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


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:And masterfully so (Score 1) 566

ISIS? They're Junior Varsity, nothing to worry about.

Irrelevant, even if true. Trump claimed to have a "foolproof" and "absolute" plan to defeat ISIS "quickly". He has so far failed to put his plan into action, unless, of course, his "plan" was to tell his top generals to come up with a plan.

But even if ISIS is nothing to worry about, that makes his ongoing failure to defeat them "quickly" all the more pathetic.

Comment Re:Uhm... (Score 1) 566

THIS is the exact reason Trump is sitting in the White house. It will of the reasons he will be sworn in, in 2020 for a second term. You constantly underestimated Trump from the time he threw his hat in the ring all the way up to election night.

Let's not get stupid here. It's less an underestimation of Trump than it is an overestimation of certain voting demographics. Trump didn't vote himself into office, after all.

Comment Re:The house always wins (Score 1) 843

He isn't releasing his tax returns because they don't exist in any meaningful sense, and they won't until the audit is concluded. When you are under audit, the IRS is saying that the documents you submitted are not your tax return, and they are going to use the audit process to create your return.

This is incorrect. The IRS has officially stated that there is nothing preventing Trump from releasing his tax information:

In a statement Friday [February 26, 2016], the IRS said that federal privacy rules prohibit the agency from discussing individual tax matters, but “nothing prevents individuals from sharing their own tax information.”

IRS: Trump can release tax returns, regardless of audit

Comment Re:Theory vs. Practice (Score 1) 391

That is not a valid argument. You should always use only space, or have spaces expanded to tabs, because a space is always a space. A tab might be 4 spaces or 3 spaces or 2 spaces or default to 8 spaces (or columns every 2,3,4,8,etc columns) depending on the settings of the editor. If there are multiple people working on the same set of files with different settings for tabs, it rapidly becomes an incomprehensible mess.

This makes no sense. Tab widths aren't encoded into the file; they're editor-specific. Jim could use ts=2 and Bob could use ts=8, look at the same file, and not notice anything screwy; they'll each see indentation at their preferred width.

Comment Re:Spaces are for people who don't understand tabs (Score 1) 391

Use only tabs to indent to the beginning of the indent level. Use spaces for all other alignment, including if you want to go a little further in than the indent level for some reason.

It pains me that "tabs for indentation, spaces for alignment" seems to be such a minority. The combination seems to solve nearly every complaint I've seen from both camps.

It's as if the desire for purity is fundamental in human nature, but manifests itself differently in each person. For some it's race; for others it's use of tabs/space. :-)

Comment Re:Lies (Score 2) 569

There is a Navy person who facing 20 years to life for disposing of a phone which had his picture while inside the sub.

A quick Google search tells me that you're not representing the situation accurately.

The sailor isn't facing charges for simply having taken pictures of himself while on the sub; he had several pictures of classified engineering spaces: "The photos that raised red flags at NCIS and the FBI included images of various control panels, a panoramic view of the reactor compartment and a panel that showed the condition and exact location of the submarine at the time the photo was taken." (source)

Comment Re:All the data means all the data (Score 1) 306

I trust Wikileaks a whole lot more than the average Associated Press news story full of random bullshit attributed to "sources speaking anonymously because they were not authorized." We're not dumb, we don't want a filter and "think of the children" is how dictators often climb to power.

In situations like this (what looks like a mindless data dump), trust in WikiLeaks is meaningless, and expression of such trust reveals a certain level of, potentially willful, ignorance. It's not trust in WikiLeaks you need here; it's trust in every person that now has access to the personal, potentially private information of otherwise innocent individuals.

Comment Re:Oh no (Score 2) 637

Informative, really mods? I can go to ANY right wing site RIGHT now and say "GOP is the rich old white people party" and I will NOT be banned...compare this to how many left wing sites will ban your ass immediately if you talk about how Hillary is a crook that deserves PMITA prison.

These aren't equivalent claims.

Comment Re:Bliz (Score 1) 250

They do NOT have a right to sue because it's their own responsibility to build software checks and balances that would prevent cheating...

This is not a good argument. It's similar (similar, mind you) to arguing that you just need to suck it up when someone breaks into your house, because clearly you didn't do enough to keep them out.

The simple fact that someone was able to bypass your security does not necessarily prove you negligent, nor does it absolve the perpetrator of all responsibility for any harm caused by their actions.

Comment Re:our surveillance state failed to prevent it. (Score 1) 1718

The longer the delay in getting guns in the hands of good guys where they could shoot the bad guy the more people died. There didn't have to be a delay at all.

That is simple enough that you should be able to understand it.

The solution to gun violence is not "more guns". Especially in a crowded and chaotic situation like this, where it would be damn near impossible to reliably distinguish the bad-guy-with-a-gun from the good-guy-with-a-gun.

I'm constantly amazed by how many people fail to understand this.

Comment Re: Omar Saddiqui Mateen? (Score 1) 1718

Usually the people claiming it is a religion are religious themselves and do it because they can't handle the possibility of people having morality that lacks dependency on the supernatural.

That may be the reason they resort to attempted insults, but I don't think it's the reason they choose that particular insult.

The reason, as far as I can tell, is that they think (rightly or wrongly), since atheist tend to view religion negatively, they'll shock the atheist into acceptance of religion by labeling atheism as the very thing that atheists view with disdain.

Of course, not everyone has likely thought the insult through that far; to them, it's probably more akin to, "Yeah, well... you're a poopy-head, too!" An implicit acceptance/admission that there's something bad about "religion".

Slashdot Top Deals

I haven't lost my mind -- it's backed up on tape somewhere.