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: Fake News? (Score 0) 624

If Snopes were left-leaning, it would have been impossible for me to defend Bush all those years.

Sorry, but Snopes is left-leaning. What you've run across are examples so flagrant, they had to admit them to false. For example, "Trump to Repurpose USS Enterprise Into Floating Hotel and Casino" or "Donald Trump Was Born in Pakistan" are obviously fake and Snopes will label it as such.
The best way to check any "fact-check" site is to find the same quote said by two people on different sides of the aisle. What I have found is that many times, the same claim will receive a higher rating from the left, as the site will find an excuse as to why it may be true. The right receives no such courtesy.

Comment Re: Fake News? (Score 0) 624

I'm led to understand reality has a pretty strong left wing bias, also.

Do you mean the "reality" that says only white Republicans can be racist?
Maybe you mean the "reality" that every Republican candidate since Reagan is a racist/misogynist/elitist/Bible-thumper?
Oh, I know... You mean the "reality" of Obamacare cutting health care costs and everyone being able to keep their doctor, right?

Sorry, but when "the left wing" has played the bigot (racist, misogynist, homophobe, transphobe) card so hard and so long that it's color has worn off, I have hard time believing that they know what "reality" truly is. Don't believe me? Go back and look at the smears against Romney and look at what they are saying about him now. Back then, he was an animal abusing, woman suppressing, religious nut-job. Today, he's the sane pick for Secretary of State. Seriously, how long did you think the American public would believe the BS when you tell them same BS every four years, only to back off your claims a few weeks after the elections end? Well, the elections you win, anyway.

Did you ever stop to think that maybe they simply disagree with your policies for reasons other than hatred?

Comment Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... (Score 1) 2837

Sorry to be the one to have to inform you of this, but this is not just about bathrooms. Sure, bathrooms are all you hear about on the news, because that's how it's framed. No one really cares the sex of the person in the stall next to you. Opinions change when you start talking about locker rooms, showers, and other facilities, especially when these facilities are used by children.

Sexual identity issues and bathrooms do not equal boys and girls in school showering together. You're literally making that up.
This is from the Charlotte non-discrimination ordinance:
"A place of public accommodation may not refuse to provide the full and equal enjoyment of its facilities based on a protected characteristic, such as gender identity and gender expression. Restrooms, locker rooms, and other changing facilities are covered by the ordinance."

Here is the source:

Oh, but you said boys and girls. OK. Let's look at what the Obama administration wants:
"Schools should let transgender students use bathrooms, locker rooms and other sex-segregated facilities consistent with their gender identity, according to the guidance." ...
"The letter does not carry the force of law but the message was clear: Fall in line or face loss of federal funding."

Comment Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... (Score 1) 2837

Whenever i see it it's almost always people complaining about the fringe left like it's the mainstream.

Do you not know that the head of your party will cut off school funds if a school does not allow boys to shower with girls? That's pretty damn far to the left and definitely "mainstream" within your party.

Sorry, but I don't believe that all women must be forced to feel uncomfortable just because and EXTREMELY small minority of men feel uncomfortable undressing in front of those with the same biological equipment.

And no, I'm not sorry, but the first man that follows my little girl into the locker room at the local YMCA is not going to like the result. But I'll be one getting in trouble because your "mainstream" left doesn't see anything wrong with a grown man getting naked in front preteen girls who are trying to change for swim practice!

Comment Re:Like suing McDonald's for hot coffee (Score 1) 102

I remember the facts of the case being something like this:

Woman gets coffee and additions (sweet stuff, white stuff) in a McDonald's drive-through. Woman parks. Woman holds cup in her lap and opens it to add sweet stuff and white stuff. Cup collapses when the lid is removed, and spills scalding hot coffee over a lot of her skin. Woman has something like $20K in medical bills, asks McDonald's to reimburse her, they refuse, case winds up in court.

What struck me was not so much the temperature of the coffee as the way the cup failed. If I were to get some sort of liquid in a cup, I'd expect the cup to be able to hold the liquid, and that was not true for McDonald's coffee cups. The coffee temperature may have weakened the cup, and it certainly caused a lot of damage, but if McDonald's had provided a halfway decent cup there would have been no injury and no lawsuit.

Now *that* is a reasonable point. And it doesn't even require a conspiracy theory. The problem seems to be, (and here we circle back to the battery "exploding") that when something like this happens, the real, true facts of the case are almost immediately replaced by something much more dramatic, and both the plantiff's lawyers and the media are usually complacent in this. Just on the face of it, I personally doubt that any of the phones are "exploding". Maybe getting really hot, enough perhaps for combustion to occur in some circumstances, but detonation seems really unlikely.

Comment Re:Like suing McDonald's for hot coffee (Score 1) 102

Testing for myself isn't going to tell me much. I'd get a measurement of what the current temperature is, at that particular store, on that particular day. It wouldn't tell me what the temperature was for the plaintiff.

The temperature range of the coffee at that particular McDonald's is mentioned in the court proceedings, so apparently someone had the data at some point. It was stated as being between 180 and 190 degrees. This is in the wiki for the lawsuit, and (if you want to be bored to death) is in the court proceedings, also online.

Shortly after the trial, I personally tested several local coffee houses (five, if I remember right -- I probably still have the spreadsheet somewhere), and every single one of them served, and (discounting the local that was bought out by Starbucks) still today serves coffee at between 180 and 190 degrees. I'd argue that this is relevant. I think a defense lawyer could argue in court that this is relevant, but indications are, the McDee suits were so confident of success that they didn't put up much of a defense.

Slashdot Top Deals

How can you do 'New Math' problems with an 'Old Math' mind? -- Charles Schulz