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


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:I hear Hillary participated in this study (Score 3, Insightful) 183

This was a classic case of little lies leading to big ones. NOBODY ever cared for one instant whether this guy was for the Iraq War in 2003. 70% of the population was for it. A normal person would say, "well, I guess I forgot I said that, since after all this was 13 years ago". But that almost sounds like an apology, or at least admitting to an imperfection- which he will not do unless an ISIS fighter is behind him with a sword. Instead he has to double down and construct an imaginary alternative universe of conspiracy theories where people are spreading malicious lies about him, trying to insinuate that he favored the Iraq War- as if anyone ever gave a flying fuck in the first place.

Comment Trust & Safety/Abuse needs to go. (Score 2, Insightful) 104

How many from Trust & Safety/Abuse? Their Abuse/Trust & Safety department has helped cause Twitter's losses through arbitrary enforcement (or even defense of harassers such as Leslie Jones).

Cut those departments, remove the blocking tools, and make Twitter a better company.

Comment Re:I hear Hillary participated in this study (Score 5, Funny) 183

...and she voted for the Iraq War. Donald Trump did not vote for the Iraq War, was against it, and said so. I hear people have tapes of Donald Trump saying he was for the Iraq War. It's all fabrications, all lies. Donald Trump does not tell lies. Donald Trump is a very honest person, very decent person. The best. The best. And all these people faking audio tapes, making all these fraudulent, phony, tapes, are all linked to Hillary's campaign rigging the election. All these people coming out of nowhere, saying "Trump, even though I never met him, he was for the war, I heard him say so on the radio." No witnesses. All lies. It's a huge scam, people, a huge scam. Donald Trump exhibits only a narrow subset of normal human behaviors which does NOT INCLUDE PATHOLOGICAL LYING but does include referring to himself in the third person- that makes me smart.

Comment Then prepare a fiery desk for Watson, too. (Score 1) 904

That's all fine and good but what you are proposing will only stave off the inevitable for at most a year or two. Automation is coming, it is already here and covering more ground faster and faster. Read "Rise of the Robots" it is an enlightening read.

AI is fine and dandy, but only when it is an intelligent companion, not an existential threat.

If multi-disciplinary automation (such as current-day AI) wants to become a threat, treat it no differently. Nothing says that today's Watson can be treated the same way Mr. Patterson treated the original one.

How would you propose penalizing anyone that overlooks the long-term unemployed/discouraged? Who would you propose get penalized?

The party/parties that overlook the unemployed, including all third parties and contracting services.

What would be the mechanism for detecting and punishing these despicable beings?

The lowest bar of proof constitutionally allowable for the unemployed (that meets criminal/civil standards), such that no "safe reason" can be formed.

As for punishment? A golden ticket to work directly with the organization in question for a guaranteed minimum term measurable in decades, with provisions to survive existential events - including but not limited to acquisition, offshoring, bankruptcy, and/or reorganization. It might put the staffing industry out of business for being a favored benefit dodge, but it's not as if they've been of much use for regular people these days.

Comment Not everyone is an entrepreneur. (Score 1) 904

The people who would sit on their asses with a UBI are the same people who pretend to have autism and get social security disability checks, i.e. they would amount to nothing anyway

Between the ones that do and the ones that don't, it'd be far better to entice them with a good job on good terms versus the pittance of a Social Security check.


Not everyone is fit to be the proverbial Richard Branson. They would be fine with their 30ish years of office work as a direct hire at a respectable company, with good benefits and increasing levels of responsibility. Consigning them to 60-70 years of squalor just for not having the startup bug in them is far from optimal.

Never mind that some people have a perfectly fine mindset that does not work well with startups, but works well with established organizations. Unlike some people of my generation, I saw how the latter can work well for people.

Comment Or how about recruiting people that we have? (Score 2) 904

Instead of allowing employers to have an entitlement mentality to perfection or desperation, why not make it harder for them to not hire citizens, especially the ones looking for work? Get rid of guest workers, make offshoring a royal PITA, and penalize anyone that overlooks the long-term unemployed/discouraged.

Entrepreneurship doesn't provide a steady income or a good upward path (unless you like casino-level risk), and UBI would serve to reward laziness.

Comment Re:Groping (Score 1) 394

And he's trying to cause election day violence.

I'm not saying to go violent, but we have to watch, folks, because our democracy is being stolen by the media, by the government, by a bunch of lying whores too ugly to grope, by SNL, and by illegal aliens who get airlifted from Mexico to the inner cities so they can vote five times for Crooked Hillary! It's all rigged, the system is totally rigged, folks, totally rigged, and you know it's true because if Trump loses, believe me, everything is rigged, I can tell you that much.

Comment Re:Groping (Score 2) 394

Conservatives seem to be more concerned with hypothetical scenarios than things that actually happen. Hypothetically, a good guy with a gun might shoot a bad guy with a gun, a guy might put on a wig and enter a women's restroom to leer at girls, a Syrian refugee will show up in Chicago and vote 10 times for Clinton or set off a fission bomb, etc. The fact that these things never happen doesn't matter- if they can *imagine* it occurring, that's enough.

It's amazing how many people are convinced of "voter fraud" without actually thinking about what it means. Voter fraud means someone stands in line, votes, then gets back at the end of the line and votes again- thus risking years in prison in order to get in one extra vote! Which is believable if you're utterly incapable of putting yourself in another person's shoes and imagining what they might be thinking.

Ever since voter fraud paranoia took hold, governments have been policing for voter fraud more vigorously. And so far the only offenders have been conservatives trying to prove how easy voter fraud is.

Slashdot Top Deals

!07/11 PDP a ni deppart m'I !pleH