Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


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

Comment Re:Assange lacks integrity. (Score 1) 550

The persecution of Zimbabwean opposition members that had been talking to the US and the diplomatic damage done to relations between the U.S. and people/governments whose confidential remarks were only given on the condition that they remain secret are both concrete examples of damage caused by Manning's indiscriminate data collection/exposure.

That you now refer to them as "handwaving" when I have been talking about them since the beginning of the thread just shows that you refuse to acknowledge proof that saps your beliefs.

Comment Re:Not hard to see why (Score 1) 379

No the ones with active glasses got MUCH better. mine has a 240 hz refresh and there is no ghosting and no perceivable dimming. The passive glasses suck because of the half-height resolution.

as far as not needing glasses... you do know how binocular vision works, right? The only FMV non-glasses technology that I'm aware of is on the 3DS, and that requires an eye tracking camera. There's no way a tech like that can work for multiple people.

Comment Re:3D was a thing? (Score 1) 379

I still wear glasses. You can only get the laser operation once, so I'm waiting until I need it.

Sorry it's so easy to dissuade you from using a technology. The glasses for my current TV are lighter than my prescription glasses.

Nothing is further from my mind when I'm watching something in my own home than "oh no. I look silly"

Comment Re:Yeah, not a surprise (Score 1) 550

When the U.K received the extradition request from Sweden, Assange was placed in detention like anyone else would be. In order to be released from detention while his appeals of the Swedish extradition in U.K courts were considered, Assange gave multiple oaths given to UK justice system promising to respect their authority, oaths he broke when he fled to the Ecuadorian Embassy.

I'm curious that you are able to completely ignore these well known facts. Is it that you judge that the ends (Assange free do do whatever he wants) justify the means (breaking his oaths)? Is it just Assange, or do you apply this reasoning for yourself? Does the end of getting your rocks off justify to you the act of not respecting a woman's word when she says no too?

Comment Re:Assange lacks integrity. (Score 1) 550

Yeah and Bill Clinton "Never had sex with that women" and Bill Gates claimed "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is"

When people are in controversies and there are multiple interpretations of their statements, it is foolish to attempt to attempt to use the clearly false interpretation.

We know that Manning's indiscriminate collection and divulgation has caused damages, Domestic damages, no. International damages, yes. Attempting to advance your agenda by attempting to use quotations when you know that your interpretation does not hold up logically merely shows you have abandoned logic to espouse the agenda. Trump won the presidency doing so. Do you really want to stoop that low?

Comment Re:Assange lacks integrity. (Score 1) 550

Selective quotations by those that published your references?

Pray ask Gates/... directly how they reconcile the fact that the indiscriminate nature of Mannings collection and release of information were indisputably harmful and the the claimed absence of damage from them.

Comment Re:Assange lacks integrity. (Score 1) 550

Gates/the generals were commenting on the domestic damage of Manning's leaks. The Diplomatic damage done to the US and and the persecution of people like Zimbabwean opposition that were identified and then targeted due to the indiscriminate nature of Manning's collection and then release of information are undeniable. Manning is no angel and his actions had severe consequences for more than just "war criminals".

Comment Re: liar (Score 1) 550

Lol, the Assange apologist Anonymous Coward thinks that embassies get to label any car "Diplomatic" without any recourse from the host country.

Here's a real world lesson for you coward: Diplomatic vehicles are not an automatic right but a convention negotiated with the host country (generally in exchange for the same courtesy for the hosting nations embassy in the embassies country. When one country revokes the courtesy, say because the other country is harboring a fugitive from justice the only recourse the embassies country has is to revoke the use of diplomatic vehicles on their turf.

The UK has already notified the rest of the world that no diplomatic vehicles will be accepted leaving the Ecuadorian embassy containing an unsearched volume sufficient to hide a lying oath-breaking slimeball weasel.

Slashdot Top Deals

Your mode of life will be changed to EBCDIC.