Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:The USA was founded on Anonymous Comments (Score 1) 582

The AC to Whom You reply did not equate Ms. Huffington with government.

He equated Huffington with "the British." Before ~1775, "the British" were the government, hence the revolutionary pamphlets to begin with.

Plus, the Owners of said press at the time of the revolution did not find specifying the identities of the Pamphleteers so important as to require attribution.

The publishers almost certainly had personal knowledge of the authors, though. At this point, HuffPo doesn't even have that much.

Even if They had, the fact remains One cannot fully critique and/or criticize policy/Politicians if the Owners of the press require "true names".

Then use a press other than HuffPo's, or buy your own.

Comment Re:The USA was founded on Anonymous Comments (Score 2) 582

First and foremost, Ariana Huffington is not the government. Otherwise there'd be a lot more sideboob in Congress...

Beyond that, those anonymous pamphleteers you mentioned got their works published because the owners of the printing presses consented to the publishing of the specific tracts in question; Whether or not they printed a particular piece by a particular person was wholly by their own prerogative. Here, Huffington owns the printing-press equivalent, and has decided to limit the use of her resources just a bit more narrowly than "Anybody can come along and post GNAA spam."

Then as now, freedom of the press belongs to those who own one.

Comment Re:quit drinking (Score 1, Insightful) 330

"No True Scotsman" involves moving goalposts. Alcohol abuse is a well-documented, well-defined medical condition; the only "goalpost-moving" here is movement from the OP's self-diagnosis.

Or are you honestly trying to defend all the first-hand accounts of users of homeopathy, chiropractic, faith healing and the like?

Comment "Seeing" (Score 1) 537

"What you're not seeing is people actually abusing these programs."

Four months ago we didn't see this NSA datamining to begin with. Just because we don't "see" it doesn't mean it isn't actually happening.

Going on prime time TV and constantly repeating "Trust me on this" isn't going to get him very far. After all, why are these (supposed) changes so needful now and not four months ago? If we were to take Obama and the intelligence committees at their words, the only thing that has changed in these programs in the past four months is that we know about them, so why are these "changes" necessary now?

Comment Re:Congress considers Snowdon to be a whistleblowe (Score 1) 531

The votes failed, and Congress (or at least the folks on the intelligence committees) knew about these programs the entire time.

It's not White House versus Congress or Republican versus Democrat. Everyone's on the same page except the voters, and everyone wants Snowden waterboarded to the fullest extent of the unpublished law.

Comment Re:Japanese Military (Score 1) 282

Leaning on the U.S. forever is not sustainable.

Perhaps, but right now it's the best way of preventing a second Sino-Japanese War. China trusts the US military much more than they do a Japanese military, and US abandonment of the region would trigger an arms race (conventional and otherwise) that would make Indian-Pakistani relations look warm and fuzzy.

Slashdot Top Deals