Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Open Source is similar to the Tea Party ... (Score 1) 356

The birth control issue is about government forcing employers to pay for their employees' birth control.

No, it's about government forcing employers to pay for their employees' health insurance. Whether the employee uses that insurance to cover birth control or treatment for the clap or hemorrhoid surgery or a flu shot is none of the employer's fsck business.

The option, of course, would be to not have employers to pay for their employees' health insurance, and go to a rational "Medicare for all" system, but no one is willing to face the corporate monster that for-profit health care has created.

All the libertarians I know adopt the attitude "Leave me the hell alone". They don't want to be "given" anything. Just the right to keep the fruits of their own labor.

In the original sense, where libertarian == anarchist, that's true. But in the American sense, after capitalists hijacked the term and founded the so-called "Libertarian Party", we have a "Libertarianism" that wants to keep the fruits of other people's labor. That is, after all, the essence of capitalism: wealth for the owners of capital, a pittance for those who do the labor. Show me an American Libertarian who wants to tear up all government-issued land deeds, resource deeds, corporate charters, copyrights and patents: all the ways the investment class accumulates wealth without labor.

Comment Re:Open Source is similar to the Tea Party ... (Score 1) 356

What the government hates most about the TEA Party is that it was largely dispersed and lacking centralized leadership and hierarchy.

SMH. The "tea party" movement was started by an astroturf movement put together by Fox News, Americans for Prosperity, and Koch Industries. Plenty of centralized leadership and hierarchy there.

Comment Re:Open Source is similar to the Tea Party ... (Score 1) 356

That it was the Republican party that fought a civil war that helped to free American slaves.

True, though it's not like they had much choice after the "Confederate" terrorists attacked.

That it was the Republican party that fought for civil rights for minorities from the 40's all the way to the present.

False. The GOP became the anti-civil-rights party in the 70s and 80s, as Southern whites of the segregationist generation abandoned the Democrats (or vice-versa).

Liberalism is a mental disease.

"I believe in human dignity as the source of national purpose, in human liberty as the source of national action, in the human heart as the source of national compassion, and in the human mind as the source of our invention and our ideas. It is, I believe, the faith in our fellow citizens as individuals and as people that lies at the heart of the liberal faith. For liberalism is not so much a party creed or set of fixed platform promises as it is an attitude of mind and heart, a faith in man's ability through the experiences of his reason and judgment to increase for himself and his fellow men the amount of justice and freedom and brotherhood which all human life deserves." -- JFK. Not a Kennedy cultist by any means, but that's a nice string of words. Care to define what in it you find "diseased"?

The takers have run out of other peoples money and the workers are fed up.

Yes, the takers -- the banksters, the corporate welfare queens, the rent-seekers, the parasites, the military-industrial complex, the prison-industrial complex, the surveillance-industrial complex -- are indeed running out of blood to squeeze from the workers, after three decades of right-wing policies have almost destroyed the American middle class.

Comment Re:Open source equates to freedom. (Score 2) 356

It's my understanding that it was proven they are scrutinizing some groups with specific ideologies and rubber-stamping groups with the opposite ideology.

That's certainly the Fox News understanding of the story.

Does it reflect reality? Not so much. "Progressive", "Occupy", and "Green Energy" groups got the hairy eyeball too.

Comment Re:Creepy libertarianism (Score 1) 80

Is there any compelling reason why you can't manufacture things in space?

The immense costs of building, maintaining, and staffing factories in space, and the difficulties of returning finished cargoes to Earth.

abundant free energy

If you've got the tech base for orbital factories, you've got the tech base for orbital photovoltaic beamed down to Earth. So that free energy's down here too.

pollute all you like

Nope. Space junk is an issue already.

raw materials literally raining on you

Huh? If you're talking about meteorites, Terra receives tens of thousands of tons of "raw materials" every year. But as was pointed out upthread, raw materials aren't the limiting factor. Heck, our garbage dumps are full of them.

and you can drop consignments next door to wherever they are meant to be going.

Uh, no. You can drop consignments in the middle of the ocean or some areas of scubland, subject to scheduling constraints to not hit any planes or ships...and the first time a cargo goes off course and crushes someone's house, expect a fair chance for your whole operation to be shut down.

Comment Re:Creepy libertarianism (Score 1) 80

but it is inevitable...

Oh, it's entirely evitable. You get up out of the planet's gravity well basically on top of a huge human pyramid. If it turns out to be practical to snag wealth while you're up there (a highly questionable proposition, but let's assume), there is zero incentive to pass it back down the pyramid.

ultimately when we've got deep orbit factories being fed an endless stream of ores by automated refinerminers that will hardly matter.

Yuor deep orbit factories are not going to be making food or houses or providing energy to the people on Earth's surface. They have nothing to do with meeting the basic physical needs of the majority of humanity; there's nothing "post scarcity" about it.

Asteroid mining is a romantic notion based on a propertarian myth of the frontier, where a hard-working man can make his fortune with his own two hands and no government interference (other than the government he relies on to register and defend his property claims).

Comment Re:Carlin never said stuff (Score 4, Informative) 129

[Carlin never said stuff, h]e said "shit". He talked about people running out of room for their shit and having to get a bigger house so they could put more shit into it.

No, he said "stuff". C'mon, dude, the title of the fucking album is A Place for My Stuff . Have some respect and don't misquote Carlin:

Actually, this is just a place for my stuff, ya know? That's all; a little place for my stuff. That's all I want, that's all you need in life, is a little place for your stuff, ya know? I can see it on your table, everybody's got a little place for their stuff. This is my stuff, that's your stuff, that'll be his stuff over there.
That's all you need in life, a little place for your stuff. That's all your house is- a place to keep your stuff. If you didn't have so much stuff, you wouldn't need a house. You could just walk around all the time.

Comment Re:Burglars will love this. (Score 2) 129

The same sort of people who accept join/friend requests from all sorts of people they don't actually know on their social media sites.

I accept "friend" requests from anyone -- as a teacher/lecturer/author/poet/musician, I figure people I don't know are people who have been to one of my classes or performances.

But when I choose what I share on Twitter or FB, I keep in mind that many "friends" there are strangers. I share only what I want to publish publicly.

Comment Re:This has to end.. (Score 2) 407

Of course this asshole and most others in the Fed have lost sight of this.

SMH. RTFA. Hell, RTFS: "Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation deputy director...not a federal official.

Anti-federalists who think that state governments would guarantee and secure our freedom and rights if we just got the feds out of the way, would be amusing if they were not dangerously ignorant of history, law, and fact.

Comment Re:Idiot (Score 2) 188

you are entering the store's property,

So what? An act is right or wrong independent of whether the state has issued a piece of paper making the part of the planet on which it occurs someone's so-called 'property". And many surveillance cameras, privately and publicly owned, record public spaces.

and their cameras are for identification purposes should the store be robbed

Their cameras are for whatever the store management decides they are for. If a woman has a nip slip that gets caught on the store's cameras, you can bet it will be viewed...

Therefore, this is no longer random recording, but targeted recording

Oh, I'm sure the bike guy would have been mollified by SCM saying "It's not random, I deliberately targeted you."

This is rather different than some asshole standing on public property

Amazing the anger and hostility SCM brings up, especially among people who are apparently ok with being filmed by hidden cameras controlled by corporate and government agents.

I'd rather be filmed by a obvious person than a hidden camera -- if there's a person where I am, I know I'm being observed. The problem with surveillance is when it separates "being observed" from "being in the company of others".

Comment Re:Idiot (Score 5, Insightful) 188

This guy is brilliant. The idiots are the people sitting around outside yakking on their cellphones who want to label it a "private conversation". Not when you're inflicting it on everyone at the next table.

And this guy:

Passer-by: "I don't really care for other people to just be taking a random video of me."

Surveillance Camera Man: "Didn't you just come out the drugstore?"

Passer-by: "Yeah."

Surveillance Camera Man: "They have cameras in there."

Passer-by: "So?" (pushes Surveillance Camera Man).

If you're ready to assault this guy, why are you not out wrecking the surveillance state, spraypainting cameras and calling for better privacy laws? The cognitive dissonance is amazing.

Comment Re:Innocent until blogged about (Score 1) 666

On what planet is men wrongfully being accused of rape an issue even *visible* next to women being raped?

On what planet is it ok to excuse a crime by saying that another crime happens more often?

or bend over backwards to pretend there isn't enough information to have an opinion either way

Unless you're looking at police reports or other data I haven't seen in this thread, there is no reliable information about what happened. That's not pretense, that's fact. In any disputed event, testimony from one of the disputants is not reliable without some sort of physical evidence or corroborating neutral testimony. You talk about items found in Gont's room -- but so far as I've seen we have only Weidman's say-so that those items were found there. Still nothing but she said, he said.

If police or conference organizers confirm the items' presence in Gont's room, then yes, that would be corroborating evidence. Until then, with no knowledge of the character of either party and no reliable evidence, the only rational course is respect skepticism of both account, withholding judgement and remaining open to evidence as it comes in.

Comment Re:Current evidence does not support reasonable do (Score -1, Offtopic) 666

I'm having difficulty coming up with a rational explanation that doesn't include the stronger person being a predator who engineered a situation where they expected to face no consequences for their actions

There is no "rational" explanation here. Either the man is a rapist -- irrational behavior -- or the woman is a liar and an abuser -- irrational behavior. If we go looking for rationality in a situation where we know one or both persons involved behaved irrationally, we're going to have trouble.

It does happen that smaller women physically attack larger men. (Though I have no knowledge of the size or strength of the people involved here -- I'm assuming your characterization of Weidman as "physically weaker" is based on some knowledge.) And it does happen that women make false allegations of rape. Did these things happen here? I don't know. But either way it does point up an important real-world security rule: don't be alone and unobserved with someone you don't trust.

Slashdot Top Deals

EARTH smog | bricks AIR -- mud -- FIRE soda water | tequila WATER

Working...