Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Gee, maybe U.S. shouldn't try to steal oil (Score 2) 969

Oh it's the sanctions that kill people. Sorry but it was the leaders of Iraq who refused to play nice with the world even after they invaded Kuwait and were subsequently forced back onto their own soil. It was the leaders of Iraq who murdered millions of their own people throughout the 80s and 90s. It was the leaders of Iraq who refused to deliver the UNICEF and other aid to those in need in their own country. It was the leaders of Iraq who plundered the revenues from the "oil for food" program instead of feeding their own population.

Your socialist revision of history is appalling. You are the type of person who believes guns kill people. Sorry people kill people as illustrated above.

It's easy, quit threatening people and play nice with the world, quit having a childlike temper tantrum and the sanctions will be lifted.

So you're ok with punishing innocent people for the crimes of their tyrants? It's not like the people who are suffering from the sanctions have any influence over the actions of their government. Their leaders aren't even democratically elected. Additionally, the people at the top who are actually responsible for the evil that the sanctions are in response to are incredibly well-insulated from the effects of those sanctions. In fact, the crazy dictators who run these countries actually use these foreign sanctions to their advantage, as a rallying cry to motivate their people to hate the "evil" western powers that are making them suffer.

Your incredibly short-sighted revision of history is appalling. You are the type of person who believes that corrupt dictators represent the will of their subjects, and that punishing their subjects somehow punishes them. I hope you're just a troll.

Comment Those evil black bars (Score 2) 666

I have a good friend who is a proud owner of a very large TV. He is also one of those weirdos who likes to watch everything squished. When I ask him why, his response is that he feels like he's not getting his money's worth unless every inch of the screen is in use. Black bars make him feel like he's just not getting full value out of his expensive, giant TV.

I don't really understand it, myself. I have a very hard time watching incorrect aspect ratio TV for more than a couple minutes (unless it's animation). If I'm watching squished (or pan & scan) content, I don't feel like I'm getting full value out of the content. I don't even notice black bars if I'm enjoying what I'm watching. Different people have different priorities, I guess.

Comment Not Necessarily A Bad Thing (Score 1) 932

This country's addiction to fossil-fuel-intensive travel is inappropriate and unsustainable, and actively fucking the environment of the entire planet from multiple directions. This conspiracy to make travel undesirable/expensive might actually be in the service of a greater good.

Or it could just be about good old totalitarian control, restricting the movements of the slave class.

Most likely both.

Comment Socialism != Fascism (Score 1) 366

Ah the irony here will be the dozens of slashdotters who claim that this has nothing to do with socialism, or communism (in China the state does not even allow one to make the difference).

Ok, you're probably a troll, but I'll bite. This has nothing to do with socialism or communism. Socialism and communism are economic models. They are both quite neutral on the subject censorship of political speech. What's going on here is called fascism. Fascism, defined as a system of absolute governmental control, is compatible with any economic model, including the form of capitalism practiced by the western world.

I understand that the american media deliberately makes this point hard to understand, but socialism/communism are opposed to capitalism, while fascism is opposed to a democracy/republic model. You can easily have fascist capitalism, and you can easily have democratic communism.

Comment Re:This is unacceptable (Score 1) 840

There. Is no such thing as a progressive muslim state. They are all horrendous in one form or another. Human rights, crime, despotism, corruption, justice, the works.

This is a true statement. However, it is still a true statement if you take out the word "muslim". Let's not contribute to divisiveness....

Comment Re:OK, so I don't know the whole story... (Score 1) 477

But let's compare to some other businesses. Banks, for instance, are businesses that are often targeted by criminals. They - OH MY GOD - list their addresses publically! I feel the bank's right to privacy has been violated here. Not only that, but how can the banks survive now that the criminals know where they are?! OMG!

Seriously, people. If you legalize the growing of marijuana, it's just like any other product now. You want to run a respectable business, then do it. If you are concerned about security, do what any other company concerned about security would do, put down the pipe, and GET SOME SECURITY.

Well, yes. Your argument would make sense if pot were currently legal. However, it's not. The growers, even the ones approved by the state for medical purposes, have to keep a low profile from the feds. Armed guards patrolling the garden are not really compatible with stealth.

Also, the only reason people are so interested in stealing the marijuana is because it's so valuable, and the only reason it's so valuable is that it's still a controlled substance. Once it is legal, secrecy and security will not be as necessary because robbing the pot garden won't be any more profitable to the thief than robbing a tobacco plantation.

Scarcity (even when artificially imposed) creates value. Value attracts thieves. Remove the scarcity, remove the value, remove the thieves. Pretty simple, actually.

Comment Re:Stop with the "Just a plant" nonsense (Score 1) 477

throat and lung cancer is from smoking period not from nicotine. it doesn't matter what your smoking you really shouldn't be inhaling it.

While this does sound like it really ought to be true, actual peer-reviewed scientific studies have shown that pot smoke has no measurable harmful effect when it comes to lung cancer. Weird and counter-intuitive, but apparently true.

As for turning your brains into mush, long term effects are hard to judge, but every adult I have met who smoked pot back in the 60's and 70's are not what I call intelligent or well off anymore. But I have a limited pool to work from as most of them are also big drunks, and so have other problems that need to be accounted for.

I have met a pretty large sample base of adults who smoked pot back in the 60s and 70s. They run the complete range from six-figure-salary CEO to career fuck-up jailbird, just like any other fairly large sample group. As also appears to be the case with your sample group, it is much easier to draw a correlation between heavy alcohol use and mush-brain than it is to correlate it to pot.

While it is universally accepted that some aspects of cognition are impaired when actively under the influence of marijuana, I see no evidence of long-term effects.

Comment Re:Stop with the "Just a plant" nonsense (Score 1) 477

If a bunch of pot smokers want to turn their brains to Jello and wreck their lungs, throats and mouths, let them
And if the voice of all ignorance continues to spread fear, uncertainty, doubt, and lies, let them.

Tax and regulate, tax and regulate, that's all we hear is tax and regulate. First you spread lies and then you want to tax and regulate--taxations and regulations justified by the lies previously spread. Control freak much?

Did you just seriously call the person arguing to end drug prohibition a control freak?

Seriously?

Cognitive dissonance much?

Comment Re:Alternative headline (Score 1) 987

Let's bring the soldiers home so they can't accidentally kill children, journalists, or innocents. Or get killed themselves. And I don't mean two years from now ('bama's schedule) but immediately. Tomorrow. The Soviets wisely stopped fighting in Afghanistan when they realized it's hopeless to civilize that mountain country, and we should too. We'd save a LOT of lives.

Ok, I want to end our foreign wars as much as the next guy (maybe even more - my brother-in-law is risking his life in Iraq as we speak, but that's besides the point), but we can't just up and leave without making an even bigger mess than we already have. If we were to just pull out now, the power vacuum will be almost immediately filled by some very unpleasant local religious zealot warlords that will make life shitty for everyone nearby for a very long time.

We have to finish what we started or it gets even worse. That's the sad reality of the situation. It would have been better to not get involved in the first place (or at least to get involved very differently than we did), but now that we're here the only responsible action is to see it through.

Comment Just kill him (Score 1) 469

No, the CIA knows better than to make a martyr out of him with simple assassination. That's why he's being discredited with sexual assault charges. Character assassination is far more effective.

Slashdot Top Deals

I have a very small mind and must live with it. -- E. Dijkstra

Working...