Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Trust the World's Fastest VPN with Your Internet Security & Freedom - A Lifetime Subscription of PureVPN at 88% off. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. ×

Comment Re:Just another mindless attack (Score 1) 473

What they forget is no one cares what phone Trump uses to tweet from. As long as he has a second phone to keep the classified stuff secure, who cares if he also keeps his personal phone?

FWIW there are document preservation laws he needs to comply with, too.

I know I'll get modded down for being honest here, but I don't care.

"FWIW" is no worth at all. The document preservation laws you mention concern official papers, communications, etc. They do not cover non-government-related, non-classified/non-TS public statements and commentary published openly on a public website. Trump could have 100 phones, tablets, etc etc and post all over the 'net and not be breaking any laws or security protocols.

You lot on the left suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome are just being pathetically disingenuous and disgustingly dishonest and hypocritical with your Alinsky-ite 'accuse your enemies of exactly what you, yourself do' tactics. It's no wonder people are abandoning the left/Democrats in droves. They can't stand the smell any longer.

But hey, that's what got Trump elected! Keep it up! You'll gift the conservatives control of all 3 federal branches and the entire federal government along with the public's backing to repeal/abolish every leftist initiative instituted in the last 60 years! Good times!

For those who claim to be anti-gun, you sure love your high-caliber, fully-automatic footguns, LOL!


Comment Re:How to get 8 years of Trump (Score 0) 901

I think we should get Ivanka for 2024

Nice, but I think Melania would be even better, with 'the Donald' as 'first husband', LOL! There would be blood shooting from eyes on the left!

The left might even vote for her since she has a woman card.

Not a chance...the left only honors the 'woman card' when it's being used against opponents. Conservative women are not really 'women' to the left and it's fine to treat them in ways they'd scream about if it were one of their women instead. They don't even consider any possibility they might be wrong, it's a totally foreign concept for them. They view anyone who has different opinions as stupid and/or evil, and so that just reinforces the notion that opposing ideas aren't even worth listening to, and they reason since they are facing evil and/or the irredeemably stupid, the ends justify the means.

It's a dangerous and contagious ideological psychosis that spreads among those ignorant of history and/or indoctrinated by the authority figures in their upbringing and education which has killed uncountable millions around the world.


Comment Re:How to get 8 years of Trump (Score 0) 901

Do this. Do this more often. Exactly this.

Followed by 8 years of Cruz, LOL!

The way the left is melting down is hilarious!

Conservatives don't have to say a thing, just point at the left. Their own actions, behaviors, racism, bigotry, and violence speak all that anybody needs to dismiss them as a serious political force. All Cruz's 2024 campaign ads have to be are simply replays of all the hysterical leftists ranting, lying, and rioting. They won't even need narration! He'll win in a historically 'yuuuge' landslide!


Comment Re:Never Fails (Score 1) 130

To answer a simple question with another, would you be okay with alcoholics who have lost their license half a dozen times offering taxi rides on Craigslist, when they're driving a car with no license and no insurance? Would you expect minimum professional standards from a taxi service, or expect Joe Blow Consumer to do a full background check on Billy Bob for DUI's before getting into his car for a ride to the airport, least it be Joe's own damn fault for the ensuing car accident?

So what stops anybody from doing that now? I've seen ads on the local CL by individuals for ride-sharing in the local area before Uber/Lyft came along. With a driver-rating system that passengers can use to see what others thought of prospective drivers integrated into the OSS free app this can be mitigated greatly. Besides, Uber/Lyft are/were setting standards for drivers, but abolish them and you'll have just what you describe.

As others have pointed out, the current taxi system (at least everywhere in the US I've been, and I'm fairly well-traveled) is fundamentally broken and horribad in many ways and on many levels. Are you saying we're simply doomed, DOOOOMED! to suffer the existing broken, too-expensive, and corrupt system?

The current taxi system in many, many places, including where I live currently, is a 'private contractor' system as well. Drivers are not employees of the taxi companies, they simply temporarily lease a cab. The taxi companies don't do any screening other than checking for a valid license and maybe a basic check for outstanding warrants. Why is it that taxi drivers being 'contractors' is fine, but Uber/Lyft drivers are 'employees', other than being interpreted as such as a weapon to be used against ride-sharing?

AFAICT, Uber/Lyft actually screen drivers more stringently than the taxi companies do. Uber/Lyft vehicles are far and away better quality than typical taxis. Not everything needs to be controlled by the government, as often that control actually ends up degrading safety, utility, and efficiency.


Comment Re:Never Fails (Score 1) 130

Uber's business model is to pretend ride-sharing and car-for-hire are the same thing until some government or private entity challenges that obvious falsehood in court.

What about an open-source free app that simply connects drivers with riders in a distributed, non-centralized way, where any fees are negotiated exclusively and privately between each driver and rider, where no money goes back to the app writers and where they exercise zero control/restrictions over drivers? When it's simply individuals with no business like an Uber or Lyft involved at all? Would that be OK in your opinion?


Comment Re:If the *.AA think it's bad (Score 1) 134

...exclusivity of control was the property of the copyright holder.

You seem to be conflating two different definitions of "property". In the first definition, "property" is a physical thing, as in land or a car. The second, and the definition which applies to "exclusivity of control", is that of a characteristic, as in occupying space is a "property" of mass.

"Exclusivity of control" is a "property" of copyright law, as in an attribute, it is not physical property as in a car or land is "property".

These are important distinctions to grasp in order to have a meaningful discussion about copyright.


Comment Re:Incorrect! (Score 1) 382

Actually you have it backward, modern civilization is modern because Christianity went through reformations.


I personally tend to think they went hand-in-hand in a sort of 'chicken -or-egg' sense, in that neither one was really possible without the other. I also believe that if Islam experienced a similar reformation the ME would experience a 'Renaissance' period somewhat similar to Europe's and become a far more peaceful, advanced, and wealthy region.


Comment Re:Incorrect! (Score 2) 382

"they spend billions in spreading their religious zeal to mosques around the world" - not unlike all the missionaries the catholics sent around the world to indoctrinate

False equivalency.

How many terrorist attacks/car-bombings/mass shootings/suicide bombings have Christians performed in the last 50 years against non-Christians simply because they were not Christian?

The major and most relevant difference between Islam and Christianity in this context is that Christianity went through reformations to be compatible with modern civilization, whereas Islam has not. Christians do not kill apostates nor tax/enslave non-Christians, nor throw homosexuals off rooftops or stone women to death who were raped.

There is plenty to criticize about Christianity, but currently it is far and away more benign than Islam and the two are in no way equivalent in terms of violence against non-believers. Islam needs it's own reformation, but sadly, it looks like the only way that will happen is when enough Muslims bent on violence are eliminated by force.


Comment Re:If the *.AA think it's bad (Score 1) 134

...exclusivity of control

Does NOT equal:

lawfully recognized property.

You use contradicting definitions describing two entirely different things in your own post and then try to conflate them as the same thing.

Maybe you should rethink your position and/or critical-thinking skills.

Just saying.


Comment Re:If the *.AA think it's bad (Score 4, Insightful) 134

...the only real reason that people object to calling copyright infringement "theft" is because they don't want to feel guilty about doing it,...

Or maybe, I dunno, because it's clearly defined as two separate things under the law.

I understand copyright infringement is against the law, but "the law is an ass" in this case as the law is the product of corruption and criminality. I did not feel this way before the endless extensions and honored copyright law. Now, not so much. If copyright was reset back to the original terms I would once again take it seriously.

The world has changed and copyright must change with it, or die. As it stands, copyright law is locking away our own culture by preventing works from entering the public domain, which is the reason why copyright law was originally written, not to assure someone and their relatives money in near-perpetuity for a single creative work. That was simply a carrot to encourage creators to share their works. You have no inherent right otherwise to profit from or control any creative work once it's been published.


Comment Re:If the *.AA think it's bad (Score 2) 134

Infringing on copyright is theft.

No, it's copyright infringement as spelled out in the law.

I view modern copyright infringement as a form of political protest against absurdly-long copyright terms bought and paid for by greedy and amoral media distributors from criminally-corrupt politicians. They jumped the shark in most people's eyes so now many, many people view all copyright as something to be ignored and the copyright owners/distributors have only themselves to blame for any losses they suffer.

It may be 'law' but it is a law enacted through corruption. It is a morally bankrupt law, and should be ignored by all people of conscience until corrected. Racial segregation was also once a law until people like Rosa Parks similarly decided to ignore it.


Comment Re:Overreliance (Score 0) 110

They prove who did what when the bullets fly, keep the police honest,...

Funny how, quite often, there's a sudden mass failure of police body cams and audio recording when there's a situation where the cops may look like criminals. Or, there's suddenly a 'computer problem' that loses all the video/audio and gee, backups? What are those? Sorry, we either A: didn't have the budget to implement backups, give us more money, or B: surprise, there was a sudden system failure that lost just that particular stored evidence but strangely didn't lose any other data on the same server/HDD.

You could file a complaint against the officers in question, but that may not go well for you.


There are many, many more.

Welcome to the American police state. Legal complaints not allowed against enforcement forces (they've lost both the 'police' and 'law' adjectives/descriptors by their actions...they're now simply 'enforcers').


Slashdot Top Deals

This is a good time to punt work.