Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Get HideMyAss! VPN, PC Mag's Top 10 VPNs of 2016 for 55% off for a Limited Time ×

Comment Re:Standard Ruling Party shit. (Score 1) 380

Are you sure you wouldn't rather tell me you can't talk to strangers until they promise they've read a link that Hillary told you to show to people whenever they ask you questions? I mean, you've put in all this effort to avoid ever backing up your own position with thoughts of your own, so why stop? Unless it just feels good to you to admit you really don't have anything coherent to say about pretending to throw away your vote.

Comment Re:From where does the FAA get power to regulate i (Score 1) 35

Where does the FAA claim it gets the power to regulate drones which are only engaged in INTRA-state commerce and flying too low to interfere with interstate air traffic? Seems to me that's the state's job

From 49USC app 1301 - the Federal Aviation Act of 1958 ...

No, no, no. Not what I meant.

From where in the Constitution, in the face of the 10th Amendment and Norton v. Shelby County 118 U.S. 425 (1886), does the Federal Government's Congress claim to get the power to delegate to such an executive branch agency?

Comment Ads, of course (Score 1) 122

No doubt they will want to start off with some innocuous, nearly inconspicuous ads, and then work their way up to several minutes of unskippable ads, with ads resetting any time you skip too far ahead or leave it paused for too long. At least that seems to be what other companies are doing. Then they can sell the flaming wreckage before buyers realize that sort of thing pisses off their customers like nothing else. Although there is a chance the CEO will fend off the idiots who want to do this.

In the meantime, Netflix will have to put more and more effort into original shows, both to distinguish themselves from the competition and because the media companies want to kill off Netfix by refusing to renew licensing agreements. At least the DVD-by-mail system is safe from those shenanigans.

Comment Re:Standard Ruling Party shit. (Score 1) 380

Hey look! Another failure to utter even a single sentence on the subject matter at hand! Fascinating. Someone so dedicated to his cause, and so unable to muster the wit and energy necessary to construct sentences about it. OK, so it's some sort of cognitive problem. That's a shame, I feel for you. Since you can't form sentences to express your thoughts, I'll make it easier for you by giving you multiple choice. Just pick the one that describes your thinking.

1) Fustakrakich knows that voting for a third party cannot possibly result in that third party candidate actually being elected, but does know that depriving one of the actually viable candidates of votes will result in that candidate's opponent being more likely to win. Thus Fustakrakich is actively choosing to support the person most likely to benefit from his action: Hillary Clinton. This is a conscious choice. Because Fustakrakich has to maintain his slashdot street cred by pretending he doesn't really support Hillary Clinton's long career display of lying and massive corruption, he's using this back-channel way of supporting her. His inability to simply say all of this reflects the depths of his embarrassment over his poor choice and his growing awareness that his entire philosophical stance is based on badly mixed premises and contradictions, and that saying anything out loud in his own words will expose him to having to reconcile his broken world view with reality - a process he finds too painful, which causes him to regress to juvenile insults and painfully bad ad hominem and hissy-fit foot stamping in order to distract from that dawning realization on his part. And so he childishly tries the "Well, just talk to my daddy! He'll explain what I mean!" tactic of refusing to articulate his own thoughts, and attempts to steer any expectations that he might be clear on the subject over to another person's writings, in hopes that that will somehow spare him from having to examine the fragile, self contradictory constructs on which he's built his thinking.

2) Nah, there's no number two.

Comment Re:Standard Ruling Party shit. (Score 1) 380

Ah, good, we're back to you displaying your own inability to explain your actions without admitting the consequences, and thus once again deflecting and dishing out juvenile insults. SOP for "my type?" What, pointing out your inability to so much as answer a direct question in your own words? Wow, that is just awful, isn't it? Of course anyone with the intellectual courage to stand behind their position to support Hillary Clinton would have no trouble using their own words, or at least doing the usual Shillary cut-and-paste. But no, you don't want to be seen typing out those words - it's embarrassing, I know, being unable to form your own sentences to explain yourself. Perhaps your next Hillary campaign workshop can help you out with that.

Comment Re:Horse Hockey (Score 1) 750

He pointed out her untruthfulness about a long list of things, one at a time. She said she only ever used a single mobile device. The FBI said that was untrue. Why? Because she used several of them. It's not a matter of English usage or context.

Are you really suggesting that she, a person known to be glued to her device, wasn't clear on the fact she used several, instead of one? She said she never handled any classified information on that account. She, who as the nation's top diplomat and read in on all sorts of extremely sensitive material and programs involving billions of dollars and life-or-death activities, was unable to recall the dozens of email threads - including top-secret and ABOVE top-secret material - in which she participated? Or understand that things like imagery from the NRO of sites in North Korea are born classified? She claimed no, and the FBI said her characterization of all of that was untrue. Are you saying that she really meant it when she said that knew she'd turned over every single work-related email because her lawyers had read each and every one of them ... which the FBI reported was untrue (to say nothing of the thousands more they turned up, which she had deleted)? I know I don't need to run down the list of 100%-exactly-wrong things she said, even under oath in front of congress, as she tried to wish this away, because you already know about them. They're not "context" problems, or her not double-checking things. She repeated these untrue things dozens of times for a year and a half.

Comment From where does the FAA get power to regulate it? (Score 1) 35

I'm curious:

Where does the FAA claim it gets the power to regulate drones which are only engaged in INTRA-state commerce and flying too low to interfere with interstate air traffic? Seems to me that's the state's job.

(Similarly with the FCC and radio signals that are too weak to be decoded outside the state of origin or substantially interfere with reasonable interstate services. Sure "radio goes on forever". But so does sound - with the same inverse-square law and similar interference characteristics - and we get along just fine without federal regulation of speech and bullhorns.)

Comment Re:Standard Ruling Party shit. (Score 1) 380


So you consider your actions in relation to the election to be irrelevant? Then why are you telling people that you're going to vote? Why do something you consider to be irrelevant, or why say it's irrelevant if you don't actually think that?

Oh, I get it ... you think that the fact you know your vote is going to be thrown away as a way to help Hillary Clinton is irrelevant, because talking about it means you have to justify your support for her. That makes more sense, and fits your previous pattern of evasion.

Comment Re:Horse Hockey (Score 1) 750

No, you're confusing two different things. There's whether or not she was "extremely careless" with classified material (the FBI chose the words "extremely careless," not me - and that's not at all like "sloppy"), and then - separately - there's whether or not she regularly, over and over again, lied about what she did. The FBI director, when asked specific questions on several fronts about Clinton's statements regarding numerous aspects of her conduct, said they her statements were (his word) "untrue."

Slashdot Top Deals

Maternity pay? Now every Tom, Dick and Harry will get pregnant. -- Malcolm Smith