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

 



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

Comment Re:Every Fucking Day with this Shit (Score 1) 104

Ever walk down the street in the city and a bum comes up to you begging? He can smell and look offensive. Should that be censored?

Yes. My purpose of being there is not to be a begging target, I didn't invite him to approach me, he is, in Internet terms, spamming me.

Ever been on a farm and smell the pigs or the cow manure? That's offensive.

But it is a necessary part of the operation of the farm. It is a direct consequence without which the farm could not function. In Internet terms, it's the annoying login dialog.

Ever see guts at the scene of a car wreck? That's offensive.

That is an unintended side-effect, not desired by anyone and not intentionally inflicted upon me by anyone. In Internet terms, it's lag or slow loading times.

You are comparing completely different things, not understanding that for some of them, there is no reason we should have to endure them (for the record: The proper solution is that the bum doesn't exist, our society is rich enough that every homeless person is a shame to us all)

Get off your ass, unplug, get out there into the real world and get offended! Trust me, it gets easier after the first few times. And you'll probably realized that being offended isn't anywhere near the worst thing that can possibly happen to you

I'm with you on that there's no right to not be offended.
However, I can absolutely want to protect myself from what I don't like. I keep my house clean because I don't like trash and smells. I keep my door closed because I want to decide who I invite in and who not. I don't hang disgusting pictures on my walls, etc.
I can filter my view of the world. You have a right to Free Speech, but not a right to force me to listen. Individual filters are a necessity or we would all drown in spam. What we need to prevent is centrally controlled filters.

Comment Re:Sour grapes (Score 1) 1424

Uh, Obama didn't lose the popular vote either time (the last president who was elected despite losing the popular vote was Bush in 2000.) In fact, he won an absolute majority (not merely plurality) of the popular vote both times. Not sure what you expected people to complain about there?

There's a lot more broken than the imaginary "popular vote" or the EC. There's the whole gerrymandering issue, the voting machines debacle, the voter registration issues, the fact that many people are stopped from voting, that the voting is on a working day and a hundred more.

I wouldn't even agree that the EC is broken as a concept. It's a slightly odd way of doing it, but there were and are reasons for making it this way, and while they can be discussed and maybe don't apply to the world of today anymore, many of the issues I listed above are much more clear-cut examples of why the election system is fundamentally broken.

Comment Re:Sour grapes (Score 1) 1424

As I said in other comments, it's so funny that there is so much uproar over how the system is broken and needs to be fixed now that Trump has won, but there was no such thing after Obama won. I don't like people who complain about the system only in the event of a defeat.

I'm not discussing if the rural vs. city divide is good or smart or anything, only that it's real. And yes, Trump probably would not have gained tons of votes in NYC even with massive advertisement, but there are swing states and "ignored" states, where more votes could have been gained easily. Maybe. If it mattered enough to either candidate to try.

The whole system is broken. Fixing it with a law about the EC is like fixing a plane that's falling into pieces in mid-air with some duct tape and pretending everything is fine.

Comment Re:Sour grapes (Score 1) 1424

Election reform - yes, necessary, your system is as fucked up as they come, if someone were tasked to create a really bad election system for a movie and they showed this, the director would tell him to come back with something at least halfway believable.

I don't agree with the "red state vs. blue state" bullshit everyone throws out there. A lot of "blue" states are actually dark red if you look at the county level. The divide isn't between states, it is largely between city folks and rural folks. That is not unique to the USA, btw. - here in Europe there are very similar patterns.

Now for the popular vote - no, it does not matter. The rules of the election give it no weight or consequences. Since all candidates know the rules, they also adapt their campaign strategy to these rules, and they don't even try to win the popular vote. They try to win swing states, and states with many votes in the EC. If the so-called "popular vote" would have an impact on the result, the campaign strategies would be different, and the results would be different.

Again, pointing to this "popular vote" is like announcing that your running style was more beautiful - when everyone knew that it's a race for time. Everyone loved Eddie the Eagle, but nobody gave him a gold medal.

Comment Re:Sour grapes (Score 1) 1424

Wasn't intended as such.

Yes, the EC is theoretically free in how they cast their votes. But with the two-party system so strongly ingrained in american politics, you really think that all those Republicans will vote for a Democrat, when they have both houses?

There is maybe a theoretical chance that a surprise hardcore republican candidate appears, but again if there were such a move, one would have to be on the horizon already. I could imagine such a switch in the Democrat camp, if Hillary had won, because Bernie Sanders didn't just disappear after the nomination, he continued on the same path as always and still has a presence, and if for reasons of some scandal or other the Democrats had to drop Hillary at the last second, he could still become POTUS.

But I don't see anyone in the Republican party who could pick up the torch if, say, Trump were hit by a bus tomorrow. Too much fragmentation.

That's why I said "yes, theoretically... but really, come on."

Comment Re:Ya think ur clever but ur not (Score 1) 1424

I'm a conservative, a liberal, a socialist and many other things. Maybe if you weren't subject to the black-and-white painting you accuse others of, your view of the world would be more wide?

I'm pro-Trump because Hillary would have been a terrible danger to the rest of the world, Trump at least is only dangerous to America. I'm a liberal when it comes to personal freedom and liberties (in fact, I held the european EFF domain for a time), and a socialist when it comes to economic policies (big fan of Bernie for that reason).

The world isn't simple. But some questions are simple. Did you bang your secretary is a yes or no question and any answer more complicated than that is a cover-up attempt. Did you steal that candy? Do you love your wife? Is that child yours or not? Is the pope a catholic? Some things are black-or-white, yes-or-no. Doesn't mean everything is. The mistake of stupid people everywhere and the most common trick of demagogues everywhere is to start with straightforward examples and assume that all the world is so clear-cut. The mistake of wanna-be-smartasses and pseudo-philosophers everywhere is to start with complicated examples and assume that all the world is difficult and nuanced.

Smug enough for you?

Comment Re:And flat look [Re:Infinite web pages] (Score 1) 332

Maybe the post I was replying to was. Flat isn't necessarily a problem, but having no borders at all could be. This goes double for the computer-illiterate: without the borders and shading mimicking physical controls, buttons are becoming increasingly abstract and thus ever more difficult to recognize as being clickable, especially for people who didn't learn the analogy back in the "beveled-edge pseudo-3D" day.

My only point was that (contrary to the previous poster's implication that 1989 was some kind of primitive age), UIs from back then were actually pretty usable because they were designed by UX engineers instead of graphic artists. Sure, they were ugly, but at least you could tell what was a button and what wasn't.

Comment Re:Agile is good for some teams & projects, ho (Score 1) 332

Sure, there are occasionally the huge changes that some customer decided they couldn't live without, but those types of changes hurt agile shops too.

But usually not as much, because with shorter development cycles the customer has the opportunity to realize they need the changes earlier.

Comment Re:And flat look [Re:Infinite web pages] (Score 1) 332

Similar annoyance points for the "flat" look. You cannot even tell a button is a button, and entry box boundaries are washed out. Shade the fsckers, people! It's not 1989.

Well that's the problem, isn't it? In 1989, UIs were designed so that it was easy to tell which controls were what.

Comment Re: Change the law (Score 1) 1424

Unlike the Republican South from where people are leaving in droves for Blue states.

FYI, that's not true. (I'll be charitable and not accuse you of lying or jump on the "fake news" meme bandwagon... but I could have.)

Several Southern states, including both Carolinas and Georgia (plus pseudo-Southern Texas and Florida) are all growing faster than California.

On the bright side, pretty much all that growth is occurring in the "blue" urban parts of those states.

Comment Re:really ? (Score 1) 272

does anyone actually sit through Putin answering questions from Russians every year? I've tried - could never make it through the whole charade. I guess it doesn't help that I'm not a Russian citizen.

His speeches and answering sessions are very popular among educated Russians. My girlfriend is Russian and says that in original Russian they are much better than in the english translation, because he uses a lot of wordplays and hinting at things by choice of particular synonyms.

I cannot stand watching politician's speeches. I find them mostly meaningless and full of empty promises.

I generally find opposition speeches better than ruling party speeches. Have you seen Farages speech in the EU parliament just after the Brexit vote? Very personal, very particular, very british.

It's a relief to me when they actually sit down and do an investigative report or interview someone instead of just letting them give a speech.

That is true, but unfortunately there are almost no investigative journalists left, and what is sold under that name is largely just sensationalist crap. Basically, TV invented clickbait long before the Internet did - "The government build a new road in Somevillage. Stay tuned to find out what it did to this generation old farm."

Slashdot Top Deals

Line Printer paper is strongest at the perforations.

Working...