Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


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:Why is this even on Slashdot? (Score 1) 98

LOL- You're clearly obsessed with this guy's tweets.

Nothing original, "Dip shit", just the same crap pasted into one comment after another. Sad!

Comment Self interest (Score 1) 48

This is like his tax cut plan- his refusal to release his own tax returns while pushing for tax "reforms" strongly indicates that the cuts are designed to lower his own taxes.

Trump obviously doesn't care about an American's emails being read unless the American is him or one of his employees. While I may like the result in this case, I seriously doubt he'd be implementing this policy if it didn't benefit himself.

Comment Re:Does this include genitalia? (Score 1) 50

Actually there was a penis transplant done recently on a cancer patient. To everyone's surprise it appeared to be a wild success, and it worked pretty well. Until the guy tried to actually use it and his wife was just too creeped out by the thing. (Maybe if she'd met the donor first... oh well.)

Comment Re: Just like Obama did to NY Times' James Risen! (Score 1) 98

Obama hacked, surveilled and stalked and outright harassed a reporter who had successfully dug up dirt on the Obama Administration and made them look bad under the guise of "national security" to silence him.

Who, Sharyl Attkisson? (He launched a cyberattack on her backspace key to get it stuck so it would delete an article on Benghazi she was writing. Thanks, Obama.)

Comment Re:Ah yes, Facebook (Score 1) 107

[S]imple confirmation bias will ensure that you disproportionately trust things you already believe. And there's nothing you can do about it. Our brains are just wired to work that way.

I don't disagree with the general tenor of your argument, but to this I must object. There's plenty we can do about it: it starts with honestly questioning ourselves as to whether we are letting our biases colour our understanding, and it proceeds by the applying the evidence in attempts to rebut those presumptions ordered thinking demands. Even if few people are motivated to do it, dispassionate fact-checking is possible. While here is no guarantee the conclusions will always be correct (Type I and II errors suck!), we can adopt correct methodologies, which, it is hoped, will draw correct conclusions more often than not and which, most importantly, allow for subsequent correction in light of the evidence (as methodologies built upon poor presumptions may not).

Comment Re:Detectives? (Score 1) 130

I was walking through our customer waiting area earlier this week and saw something very upsetting. There were roughly 10 people in the waiting area, sitting in chairs all facing the flat panel TV on the wall.

On the TV: a guy in a business suit places a bag over another guy's head in the foreground. He then smashes the guy's head in with a bat. Not one hit mind you, but like 10 or 15 hits. The bag gets bloody, the body falls off of a chair to the floor.

It was not what was on the TV that upset me. Well it upset me a bit. That aside, it was the vacuous and accepting looks in the eyes of everyone else who just witnessed the faux blunt object murder. No one cared. No one was surprised or upset. Not even a flicker of emotion passed their eyes.

Slashdot Top Deals

Honesty is for the most part less profitable than dishonesty. -- Plato