Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. ×

Comment Re:Do we need more evidence... (Score 1) 179

You just accept them because you are affiliated with the same party.


See, that's exactly the short of fucked-up false-dichotomy thinking I was complaining about in the first place! I'm a LIBERTARIAN , not a Democrat.

The Clintons, both of them, are every bit as horrible as Trump.

That's the thing, THEY'RE REALLY NOT. The Clinton's are horrible in a "normal" corrupt-big-government sort of way, but they PALE IN COMPARSION to the damage to civil liberties and democracy itself that Trump is doing! The Clintons never (a) kicked the media out of white house briefings, (b) stuffed their administration full of LITERAL WHITE SUPREMACISTS, attempted to normalize lying to the public in a strategy straight out of 1984 or Mein Kampf, or done any of a hundred other ACTUALLY, LITERALLY, AND WITHOUT EXAGGERATION FASCIST things!

Comment Re:Costing to the RIAA vrs Ignoring? (Score 1) 81

You grossly overestimate the cost per notice. To the rights holder the cost is basically zero.

Well, the copyright holder first has to determine whether the content is actually infr-- (snicker, choke, guffaw)

Sorry, I just couldn't get that whole sentence out while keeping a straight face.

Comment Re:bitwise math (Score 1) 614

Compilers aren't AI, they can do any 'trick' the compiler writer knows

There is an entire class of optimizations that the programmer can make but the compiler can't because the programmer understands things about the program that aren't expressed in the source code. For example, maybe the programmer knows that in his case the shift really is equivalent to the divide because he knows the range of the possible inputs, but he can't tell the compiler that unless he's programming in Ada.

Comment Re:Isn't this illegal? (Score 1) 326

ordinary Democrats generally preferred her. If you can't get the left of American center voters to support a so-called socialist

That is an idiotic argument, and here's why: there is almost certainly not a single, solitary "ordinary Democrat" who would have voted for Trump over Sanders. On the other hand, there were many people for whom Clinton's out-of-touch elitist platform (e.g. support for the TPP) made her unacceptable. This includes, crucially, historically-Democratic union workers in exactly the few Midwestern states that handed Trump the victory. Sanders would have swung those people easily.

Comment Re:Isn't this illegal? (Score 1) 326

Bernie was an outsider not a lifelong member of the party.

Who gives a shit?

The Democrats (the party not the people who vote democrat - annoying how I have to spell everything out) would see any win by him as a loss.

More of a loss than electing FUCKING TRUMP?

Let me spell this out very clearly, since Democratic partisans are apparently utter morons: even though Sanders wasn't a loyal apparatchik of the DNC political machine, they would have still been a fuck-ton better off having Sanders sit there vetoing all the alt-right bullshit the Republican-supermajority Congress will be shoving through for the next four years, instead of having Trump sit there signing it into goddamn motherfucking LAW!

Comment Re:Isn't this illegal? (Score 3, Informative) 326

On a related note, the White House FOIA page is currently unavailable. So much for requesting transcripts of all Trump Administration business done over Confide (just for shits and giggles since there's no chance they'd, you know, comply with the law or anything).

Comment Re:He didn't steal the data, they still have it (Score 1) 156

Well, they are secrets, which are only valuable if not shared.

One can make a similar argument about the commercial value of copyrighted material.

On the contrary, one can make the opposite argument about copyrighted material: I say it becomes more valuable to society as a whole (as opposed to any particular entity in it) the more it gets shared.

Comment Re: Well, damn (Score 1, Interesting) 335

I mean, what exactly is wrong with our elected American leaders saying they are going to put forth and defend American interests first and foremost when dealing with the rest of the world?

If that's all it meant, it wouldn't be a problem. But it's actually a dog-whistle for fascism, and you fucking know it.

Was it about the same time it seems it became just plain wrong to be born a white male?

From one white male to another: fuck off with your bullshit feigned victimhood. It's not helping anything, least of all other white males!

Comment Re:Pro Shareholder Agenda (Score 1) 182

Corporations should focus on their employees and their customers, not shareholders.

Corporations should act in the public interest. Otherwise there is literally no reason for them to exist.

Remember, the Constitution affirms the right to assemble, but it does not affirm some imaginary right to do so and then demand special legal treatment to limit liability!

Slashdot Top Deals

"May your future be limited only by your dreams." -- Christa McAuliffe