Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


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

Comment Re:Hold down power button and ... (Score 1) 268

Let's take this backwards.

Real abuse comes from congress and the supreme court as brought to you by [corporation].


Lack of power.

The President has a certain amount of power to do things or not do things, and that power can be wielded on behalf of corporations — especially when done in concert with [corporate stooges in] congress [but I repeat myself].

Comment Re:What a dumbass (Score 1) 93

Now the Ruskies will be patching the server (and maybe other insecure servers) like crazy.

I wouldn't count on it. People in Russia are just as lazy and arrogant as Americans, and twice as drunk.

That's why Russia has an economy about the same size as Spain's.

When we try to put forward Putin as some sort of brilliant super-leader, let's not forget that it was guys like him who got his country bogged down in Afghanistan and allowed his country to get head-faked into flushing their economy down the toilet trying to keep up with a non-existent "Star Wars Initiative", which led to their collapse as a superpower. They can't even field a respectable Olympics team any more.

Comment Re:You're being silly (Score 1) 309

The evil libtardos aren't coming for your guns.

Well, Hillary Clinton thinks the Supreme Court is incorrect, and that we don't have the individual right to own guns. That what she says to her money people when she hopes the press isn't listening. She's also said she'd consider confiscation, a la Australia. And the left is cheering her lying, corrupt self into office - not least because they agree with her on this - the constitution is there to be "reinterpreted," as Clinton puts it.

Do you have any idea what you're chances are against a modern, mechanized army?

What does that matter? That's not why millions and millions of Americans own guns. They use them for sport, for hunting, and - as record numbers of recent buyers are showing in research - for self defense, especially in the context of social unrest. That's EXACTLY what the founders had in mind when they said that the government could not be allowed to have the monopoly on keeping and bearing arms: so that individuals could exercise their own rights to do so if and as they see fit. For whatever reason they see as appropriate. A standing army being necessary for the country, it's not to be considered justification for infringing the people's rights to their own tools of self defense. Sound familiar?

Stop caring so damn much about your precious firearms and start doing something about oppression brought on by wealth inequality.

Ah, I get it. Because someone else is prosperous, your right to vote is being oppressed. Or your right to assemble, or freely speak. Or your ability to go to school. Or your ability to ... which ability is it that you're being denied because someone else has money, again? It's not a fixed-sized pie, dude. If it was, we'd all be living in total poverty. But we're not. The standard of living has never been higher in human history. The "poor" live better than the vast majority of humanity ever could have dreamed.

Wage slavery? Get rid of nonsense like Obamacare, which went out of its way to entrench the system that prevents you from shopping across state lines for health insurance, and went out of its way to keep such services expensive by carefully avoiding tort reform at all costs. Or... do you mean that people who haven't trained themselves to do something valuable are finding it hard to move on in life? Yes, getting rid of our ability to defend ourselves will definitely fix that. We can only do one thing at a time, right?

Voter disenfranchisement? Yes, this is a real problem. We have millions of dead an ineligible people registered to vote. Every time a vote is cast in one of their names, that disenfranchises a person who is voting legitimately. When the Clinton campaign spreads around information, as we've just seen, about how to get illegal immigrants into the voting booth, that disenfranchises people who play by the rules. Definitely a serious problem, I agree. But the disenfranchising actions of voters mostly as encouraged by liberal activist groups go largely unprosecuted because that task would fall to the very party in power that encourages the crime. So, we have to live with it. Steps to mitigate it, like having to show who you are when you vote, just like you have to when you cash a government check, are considered "racist" by disingenuous people who know perfectly well it's not, but there you have it.

Hell, there are folks who matter talking about taking away women's right to vote.

They only "matter" in the sense that you're enjoying mentioning them. There is nobody with any prospect of infringing that liberty calling for that. Unlike Hillary Clinton, who certainly leans towards infringing constitutionally protected liberties and says so out loud, to great applause from the usual would-be little tyrants on the left.

It's been 8 years. Don't you think if he was going to do it he would have?

He knows he can't get what he wants past a legislature more inclined to protect those rights. He fails on that front because what he proposes - usually in the wake of some broken person killing some people - fails on the face of it to even address the actual problem (broken people). He doesn't propose making it easier to lock up crazy people, he proposes making it harder for law abiding, non-violent people to possess or transfer a firearm ... even though that would exactly nothing to stop, say, a Sandy Hook type incident. So every time he talks about "using his pen" to limit rights, it fails because, of course, people see right through the total lack of causality in the chain of things he pretends he's addressing. He's had multiple unconstitutional executive orders smacked down in the courts, exactly as they should have been. Hillary Clinton wants a court that would prevent those checks and balances from impacting her agenda (see above-mentioned confiscatory sensibilities and assertion that, for example, the second amendment doesn't mean what the founders said it means).

Comment Re:Showmanship (Howard Stern, Lady Gaga) vs sociop (Score 1) 137

While Trump is most assuredly a clown, Hillary is very likely a sociopath, so "the only sane one" would have to go to the clown, Trump.

What color is the sky in a world in which running a visa mill, bragging about having sexually abused many women, raping at least one woman, and Trump's typical deliberate corporate malfeasance are not sociopathic behavior? Does photosynthesis work on your planet?

Comment Re:progressive thinking (Score 3, Insightful) 55

But heaven forbid people want to build an oil pipeline, something that actually makes roads safer and actually saves energy: then progressives are up in arms and start protesting and rioting, and they are not above using Native Americans as props in their political theater.

Until you start using the most primitive of available technologies to make oil pipelines safe, like double-walled pipes with interstitial leak monitors, you can stick those oil pipelines up your ass.

Comment Re:Raised bar will be bypassed (Score 1) 108

The watermarking will just be removed and life will go on.

Hint: "real time". Can you identify the watermark without comparing your stream to someone else's stream? Can you do that while streaming your copy to a pirate repeater? Can you do that before sending out the first unique marker that identifies your stream?

I mean, if you can, you are indeed l33t. If not, the banhammer, she swings for you.

Comment Re:But but but (Score 1) 137

You're always here, and always with a reason we should just laugh off all this negative stuff.

That's not the part for laughing. The laughing comes when you remember that goofballs in the "alt-Right" actually nominated someone who is so awful that people are willing to overlook all "this negative stuff" about Hillary.

Slashdot Top Deals

After an instrument has been assembled, extra components will be found on the bench.