Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Really?!? (Score 1) 1448

Why is is it that so many on the right have NO CLUE what freedom of speech means?

If I call you ugly, stupid, bigoted, or otherwise insult you, that is NOT a violation of your freedom of speech. That is my usage of my freedom of speech. This seems to be the big one for right wingers. "Waaa.... waaa..... waaa..... I was insulted, that's an attack on my freedom of speech!". No it's not. You have the right to speech, and I respect your right to speak, and I have the right to not-respect the content of your speech, I have the right to criticize your speech, I have the right to insult you and your speech.

If I say "shut the fuck up", that is not a violation of your freedom of speech. You still have the right to continue speaking, and I have the right to express my opinion on it, and to say I think you should stop speaking.

I have the right to stop being your friend if I dislike your speech. I have the right to tell other people they shouldn't be your friend. I have the right to avoid you, and avoid spending my money in your business because I dislike you and what you say. And I have the right to suggest to other people that should avoid you and not spend their money in your business. None of that is a violation of your freedom of speech.

What DOES freedom of speech mean?

It means the government can't put you in prison because it doesn't like what you have to say, it means I can't use the government to put you in prison for saying things I dislike, it means the government cannot deny you equal-access under the law because the government dislikes the content of your speech.

You can be a member of the KKK, the Nazi party, NAMBLA, or whatever else. And if a city issues parade permits for activist groups, the city cannot deny you equal access to obtain a parade permit. THAT is a violation of your freedom of speech. I may utterly abhor your speech, but I will fight the government on your behalf, demanding that the government MUST issue parade permits on content-neutral terms. And once you do get that parade permit, I will either stay the hell away from your abhorrent parade, or I will show up at the parade to use MY freedom of speech to shout you down and insult you, protesting against your cause.

honest about not supporting people who have opinions different than your own

I will fight the government on your behalf if they try to imprison you for your speech, or if the government denies you equal access under the law. However beyond that I do NOT need to support cause, I do NOT need to respect you or what you have to say, I do NOT need to assist you in any way. I CAN and WILL oppose you in every way in my power. I will oppose you in every way SHORT of trying to criminalize your speech or deny you equal treatment under the law.

There are a lot of things I dislike, there are a lot of things that offend me, but I am DEDICATED to the position that no one.... not even me.... can use violence merely because we are offended by what you have to say. And that specifically means that no one.... not even me.... can use government-sanctioned violence to arrest or imprison you merely because we are offended by what you have to say. That neither I not anyone else can use the force of government to deny you equal rights under the law, simply because we dislike what you have to say.

Freedom of speech means I strictly reject violence against you for your objectionable speech (including the threat of police), and strictly oppose oppose striping your legal rights for your objectionable speech. But in the arena of speech-vs-speech, in the social arena, I can disrespect and combat your objectionable speech with all vigor.

so that America may one day be of one mind

Today we are nearly all of one mind that women should have an equal right to vote. And in getting to that point, there was nothing wrong with any disrespect that was expressed against opponents, there was nothing wrong with any insults cast against opponents, there was nothing wrong with social stigma against opponents. Anyone today who advocates revoking women's right to vote is going to dear well-deserved insults and social stigma for arguing such noxious ideas. Freedom of speech ensures they CAN pursue that speech, but there's no violation of freedom of speech when the general public loudly and viciously attacks that speech. There no violation of freedom of speech when people boycott that noxious individual.

must be punished into submission and silenced until they think the same way you do

Bad or noxious ideas are SUPPOSED to lose. And yes, loosing can be unpleasant. The point of freedom of speech is that the government cannot forcibly shut down objectionable speech. The point of freedom of speech is that people have the freedom to *try* to win people over to their side. It can get ugly to be right when everyone else is wrong, and unfortunately there's no simple fix for that. It can get even uglier for someone who is dedicated to some wrong or noxious idea, and who is too stupid or obstinate to learn why his ideas are wrong or noxious. And again, unfortunately there's no easy fix for that either. But in that case it's a self-inflicted problem.

-

Comment Re:Really?!? (Score 1) 1448

Destroying governments can mean voting in new governments.

It can. But that hardly seems to be the case here.

When he calls the government a "mortal enemy" and vows to use "any means necessary" to "destroy that government and bring it down", and says "that insane Constitution [] will die", that's a wee bit stronger than merely saying "I feel like voting against it" and gently suggesting "heay I think it would be swell if maybe you voted against it too". Not to mention the fact that voting against it is now pretty well futile. There's 55% nation-wide support for gay marriage, and that support is rising at a steady 2.4% per year. He can't muster majority support for a federal law against it, much less the supra-majority percentages that would be required to change the constitution, which would be needed to overcome constitutional court rulings in favor of gay marriage.

-

Comment Re:Really?!? (Score 1) 1448

I agree completely with Mr. Card. The intellectual contortions that many go through in order to legitimize the perversion of homosexuality is breathtaking.

What contortions?

The law has no business examining a person's race, religion, or gender as a basis to discriminate between acceptable or unacceptable applicants for a driver's application, marriage application, or anything else. It's impossible to write a marriage law to discriminate against interracial couples without the law examining the applicants' races, it's impossible to write a marriage law discriminating against inter-faith couples without the law examining the applicants' religions, and it's impossible to write a marriage law discriminating against gay couples without the law examining the applicants' genders. It's unconstitutional to discriminate against gay marriages for the exact same reason it's unconstitutional to discriminate against gay marriages.

Race, religion, and gender are equally invalid criteria for the law to examine as a basis to approve or deny driver's applications or marriage applications or anything else in law. No contortions at all. Equal protection and equal treatment under the law for all people, as people, regardless of anyone's race religion or gender.

-

Comment Re:Really?!? (Score 1) 1448

Also, again
If the Constitution is defined in such a way as to destroy the privileged position of marriage, it is that insane Constitution, not marriage, that will die.

And again, he said "whatever means is made possible or necessary".

That clearly extends beyond merely voting. In fact voting is effectively no longer on the list of "possible" means. Gay marriage opponents can no longer muster a 50% vote for a federal law against it, much less the percentages they would need to amend the constitution against court rulings in favor of gay marriage. Support for gay marriage is now over 55% of the public, and that percentage is steadily rising at about 2.4% per year. Gay marriage is seen as a civil rights issue by an overwhelming percentage of people under 35, and the largest percentage of gay marriage opponents are senior citizens. Gay marriage proponents are literally burying more and more gay marriage opponents every day as they drop dead of old age.

If he (or his ideological allies) attempt to oppose gay marriage by some means beyond a now utterly-futile vote against it, if he (or his ideological allies) attempt to bring about the "death" of the constitution by some means beyond a now utterly-futile vote against it, then I am prepared if necessary to take up the same means, whatever those means may be, to preserve the constitution and to preserve interracial marriage and to preserve gay marriage.

I do not take kindly to anyone threatening to use "whatever means is made possible or necessary" to kill the constitution. I do not take kindly to any bigot threatening to use "whatever means is made possible or necessary" to exterminate interracial marriage or gay marriage. The government has no business using race, religion, or gender as a basis to discriminate between acceptable and unacceptable marriage applicants.

-

Comment Re:EMusic and Bitrot (Score 1) 221

IQs must be dropping fast. I, my parents and my grandparents (probably yours too) knew all about bit rot. Records can wear out, get scratched, or warp. When that happens they no longer sound good and may not play at all.

You can reduce the likelihood by keeping them in their sleeves when not in use, making sure the needle on your record player is in good shape, dusting the records off gently and don't leave them in a hot car.

Similar applies to CDs.

Comment Re:Who Cares? (Score 1) 1448

A Gallup poll in May 2013 put support for gay marriage at 53% of Americans, and opposition at 45%.
A Pew poll also in May 2013 puts it at 52% support and 42% opposed.
A Post-ABC News poll in March 2013 puts it at 58% support and only 36% opposition.
USA Today in July 2013 puts it at 55% support 40% opposed.

Furthermore, long term polling trends show that acceptance of gay marriage has been rising at a rather steady 2.4% per year. For comparison, long term polling showed acceptance of interracial rose at just 1% per year. Acceptance of gay marriage is rising nearly two and a half times as fast as interracial marriage was accepted. Gay marriage is overwhelmingly seen as a civil rights issue by those under 35, with opposition primarily residing among senior citizens. Gay marriage proponents are literally burrying the core opposition as more and more of them are simply dying of old age.

The battles will drag on for a while, but the war is effectively over.

Gay marriage will be officially recognized nation wide in juts a few years, and any lingering gay marriage opponents will rapidly be dismissed as just as bigoted and just as irrelevant as the lingering interracial marriage opponents. I hope you enjoy Klan meetings. Pretty soon that's going to be the only place anyone is going to sympathetically listen to your persecution complex whinging.

-

Comment Re:Cobol is self-documenting (Score 2) 345

Eh...there probably was some half baked documentation at some point, but I doubt it was maintained very well

That may well be because any decent COBOL programmer knows (or knew) that the code itself is indeed self-documenting. COBOL code may be tedious to write (actually, it certainly is) but it has the advantage of being quite easily maintained.

So, no excuses. It's more likely the US Govt is too cheap to hire anyone with the appropriate skills. It's also quite possible that an age bias has been applied by their HR bozos, thus excluding that generation most likely to be good at this work.

Comment Re:Fuck 'em (Score 4, Insightful) 344

the people who buy from street vendors in NYC instead of the botique shops are not getting ripped off, they know they are buying fake goods. for some people spending 20 bucks ona handbag that is close enough to the real thing (sometimes better believe it or not) know damn well they are not getting the real thing when it costs 2000 bucks in the store down the road.

Slashdot Top Deals

Nothing recedes like success. -- Walter Winchell

Working...