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. ×

Comment Re:What about English? (Score 1) 326

This is probably the most lucid counter argument to natural language programming I have seen. Hell we often need to spend 30 minutes discussing design before people on my team are all on the same page with what we need to do. And we're all operating under the assumption that everyone giving us work has the same vision we're decided on, and even that isn't always true.

Comment Re:Clickbait troll much? (Score 2) 629

Because Franklin D Roosevelt was a horrible president. I mean can you imagine? He hid his inability to walk from the public! People disqualify qualified people for the stupidest reasons. They also vote for unqualified people for the stupidest reasons. I'd be in favor of a presidental candidate being required to go through a health screening by a nonpartison doctor, but unless there's a condition that would seriously undermine their ability to perform in the capacity of president, anything discovered should not be shared with the public. Your health is between you and your doctor unless you choose to share that information with others.

Oh I like the idea of a piss test as well for any elected official. Prove you don't break the law before you enforce law on others. But the only thing I'd want to know is pass/fail.

Comment Re:For what, the last 20 years? (Score 1) 212

Let's say Nebraska decides that corporations that host in their borders do not have to pay any local, state, or federal taxes. If a corporation took that deal and stopped paying federal taxes, I think the I.R.S. would still be upset with them. Ireland being part of the E.U. has agreed to a bunch of treaties about how corporate taxes can be accommodated. This investigation is based on that. If Ireland was not party to any treaties about this then you would be accurate that there is nothing anyone else can say.

Comment Re:More proof (Score 1) 415

The bigger intent of my comment was to indicate that the idea that something whose defining characteristic is race based is not necessarily racist is ridiculous. There might be organizations out there specifically targeting disadvantaged races for privilege, but that doesn't make those organizations not racist. The ESSA thing bothers me because one of the rejection criteria is race. That's pretty horrible. Like saying only women and non-white, non-Asian minorities should be programmers. If they were encouragement based and not segregation based I would be really glad about it. I would also like it more if it was socioeconomic based rather than race based. Meaning have the program mostly for economically disadvantaged children. That would result in better race statistic while also not telling kids it's ok to make decisions based on the color of someone's skin.

Comment Re:More proof (Score 1) 415

To the contrary I do have experience with minorities. And I don't think them feeble. I'm also aware of the barriers that they face. Though honestly while I think a lot of the barriers they face are economic in nature, some of them are truly racial. The combination of the economic and racial and societal barriers can be insurmountable for a lot of people. Not everyone, but why should anyone be held down or held back simply because of their birth? The intention of my comment is more along the lines of I think it is ridiculous to say something that has qualifying characteristics including race is not racist.

Comment Re:By Hack it, they mean work for 2 bucks an hour. (Score 2) 472

Your premise is coming from an angle of "You shouldn't expect to be paid well enough to live." Even if you argue from the standpoint of our lifestyle is unsustainable, that's a pretty bogus angle. We should be able to expect to be paid well enough to live. Because if we aren't the money is only pooled at the top. I agree that our current pace is unsustainable. But the pace of approaching unsustainability is being driven primarily by wealth desparity and not lack of resources. Money and resources are being pooled at the top and having the poor, working, and middle class lower their expectations that thinking a family can have their own home is unrealistic is not going to slow the consumption of resources. It's only going to increase the wealth disparity.

Comment Re:Unfair? (Score 1) 112

So the US has to provide 100% free trade to China and guarantee prices for not just their own country but *every* "western" country before we can talk about imbalanced barriers to entry? That's ridiculous. The US shouldn't have any say over how a different countries tax products sold in their jurisdiction. Even given states should be allowed to establish different tax rates. Both of those things will result in fluctuating prices. Hell different western world countries use different currencies and those will fluctuate in comparison to each other which will also change real price in different countries. And why should the US be required to remove all barriers from its side before discussing if barriers in China are unfairly high compared to the barriers the US currently has against Chinese companies operating in the US? Your options are not only ridiculous they are infeasible.

Comment Re:Some do (Score 1) 271

Well... Reagan was the source of implementation of Voodoo Economics (trickle-down economics, supply-side economics, choose your name) and started the destruction of the strength of unions so yeah some of the blame for the poor and working class economic woes really can be laid appropriately at his feet.

Comment Re:Wait... (Score 1) 1017

If I do something to try and get someone elected do I need to wait for them to give me permission or ask before I do it? Or is it possible I may do something I believe will lead to support of a candidate or a drop in support for an opposing candidate? I haven't heard anyone claim that Trump asked the Russians to do the initial hack. I have heard rumors that they did it to support him, but I'm not sure if that's their primary intent. I do know that Putin has spoken in support of Trump, so it would not be unbelievable someone in Russia would do this with that motivation except the timeline does make that unlikely since no one considered him a contender last year. Maybe the hack was done with a different intent and the release of the emails was done with that intent?

Comment Re:And give Putin a Pulitzer Prize (Score 1) 1017

My point of view is that the original leaks being exposed is fine. Reporting on them is a good thing, and we should look for maleficence in the emails that have been exposed. But calling upon a foreign power to attack someone is over the line. Does he really think they will go find those emails and nothing else? And I "hope" is an invitation to action. When your mom says "I hope you clean this basement soon." She isn't really making a meaningless statement. She wants you to do it.

Comment Re:Unforseen? (Score 1) 108

One of the funniest ironies in video games to me was a line from Star Ocean on PS2. The main character is a HUGE game fanatic. And that's why he is incredibly fit. Because in that world all the video games were developed for a system that's like a holodeck. I did not consider that an implausible future.

Comment Re: The DNC overlords always get their way (Score 1) 644

All it takes is one country to decide that it is worth the risk and the world is over. That's insane. Nukes don't threaten a single country. They threaten all countries and are a force that should never be used. Owning nukes would force countries to grow up? Why? Does giving a kid a gun make the kid grow up or make the kid think he's invincible and get people hurt? If the US having nukes doesn't discourage other countries from attacking us or our citizens why would them suddenly having nukes discourage them? If every country in the world starts building nuclear arsenals it puts us (all humans) into a more precarious position. Escalating tension does not lead to peace. If you think nukes make people able to negotiate from a position of strength it would be at best the position of a bully. I don't consider that a good position. (And it is the position of the United States often and I don't think that is good either.)

That said. I'm against nuclear proliferation, but I'm not really for complete nuclear disarmament. Decreasing the world's stockpile would probably be good and I'm glad that research into making more powerful bombs has pretty much stopped, but I can agree that nukes have had a great impact on countries willingness to go to war for the countries that have nukes currently.

Comment Re: The DNC overlords always get their way (Score 1) 644

By this logic there's no problem with North Korea getting nukes. A line needs to be drawn somewhere and nukes is a pretty damn good line. Ideally NO ONE should have nukes. Being OK with any country getting them, ally or foe, shows a lack of understanding about these weapons and think they are just big bombs. Saying Japan or South Korea should grow their military so we don't budget for their defense is an understandable argument and a case can be made for it, though increased world militarization might lead to another world war so I personally don't agree with that stance, but a case can be made for it. But nukes are far too dangerous to allow them to proliferate.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Kill the Wabbit, Kill the Wabbit, Kill the Wabbit!" -- Looney Tunes, "What's Opera Doc?" (1957, Chuck Jones)