Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


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

Comment Re:Can you handle the truth? I didn't think so. (Score 1) 709

There's no such thing as clean's all just pollution in a different form. The global warming agenda, at least it's zealots, seem to only target smokestacks and tailpipes while ignoring the massive pollution needed to create, distribute and store any form of energy.

This earned me a Troll rating! Slashdot has become a bunch of puss ass mom boy pansies who can't handle a debate that doesn't meet their personal agenda. No wonder the once informative comments section is no longer useful unless your just looking for confirmation of your personal beliefs. Troll this, fuckers! There...earned it!

Comment Re:Can you handle the truth? I didn't think so. (Score 1) 709

but...we're happy put those "local effects" in parts of the world, US included, where there's little incentive or too small of a population to have a voice to do something about it. Not sure if it was intended in your spill example but the very body charged with regulating pollution in our rich nation (EPA) actually created a toxic river spill a year ago -

Comment Re:Can you handle the truth? I didn't think so. (Score 1) 709

Truly - the only solution we're going to have to global warming is to hope that eventually we just run out of fossil fuels and clean energy is all that's left.

There's no such thing as clean's all just pollution in a different form. The global warming agenda, at least it's zealots, seem to only target smokestacks and tailpipes while ignoring the massive pollution needed to create, distribute and store any form of energy.

Comment Re:Military encryption reqs are called FIPS 140-2 (Score 1) 182

Companies must pay for FIPS-140-2 certification and any updates or improvements to the encryption or surrounding application must be recertified. My main concern with this, and general lack of understanding of the process, is what happens when said previously certified code is found to be flawed? In other words, military grade FIPS-140-2 only defines a point in time and not so much as the "best currently available". At least that's how I'm interpreting it. I dealt with FIPS140-2 with IpSwitch's MoveITDMZ sftp server - you're pretty much stuck on old code if you enable FIPS.

Comment Re:The small amount of fraud (Score 1) 182

And whomever gets to define "some effort" wins the elections.

Yes, I realize "effort" is subjective, but dang, the path we're on right now is what has us voting for the worst possible people to hold office. The only effort I'm suggesting is showing up on election day...presumably only those that care enough would make the sacrifice. It would also severely limit the ability to vote harvest over weeks - and by that I mean individuals or groups that round up what can only be called "useful idiots" to cast votes in return for whatever - food, money, a ride, something to do, nothing, etc.

Comment Re:The small amount of fraud (Score 1) 182

Rights: Now only for those deemed worthy by ChickenFat.

Actually, as defined by the constitution, which does not provide for nor exclude early voting or absentee voting. That's left to the states to define and that's where my opinion should count with my elected representatives.

What's your opinion about felons or foreigners being excluded from voting by most states? The constitution does not expressly forbid felons or foreigners. Who deemed them worthy to be excluded? It wasn't me.

Comment Re:You do realize (Score 1) 182

I have no idea what you're talking about concerning socialists but I'm happy you put in the effort for your candidate. I have a 20 mile round trip, through two towns, to get to my voting precinct, yet I vote in every election - should I also complain of being disenfranchised by this unusual burden, or be proud that I care enough to put in the effort? The Hillary supporters didn't need to put in as much effort because, as you likely now know, the Democrats with their super delegates had their selection process rigged from the beginning. The Republicans just failed to properly rig theirs in time.

Primaries and caucuses are defined by the parties and access is generally controlled by how much they and the state want to spend to run the election (e.g. a caucus is cheapest). I hope we can all agree now that primaries and caucuses are a joke. There were people in Kansas City proudly proclaiming on TV interviews they took part in the Iowa caucus - no one is checked! The Kansas caucus had voting occurring in St. Louis because Wichita State folks were there for a basketball tournament - seriously! Claire McCaskill, a Missouri democrat, threw a victory party on primary night in 2012 because Missouri's open primaries allowed her to organize democrats, including tv advertisements, to vote for the republican candidate she could beat - she even wrote in her book about it. Once again for governor this year, in the open primary state of Missouri, the democrats ran virtually no candidates except their chosen ones and the republicans ran a field of candidates and now have a heavily out of state funded republican governor choice that 2/3 did not vote for in the primary - again Tv add shows up right at the end with an obvious signal to democrats to vote for the guy they can beat in the general. The gamesmanship is huge yet the reporting and analysis is noticeably absent. Why?

Comment Re:The small amount of fraud (Score 1) 182

A distinction without a difference. Our president is elected by an electoral influenced by a democratic voting process by which each state defines qualification and only with recent amendments to the constitution, has been further defined but still not specific. The founders put in place the electoral in just such as case as democracy would become idiocracy - - at least for the president. The house originally was our democratically elected branch, with the senate selected by the state's legislatures. That's all been changed by the 17th amendment. I don't know which would be better but I do know I have much better access to my federal and state house representatives than my senators or the president.

Sorry, my quick "not democratic" response to mr "fuck you" was not well defined. Frankly, I'm disappointed in the overall lack of understanding of the constitution and its history found here on slashdot; although, I'm not surprised as I wasn't taught much in high school either and had to take a full semester in college on the "right to vote." Slashdot used to be a place were people defended their ideas with information and it's just "f-you" and "move if you don't like it" - the same useless drivel found all over the internet.

Comment Re:The small amount of fraud (Score 0) 182

Actually, states determine the right to vote and citizenship is not a requirement by the constitution. The constitution has only been amended to prevent states from prohibiting certain voters, it still does not completely define how states determine who can vote. The president is selected by electoral college, of which you vote your opinion but the electoral are not bound to that opinion. I doubt most know who all their electoral folks are...I sure don't...and by the constitution they cannot be a senator or representative - so not someone you democratically elected.

...but to my original point. It's simply my opinion that people who vote should put some effort into it - if that means lazy, ignorant people don't make it to vote so be it. You can disagree and provide reasons as to why you really want lazy, ignorant people to vote but calling me names doesn't make your case.

Comment Re:Quibbling (Score 1) 182

it could be made significantly more secure than my state's vote by mail program (which is the only way to vote in Washington state).

I'm sorry to hear that Washington state has already thrown away their elections. I'm sure every single mailed in vote is actually cast by the intended person and not by one person in the household "helping" or by churches rounding up the elderly to "help", or nursing home "helpers", etc.

Comment Re:The sky is falling...again (Score 1) 182

Banking transactions are not anonymous and are substantially subject to fraud. It's amazing that people on slashdot talk for years about dumb users and their dumb passwords but come online voting by these same dumb people - no problem. How do you intend to insure the person casting the vote is the actual person and not a grandson "helping" grandma or some other form of vote harvesting? Same problem exists with mail in voting. Show up, vote on paper! Save the absentee for the very few that should qualify.

Comment Re:The small amount of fraud (Score 4, Insightful) 182

This will result in pales in comparison to the amount of enfranchisement it will create. Every time I've seen someone railing against voter fraud it's always been a transparent attempt to keep some kind of "undesirables" from voting. Usually members of the working class.

Bullshit. I only want people voting who put some effort into it. We're continually throwing away our country by trying to turn elections into zero effort by the voter. In my opinion the two worst things in our elections are open primaries and early voting. Show up the day of the election, darken the oval next the candidate you want and feed it into the electronic counter - an unambiguous paper trail will remain. Save early voting to the true absentee and not leave it open to vote harvesting.

Comment Re:Interesting quote in article (Score 1) 237

Obama wouldn't have had to fight anyone when he took office since his party controlled congress. How do you think we got Obama care? Every progressive idea for the last several decades could have been pushed through when he first took office - higher taxes on the rich, gun control, spaceships, free everything!. Why do that when you can use your "ideas" to beat people over the head with for decades.

Slashdot Top Deals

"You know, we've won awards for this crap." -- David Letterman