Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Note: You can take 10% off all Slashdot Deals with coupon code "slashdot10off." ×

Comment Re:huh? (Score 1) 96

Not that you would be able to understand their ways.

I daresay I'd have a 95+% overlap with their thinking. Because I'm substantially from the Anabaptist tradition myself. All of which makes your assertion funnier than the bulk of your twaddle.

It would appear that similarly to how you have on other documents claimed understanding without reading, you don't seem to have a grasp on what the Hutterites are actually about. Perhaps if you think they are kindred souls, though, you might accidentally learn something about Communism by reading about them.

For example notice that while absolute pacifism is a big part of their lives, so is shared ownership of basically everything. They show the benefits of Communism when it is applied to small communities, without the ugliness that is inherent in all forms of government when they grow to larger sizes. More to the point, communal ownership and direction is a core belief to the Hutterites. You cannot be a Hutterite in a capitalist system.

Comment Re:Veterans care (Score 1) 45

If only you had a shred of credibility to back it up... or even a single fact. You have yet to present one actual fact to support your allegations. Not. One. Actual. Fact.

Wait, so, it's MY task to present every atom of proof pursuant to Chappaquaiddick?

No. I never asked for all the proof. I would like to see at least one single fact supporting your claim, which so far you have not provided. Hence my statement of

Not. One. Actual. Fact

No, I think her contradictory public utterances are sufficient.

More partisanship from you, there. You would accept "contradictory public utterances" from people with the correct consonants after their name. But when they come from people with the cursed "D" after their name, they are justification for immediate extralegal removal from whatever post they might have or aspire to.

Show me an actual fact. You claimed earlier that classified information was mishandled. You have not given any facts to support that idea. You instead substitute your conspiracy of the week and insist that it is good enough.

you are carefully cherry-picking your way through the constitution to try to build support for a state of government that has never actually existed here

Can you re-iterate exactly what Constitutional points you think at issue here?

As usual, if you don't read it the first time - or first several times - I post it, why would I expect you to read it now? I'm not playing this game. You can go back and read when I posted it before or you can just stop asking for re-re-re-re-reposts.

Comment Re:woooh technology is out to git ya (Score 1) 166

And he's wrong.

According to Rubalcava, the biggest barrier to carrying out terrorist plans until now has been the risk of getting caught or killed by law enforcement so that only depraved hatred, or religious fervor has been able to motivate someone to take on those risks as part of a plan to harm other people.

No. Because look the times when we have caught the criminal. We cannot stop them from setting off a bomb, but we will catch them after they do so.

So to be a terrorist you have to be willing to die or to spend the rest of your life in prison.

"A burner email account, a prepaid debit card purchased with cash, and an account, tied to that burner email, with an AV car service will get him a long way to being able to place explosives near crowds, without ever being there himself."

But it will not stop him from being found AFTERWARDS.

Because those actions leave traces. And you will be spending the rest of your life in jail.

Imagine if they could have dispatched their bombs in the trunk of a car that they were never in themselves? Catching them might have been an order of magnitude more difficult than it was.

No. You're confusing two different scenarios and ASSUMING that the technique that worked in one scenario WOULD BE THE ONLY TECHNIQUE USED in the other scenario.

"That shutdown could stretch from temporary to quasi-permanent with ease, as security professionals grapple with the technical challenge of distinguishing between safe, legitimate payloads and payloads that are intended to harm."

It COULD. But more likely it won't.

Mostly because he's assuming that an autonomous car will be exactly like a current car + driver ... but with a really stupid robot driver that will do anything you tell it to do. Don't assume that.

Comment Re:Yeah, nah. (Score 1) 394

You're not busy tampering with my country, [...] I don't give a shit about bumfuckistan, so I will still visit so long as you don't fuck with me or my people personally.

This is why we can't have nice things. Well, actually, it's why we can have nice things while other people have to be collected from all over the room and loaded into buckets for disposal.

Comment Re:couldn't hurt (Score 1) 238

Instead of expecting people to exercise their language skills, we're just enabling stupid people to be more stupid.

And believing that you of course used a telnet client to read this discussion and post your message, since a "browser" makes the process easier, thus letting even you manage it?

This was a typically stupid thing to say, for you, for two reasons. First, I am quite capable of retrieving the page content via telnet. Second, the page content was actually deliberately formatted to be interpreted with a web browser. A whole layer of material was added to the content specifically to make that convenient.

Grammar and spelling exist to faciliate efficient communication. Trying to use them as a barrier to silence people you dislike for whatever reason means you not only missed the mark, but somehow managed to get a bullseye on your own asshole.

In what way am I using grammar or spelling to silence people? I am trying to encourage grammar and spelling, so that people can have a voice. You are trying to encourage people to engage in the digital equivalent of baby talk, so that they can never express a complex thought. You've got it completely backwards, fucko. You want to disempower. I want to empower.

if you insist on using a mobile device which lacks a zoom function yet supports less-used unicode characters

If you insist on being a disingenuous douchebag, you can only talk meaningless shit. There's plenty of places where you're not allowed to zoom, yet where emoji can appear.

Seriously, everything you said was wrong. Why do you even bother?

Comment Re:The above is informative ? (Score 0) 394

Deaths from wars and other state violence are at historic lows.

So it's okay with you if we do it every day, so long as we do it less than was done in the past overall? You're comfortable with a certain level of murder in your name, as long as it's less than it was in the past?

Comment Re:The above is informative ? (Score 0) 394

The world is enjoying it's longest most peaceful time period since the fall of Rome


The USA has been, if not in a state of war, at least fighting some kind of military action continually since when? Just because you're not suffering, you're comfortable. But somewhere, someone is being murdered with a drone so that you can sleep soundly.

Comment Re:launchd not as bad as systemd (Score 2) 116

I remember Steve Jobs found it important to save 5 seconds on the boot of one of the first Apple machines, because you save lives.

How about a computer that doesn't need to reboot so often? I used most of the early Apple machines, Apple I and /// aside, including the ][gs, Lisa, Macintosh 512k (sorry, missed the 128k) and Plus, I think I still have a SE with an accelerator in it just for the nostalgia value, had a IIci, etc etc. And I've had a lot of free reboots, most of them from Macs, and most of those reboots occurring between the era when Macs started getting MMUs, and when they started actually using it.

The Amiga would be done booting up while the Mac was still thinking about whether the mac was happy or sad... You had to reboot it a lot, but at least it genuinely rebooted quickly. Especially if you had "a lot" of RAM, by which I mean an extra MB or so. Then you could put the whole OS (ROMs aside) into a recoverable ramdisk... talk about a quick boot.

Comment Re:Veterans care (Score 1) 45

You have no evidence even though you are calling her guilty.

Her Majesty's behavior screams: "We sooooo guilty,

That is some fascinating psychoanalysis, there. If only you had a shred of credibility to back it up... or even a single fact. You have yet to present one actual fact to support your allegations. Not. One. Actual. Fact.

Not when you cherry-pick your way through them and pretend that your interpretation of them is The Only True Reading.

No, if you step back and admire Her Majesty's mosaic of mendacity, you've got to admit: there goes one truth-free piece of work.

First of all, I was talking about how you are carefully cherry-picking your way through the constitution to try to build support for a state of government that has never actually existed here. The Founders realized that their ideals for the time would not be the ideals for all time, and that things would change in the future. Hell it would not be an irrational approach to their writing to say that they expected full rewrites to occur from time to time.

Second, what the fuck are you talking about? I'm used to seeing you change topics as a defensive strategy around here, but that is quite the shift. You didn't just shift from red to green, you shot all the way into far-UV.

I can only suppose that you're a minion of the Clinton Machine, based on your complete lack of perspective.

No, though your lack of perspective is showing when you level that claim.

Comment Re:huh? (Score 1) 96

You don't need one single party for it to be partisan.

Aw, c'mon. That's akin to saying "All Democrats are godless Commies", which I don't begin to think true.

Why not? You insist on not understanding Communism, which apparently gives you free reign to apply your lack of understanding of it to whatever you want.

Or do you mean that to you some of them are theological Commies? Perhaps extra-scary Muslim Commies?

Interestingly enough I recently came across legitimate communists in my travels. Not that you would be able to understand their ways...

Comment But it wouldn't work anyway. (Score 5, Insightful) 394

But it wouldn't work anyway.

I don't think he even understands FedEx. FedEx cannot tell you where a package is RIGHT NOW. They can only tell you where it was LAST SCANNED.

The reason this works well for packages is that packages don't move themselves. And even then it has failures. This will completely fail because HUMANS can wander around on their own.

Sounds more like Christie wants to associate his campaign with something that people have a mostly positive opinion of. But I'm pretty sure that FedEx will not want to be associated with a losing candidate OR the concept of tagging and tracking undesirable races/nationalities (shades of Nazi German there).

Comment Re:couldn't hurt (Score 3, Insightful) 238

Since writing and sending messages has moved on to an everyday form of personal communication, it also requires a concise way to express tone and emotion a non-professional writer can manage.

You mean an idiot? Instead of expecting people to exercise their language skills, we're just enabling stupid people to be more stupid. Their last motivation to learn to speak properly was to communicate with other idiots like themselves, and emoji shits on that.

Meanwhile, they're actually a really shitty way to communicate, because they are far more difficult to tell apart on a small screen than are words. Emoji are stupid, and people who use them are stupid by extension. But we knew that, because if they weren't, they would have just written what they meant instead of using an ambiguous sad face fucking a duck.

Comment Re:couldn't hurt (Score 3, Interesting) 238

The Chinese, and to a lesser extent other Oriental and east Asian cultures, are what are driving the adoption of these new emoji.

No, just stupid ones. It takes a real idiot to think "this picture-writing system that we've got has been a stone around our neck limiting our ability to express complex thoughts for two thousand years... what we really need is another picture-writing system".

Comment Re:I'm not sure this is the right response (Score 1) 202

It is generally (at the very least) very difficult to prove a negative.

WTF? You claimed that they 'may' have been under investigation, not I. I discounted that and you say I have to prove your lie is wrong?

Hopefully you wake up this morning with your underwear un-knotted so we can have an actual discussion on this matter.

To comply with the latest version of your request, I would have to be able to show now that there was an investigation started into AM before the hack was known. However, if there is an investigation underway, we generally won't know until charges are brought. That is the way many criminal investigations go; you don't want the accused to start running around destroying evidence.

However you are so full of piss and vinegar over the matter I expect that even if charges were announced tomorrow you would still be unsatisfied.

Do you see the massive difference there? Oh, I'm sure you had it before and were either defending your poor use if language or attempting to insist you were fine to assert my opinion for me.

I am not asserting an opinion for you. The fact of the matter is that Schwartz made a stupid choice and broke the law. You might happen to think highly of him regardless of it, and you are entitled to that opinion if you wish you hold it. Regardless he broke the law and deserved to face consequences - including a trial. I'm not telling you what to think about him. I'm sorry that you struggle so greatly to comprehend the written word here and that you find it justification to attack me.

<< WAIT >>