Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


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

Comment Some don't know how good they have it (Score 1) 201

I know the point of this is that there is a significant cost to not having reliable high speed access. However some of us remember the days when your computer connected by a modem at 300 baud and that was pretty good. I recently found myself trying to explain a modem to a high school student... that is one exercise guaranteed to make you feel old. I could have just as well given up and said we sent everything by certified pterodactyl.

Comment Re:We'll see how long this lasts... (Score 1) 89

I could see this being a bill that Trump would want his friends in the house and senate to quickly get to work on writing out of existence. They will probably have lawyers preparing a case to bring to trial soon in hopes of getting a court to overturn it.

Why is this modded troll? This was exactly the first thing I thought of too. Trump has repeatedly and rabidly stated how he will persecute anyone that says bad things about him. The first amendment is already going to give him a lot of trouble in that regard.

Are you that new here? Slashdot has had a decidedly conservative majority voice for many years now. I was moderated troll for daring to suggest that Trump is not the greatest leader since the dawn of man kind (minus St. Ronnie, of course).

Trump will work hard at reducing the constitution to something will less value than used toilet paper. Meanwhile the slashdot conservatives will soon champion what a great idea that is.

Comment Re:We'll see how long this lasts... (Score 1) 89

Trump is now the leader of the republican party (as happens when one is elected POTUS as the candidate of the party). He also is the most successful troll in the history of trolling. Anyone in Washington who disagrees with him - regardless of their party affiliation - will be openly shamed and abused by the Troll in Chief. When he tells the GOP to jump they will ask only how high. When he says in January that he wants this bill killed they will ask only how quickly.

Being as this type of bill potentially challenges his god-given right to make money, he will want it killed. Just as he wants "new libel laws" that allow him to throw journalists into prison who cover him in unfavorable ways.

Comment Re:Different people, different rules (again) (Score 1) 1051

The DNC put a baker out of business because they wouldn't bake a gay wedding cake.

Here is an actual event

Really? I've heard various iterations of this story but I have not heard one where the Democratic National Committee actually put a baker out of business as you claim. Do you have a source for that?

If someone chooses to be a bigot, and then the negative publicity of their bigotry causes their business level to drop to zero, that is a long ways from having a political party come in and somehow magically put you out of business. Furthermore, if you sell a product to someone, and then you fail to deliver that product as promised, the person who paid you for that product has a right to seek their money back. And if your timing on denial of said product is such that an important event is now disrupted, the customer has a right to seek additional compensation for that as well.

Had the actual, extant (as opposed to your fantasy) baker just had a sign on his door declaring his bigotry, he could have avoided all this as the customer who wanted a wedding cake for a same-sex marriage never would have bothered going in.

Comment Re:Granted Government Powers (Score 1) 1051

Sure, stop black people from stepping foot into your home or your store. Refuse to buy or sell with them. It's your right!

There are things you can do that I don't think are good ideas. There are things you can do that I think are immoral or even dangerous to yourself. I am not endorsing business owners being bigots, but they do have certain rights to exclude people from their private property and rights of association. I'm willing to meet them half way and say "if you don't want to do business with XYZ type of people, that's fine as long as you post a sign plainly stating that. No surprises after the fact".

Similarly if a technology company wants to exclude certain types of traffic or communication from its services, I'm fine with that as long as it is understood what is and is not allowed. As long as the forbidden content is described, they can go ahead and do it.

Comment Re:Another one to add to the list (Score 1) 18

But weren't the broken promises part of what led to President Lawnchair having a democratic majority for only a vanishingly short period of time? If tallying up the broken promises helps to drive out some of the hacktacular idiots in 2018 I'm all for it.

You do have a point, though - he hasn't put many people in his cabinet yet that GWB wouldn't have selected. Now whether or not Cruz would have selected them is a different matter...

Comment Another one to add to the list (Score 1) 18

This is but yet another campaign promise that Trump is breaking before inauguration. If we start from 282 promises Trump made on the campaign trail (an abridged list, most likely) and then eliminate the ones that are too vague or simply impossible (like "make America great again" - for whatever that is supposed to mean today), and then subtract the ones he has already backed out on (including notable ones like this as well as "lock her up", "repeal Obamacare", etc), what is left? Not much, I suspect.

This could be a return to failure is not an option.

Comment Re:Different people, different rules (again) (Score 1) 1051

You're making an assumption there based on your own assumptions rather than what I wrote. I never said I would force the bakers to not be bigots. If they want to refuse certain types of customers I could care less, as long as they are upfront about it. Let every person who walks in know (say, with a sign near the front door) that you won't bake for people of type X. Then there will be no surprises for anyone, and everyone can make a decision to care about that decision or not.

In other words, the same as when Twitter says they won't propagate hateful speech. They are saying it before hand, so that people who are posting hateful speech will know they might not find their speech propagated through that service. Similarly if Twitter said ahead of time they didn't want to be used to advertise a certain neutral product they could do that as well provided they declare that ahead of time so everyone knows.

Comment Different people, different rules (again) (Score 4, Insightful) 1051

The GOP wants bakeries to be able to reject potential customers based on their religious beliefs, yet they want twitter to be forced to broadcast the angry ramblings of Trump just because he's Trump? The double standard is staggering. I haven't seen anyone preventing Trump from hiring someone two come up with their own site similar to Twitter; if he's as wealthy as he wants everyone to believe he should have no difficulty hiring brilliant programmers to write something that people would want to use even more than Twitter.

Comment Re:Should be obvious to everyone (Score 4, Insightful) 560

There is a reason we are particularly squeamish about handing out legal medicine that works on brain chemistry

I don't think so, bud. Tell your primary physician that you don't feel like yourself and are depressed a lot, and they have ABSOLUTELY NO PROBLEM giving you a antidepressant/re-uptake inhibitor. Hell, they even perscribe such to help stop smoking. That is just antidepressants. Make your way to a psychiatrist and there is no end to the antidepressants, mood stabalizers, antipsychotics, benzodiazapines, etc not to mention drugs like depakote that not only treat seizures and mania, but also migraines. Do you like coffee? Do you know how caffeine "works on brain chemistry"? Get your agenda straight here

Slashdot Top Deals

The rich get rich, and the poor get poorer. The haves get more, the have-nots die.