this needs to be upvoted.
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
If they use http://followmyvote.com/, that's a BitShares DAC. It uses open source software with a blockchain, similar to bitcoin, and cryptography to publicly ensure that votes are legitimate.
It would make it an experiment worth pursuing.
I may not kill him, I'd kick him in the balls as hard as I could, and threaten to kill him if he publishes anything about hemp or marijuana.
Inefficiency is inherent in a representative form of government with voting. The only way our very government could possibly be more efficient is by sacrificing certain rights and liberties such as what we see in China.
We here in the U.S. choose to use an inefficient government because it allows for both sides of the issues at hand to be examined.
"Advocating increased inefficiency as the solution to bad government is like saying that you can't run very well in clown shoes so we can lower the crime rate by making everyone wear clown shoes so they can't get away from the cops"
The metaphor seems apt at the surface, but you can only do so much when you have to balance the desire of your constituency, the media (if it's free), at the same time the other politicians (who knows what interests they're trying to represent) have to vote in favor of your bill.
So no it's not, it's democracy inaction. The OP (BJ_Covert) was actually making a pretty astute political observation.
Try avast if you haven't already. It's not the prettiest/lightest weight creature but it sure picks up viruses.
If no one gets to see your town in your profile then why care what your display is?
The guy was temp banned for a few days, so he had a few days to sit around and be upset for being unjustly banned. I don't know if Xbox Live has a certain number of offenses until you're perma-banned but that may have been a factor too.
I got this from the AP article linked about the story.
I wish they would have added "self-driving capabilities" instead of some of the dumb things like "rocket launcher" or "Web Browser Windshield Overlay". Or even "Comfy Recliner For a Driver's Seat", how does that fit with the rest of the answers? My driver's seat is a comfy recliner.
I picked "Shield To Protect Me From People Who Picked Any of the Above", and I'm happy to see that almost half of the people answering the poll so far are reasonably intelligent as well. It's a bit worrysome that 10% of slashdotters are stupid enough to choose "invisibility cloak", because the way people drive it seems my car already has one; I wish I knew how to shut the damned thing off! If your car's invisible and I pull out in front of you, well, if you're dumb enough to turn your car's invisibility cloak on and drive it you're dumb enough to bitch about someone pulling out in front of your invisible car. If you're dumb enough to turn it on when you're parked you're dumb enough to bitch about someone hitting it trying to get the obviously open parking space.
WTF, people? Where did you 10%ers come from, dunce.com?
I want to be able to park and go invisible to smoke weed, or do some private investigation.
There are still places on this earth you can park and reasonably not expect to get hit by a car.
Not to mention cops. If you're doing something illegal and a cop chases you then that invisibility shield could be an option, unless cop has the shield to protect you from it.
"Well you shouldn't be doing something illegal," bullshit as long as weed is illegal.
The shield was my second choice.
"Maybe they are thinking that if Internet users have some porn to look at, then they won't pay so much attention to political matters."
If marijuana weren't unjustly scheduled as it is today I probably wouldn't have started thinking about politics at a young age. In fact, I may not even smoke because I wouldn't have had easy access.
Based on what I know about our own invasive government, my money goes towards the sites being a trap so they can bait more "perverts" to incarcerate.
I meant 21st century, that always gets me.
But the reasoning still stands...
To hell with medical pot, when is it going to be legal for all adults?
In fact, California is scheduled to vote this November on all out legalization. It's a public vote, not one of those representatives vote it down because they're scared to look soft on drugs type thing, and enough Californians support the idea that it could feasibly become a reality.
If this vote succeeds, it may just change the status quo and make it ok for other states to completely legalize, the way other states have done with medical marijuana. Especially if other states become jealous of the extra tax dollars and population this will bring Cali. Enough states do that and eventually the constituency will demand that the federal government bring their outdated laws into the 20th century.
So we may be closer than you think sir...
Lets see, Ben Franklin estimated taxes in the colonies at around 12.5%... Today we have a 15% income tax at the realistic minimum (unless you are like a kid at a summer job or something then its only 10%) and up to 35% if you are successful at what you do! Plus, the income tax is actually unconstitutional! (Thats why they needed to pass a constitutional amendment for it to be in effect today)
Sure the poor may pay that, but if the rich actually payed that much, and we invested it back into society as we should, nobody would be complaining about being poor.
Could it be that some people have disproportionately large amounts of money to blow on things like server, bandwidth, lawyers? The guy working for humanity's best interest is the broke guy. How could such a situation ever come to be? impossible.
Could it also be that people are more willing to support TPB through donations than they are wikileaks, for whatever reasons?
As much as I'm all for civil rights and all that, being polite does a lot more to stop police harassment than being That Guy who watched an ACLU video one time on Youtube and decided he'd give the police what-for. In some states here in the US, you actually do have to answer reasonable questions from a police officer, which has caused all sorts of grief to the annoying twits that make up all sorts of rights that don't exist.
It may be truthful enough, but the above paragraph is bullshit. People aren't twits because they don't want to talk to the cops, not wanting to talk to cops is the smartest thing you could want to do criminal or not. If the laws are lax enough that they actually allow police some kind of recourse from not being talked to then a problem exists.
The rights we have are more important than ever considering how many liberties don't technically exist, but should. Why are you a police apologist?
You touch upon an important point.
Our cities need more venues for socialization other than praise jesus, how about them brownies/cavs/indians, and "how many people can we cram into a small space! WOOH!" don't they?
I for one would love for there to be something like a bar, except for potheads.
So what you're saying is that women prefer to date either men who lie to themselves about their own emotions, or men who aren't really sincerely interested in them?
That doesn't make any sense, but I know from casual observation that you're extremely right. It's disgusting, but truth.