Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Trust the World's Fastest VPN with Your Internet Security & Freedom - A Lifetime Subscription of PureVPN at 88% off. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. ×

Comment Always Assuming... (Score 1) 25

...(and it's a pretty big assumption) that human beings themselves survive for the next 200 years. And have good enough technology to reach other planets. Our descendants in the year 2217 (if any) may have their work cut out finding enough food and fighting off enemies who want to take their food.

As our numbers grow, and it becomes increasingly obvious that none of our fancifully so-called "leaders" have either the power or the intelligence to do anything to curb the growth, Homo Sapiens [sic] stands revealed as a species which throws up the occasional intelligent individual - but which cannot possibly be deemed intelligent as a whole.

Otherwise, how come no one is in charge? When did you last hear of a bunch of people who were faced by serious threats to their existence, and survived without any central leadership? Instead, we have bought into the "capitalist free market free enterprise democracy" fantasy, which essentially says that if everyone goes flat out in pursuit of his or her own selfish ends, the overall result will be the best of all possible worlds for everyone.

To be honest, you couldn't get away with that as a plot line in "Doctor Who".

Comment Re:Rose tinted glasses (Score 2) 439

World wars have a similar effect. Lots of people die, lots of work to be done, few people able to do it, price of labour goes up.

Actually, the total US deaths in WW1 and WW2 combined were about 522,000. Almost insignificant. Only slightly more than the Russian dead in the Battle of Stalingrad alone.

Comment Re:Umm (Score 1) 376

Teaching critical thinking in school can't stand up to the power of indoctrination by Mom, Dad, and God at home. Religious parents actively work to ensure that their children see them (and the church) as the only authoritative source of truth.

Way to paint with a broad brush. Catholic schools are full of the children of religious parents, and the instructors are usually priests and nuns. The nuns will kick your damned ass if you're intellectually lazy. Whenever I reflect on my education, I always thank Sister Catherine Joseph, one of my 6th grade teachers. She was a mean woman, and I hated her guts, but she was one of the best teachers I've ever known. She taught two subjects: Science and Religion, and she taught both of them rigorously, and well.

Never underestimate someone who believes they have been commanded by god to turn your child into a thinking, reasoning, well educated member of society.

Comment Re:Umm (Score 1) 376

It's called citing your sources and peer review.

That doesn't matter any more. Look at Trump's claims about vaccines and autism. How many times has it been shown the study he cites is completely fake? How many discussions on here have gone over this same subject?

Witness Trump's comments about vote fraud. He says it took place but cites no evidence. In fact, when he filed to stop the vote recounts he explicitly cited no evidence of vote fraud taking place so there was no reason for the recounts.

I could go on but it's quite clear citing evidence, showing the facts and everything which is normally done to show how one side is lying, is no longer effective. Instead, the more evidence one shows the more they are shouted down. Why? Because showing evidence and facts hurts people's feelings. It forces them to admit they're wrong and in so doing makes them feel bad. Evolution anyone?

Comment There is nothing new under the sun (Score 4, Interesting) 376

"Gentlemen, you are now about to embark on a course of studies which will occupy you for two years. Together, they form a noble adventure. But I would like to remind you of an important point. Nothing that you will learn in the course of your studies will be of the slightest possible use to you in after life, save only this, that if you work hard and intelligently you should be able to detect when a man is talking rot, and that, in my view, is the main, if not the sole, purpose of education".

- John Alexander Smith, Professor of Moral Philosophy, Oxford University, 1914.

Comment Some skills (Score 1) 508

"[...]Trump adopted a highly unusual defence, known as 'force majeure'. He claimed that the 2008 economic crisis was a 'once-in-a-century credit tsunami', an act of God that was equivalent to an earthquake.

Since it couldn't have been anticipated, and it wasn't his fault, he wasn't obliged to pay Deutsche anything. It wouldn't get the $40m or the outstanding $330m, his writ said.

He went further. Trump claimed Deutsche Bank had actually helped cause the crunch. Therefore it owed him. Trump demanded $3bn from Deutsche in compensation."

Some skills.

Comment Re:Death To All Jews (Score 5, Insightful) 914

Quite different points though. Sarah Silverman's point being about the grotesquery of Trump, and PewDiePie's being about "it's fine to be an antisemitic little shithead"

No, his point for the clip that was taken out of context was:

* "Youtube Heroes is an Authoritarian nightmare that is going to attract the worst kinds of people."
* "The media likes to take things out of context to slander people."
* "Hey, there's a thing over here that I'm pointing at."
* "This fiverr website is a great example of how surreal the modern world is."

Depending on which of the clips they took out of context you're talking about, of course.

Comment Re:Glass houses & stones (Score 3, Insightful) 914

Speaking of which, you yourself have used more than a few crass racial stereotypes

First, I encourage all Slashdot readers to take a look at what Xenographic thinks is a "crass racial stereotype".

Second, I don't expect Disney to sponsor my Slashdot comments, nor do I look for the alt-right to spring to my defense because they don't.

Why do you hate the Japanese, PopeRatzo?

Comment Re:Death To All Jews (Score 1) 914

However, do you truly believe that he's a neo nazi?

It doesn't matter if he's a neo-nazi. He put some shit on his little web video and now nobody wants to advertise with him. He made a choice. They made a choice.

Free market at work.

The same Regressive leftist trolls smugly stating that this is fair game to do to PewDiePie also raised unholy living hell when GamerGate did it to Gawker.

The difference being that GG didn't have to lie about Gawker to do their advertiser contacting blitz, whereas the WSJ openly, blatantly lied (via omission) about PewDiePie to his advertisers and network.

One of the videos they cropped to make him look bad was LITERALLY about how the media likes to crop videos to make people look bad.

The WSJ fucked up, bad. No one listened and believed like they were expecting. They're going to have to walk this back, it's literally only a matter of time before they do.

Comment Re:Death To All Jews (Score 5, Insightful) 914

I can't think of many places where you wouldn't get fired for that sign.

Infowars? Breitbbart?

Sarah Silverman once went on Conan dressed up as Hitler, complete with stache and Swastika. That's a bit more than a sign.

"Ah, but that's different, she was obviously doing it to make a point."

So was PewDiePie.

Slashdot Top Deals

In specifications, Murphy's Law supersedes Ohm's.