Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:One of the problems here is (Score 1) 121

They have to stay inside a bubble and a safe space because otherwise reality comes crashing down and they're just not prepared to deal with that.

The point were "deal with it" is going to be a harsh one then. A lot of people may even die, and from that standpoint the Darwin crowd may see it as a self-correcting problem.

Comment Re:contract terms? (Score 2) 23

Reading the above poster one could say it's even worse.

Final Take
This isn’t just “one big contract.” This is institutional capture via administrative machinery—what some would call “soft monopolization” of public service delivery. Whether or not it’s technically legal under current DoD policies, it undermines the entire premise of competitive, accountable, mission-driven procurement.

This should absolutely raise alarms—especially for:
Congressional oversight committees
GAO watchdogs
Inspector General offices*
Any contractor not named Palantir

*And remember whom DOGE got rid of several months ago.

  DOGE as the enabler, downsizing oversight and removing legacy bottlenecks—all while aligning IT power with Palantir-friendly professionals.
Palantir gained unprecedented access to internal agency data, solidified by cooperative engineering projects, and now holds a nearly unassailable position with the Army.
The combination of data architecture control, contract simplification, and institutional alignment makes this a structural shift—not merely an efficiency narrative.

Comment Re:Superhero ethics in the modern world. (Score 1) 124

To the first point—exactly. That’s what I meant by “holding up a mirror.” Superman isn’t just challenged by villains; he’s challenged by the complexity of modern moral expectations. Drop him into today's geopolitical minefields and suddenly the clarity of “truth, justice, and the American way” starts to buckle. And unlike most other characters, he’d care. Deeply. That tension is worth exploring, not dismissing.

As for the “Watchmen” reply—sure, Watchmen explored these themes, but so did Kingdom Come, Red Son, Irredeemable, and even plenty of canonical Superman arcs. The fact that writers have been tackling this for decades doesn’t mean the question’s dead—it means it’s still unresolved. And every generation has a new lens to view it through.

Quoting Watchmen like it’s the final word on moral complexity is a bit like saying “Orwell already covered surveillance, so shut up about the NSA.”

Comment Re:Superhero ethics in the modern world. (Score 1) 124

You're not wrong that Superman’s actions might look like idealized policing—but that’s exactly the issue. He’s not just a super-cop. He’s a moral symbol in a world that’s gotten increasingly skeptical of symbols.

The original comment didn’t suggest people today would literally chant "kill him!" in the streets. It pointed to something more subtle: the growing cultural trend toward results over ideals. The "pragmatism" isn’t about bloodlust—it’s about how often modern narratives reward characters who get their hands dirty, who bend rules, who do what needs to be done. Think Jack Bauer, Homelander (ironically), or even Batman in some arcs.

Superman’s refusal to kill—even when it's convenient—isn’t just old-fashioned. It’s jarringly idealistic in a climate where even heroes are expected to compromise. That’s not sociopathy. That’s cultural commentary.

And maybe that discomfort is the point.

Slashdot Top Deals

The tao that can be tar(1)ed is not the entire Tao. The path that can be specified is not the Full Path.

Working...