic. I would give you one hand clapping but you would probably try to insinuate that the other was giving a very special salute to someone in DC.

Comment: Re:Don't over-credit King George III (Score 1) 20

by damn_registrars (#46792613) Attached to: Reality - Who Needs It?

The two introductory clauses are interesting, but the ultimate 14 words form a perfect though, like a circle.

Do you mean a perfect thought? Regardless there is nothing perfect about the second amendment. Why did they mention the Militia if it was not important? That is the only amendment in the Bill of Rights that is only one sentence; why is that?

By the way, I don't actually own any firearms.

I believe you have said that before. You probably don't remember me saying this before - and likely won't believe it when I say it again - but I actually do own guns. I don't believe that gun regulations need to be an all-or-nothing deal. I do believe, however, that we can do a much better job than we currently are. Furthermore I believe that what we are currently doing is not working and we need to try something else. I also believe that guns are a terrible choice for self-defense and we should do something about the mentality that tells so many people otherwise.

Comment: Re:Don't over-credit King George III (Score 1) 20

by damn_registrars (#46792589) Attached to: Reality - Who Needs It?

You've shown that you don't care about legal restrictions to your desire to throw out President Lawnchair.

I haven't done this. You know I haven't done this. I know you know I know I haven't done this

Sure, you haven't done that. Excepting the times when you very plainly have, of course.

For example, your top conspiracy theory Benghazi. The government has already ran an investigation into it, and you refuse to actually read the report from that investigation before demanding that another one be done. You demand more time and treasure go in to the investigation of something that has already been investigated, and your only justification for that is "because". You have no facts on it that were not investigated, you have only your feelings on it that you want to see fleshed out into an unending series of efforts to overthrow the POTUS. Being as you weren't willing to even read the results of the first investigation, you give no reason to believe that you would ever be happy with a second one unless it advocated for the immediate extralegal removal of Obama.

Then on to the IRS non-troversy. In case you forgot, they are tasked with the collection of taxes. They were investigating groups that were openly advocating cheating on - and straight out not paying - taxes.

And that doesn't even scratch the surface of your never ending collection of conspiracy theories, those are just the two that you yell the loudest about.

The key fact here though is that you have already shown an open acceptance of discarding legal procedures to further your goal of throwing Obama out at any cost.

Comment: Re:Well (Score 1) 11

by damn_registrars (#46792557) Attached to: XKCD : Free speech

"when a conservative loses his job for being a loudmouthed idiot it is an infringement of his freedom of speech" is not something I've ever argued.

So then what was your point in your JE about the guy from Mozilla?. The quote you used even explicitly mentioned

I heard a lot of this stuff during my free-speech battles

But nonetheless, I will extend you the possibility that perhaps you did not feel that he, or duck man, or hobby lobby, had their freedom of speech impaired and you just were lazy with your quotes and sources.

However, if that is the case, then what is the argument you are trying to make here? The cartoon I linked to here is very plain in it's point, and is plainly showing the rank hypocrisy of the right . Earlier you pretty much showed that the right sees the constitution as no more than a mere inconvenience, what is your argument now?

Comment: Re:Well (Score 1) 11

by damn_registrars (#46792257) Attached to: XKCD : Free speech
Go ahead. Make your argument for how any of those people had their freedom of speech impeded. You have plenty of conservative talking points to support you on it, go ahead and bring them.

Show us your superior understanding of all things constitutional. Tell us how when a conservative loses his job for being a loudmouthed idiot it is an infringement of his freedom of speech, but when it happens to a liberal it's just market forces at work.

Life is difficult because it is non-linear.

Working...