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


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:who knew (Score 1) 212

Used to have some coworkers pressuring me to join the cycling cult. Never mind that I hadn't been on a bike in twenty years, was 10 miles away, and heavy traffic most of the distance, they would be utterly convinced that it was perfect for a beginner. I also saw one of them on the road riding her bike in the most dangerous way and never stopping at signs. I was getting exercise at the time, it just wasn't cycling so I don't understand the "join us!" attitude of those damned militants.

Heavy traffic usually means I can make it home on my bike faster than I could in my car. And that's with stopping at red lights, etc.

Comment Re:On-site service; cargo (Score 1) 212

Personally I'm just happy when my jeans don't get caught in the chain causing me to have a horrible bloody accident.

These days I use my bike sock. I got sick of ruining a number of pairs of pants by having them touch an oily chain, so I extend a sock (doesn't work if you wear short socks) over the bottom hem of the pants leg to keep it from flapping all over.

Comment Re:So the real crime is... (Score 1) 357

It's funny the terminology people use. When we read the governments emails we're "stealing".

When they're into ours...shit they don't even count it as "collected" unless a human reads it!

Huh, it's almost as if, societally we decided that law enforcement has more allowance towards surveillance and law enforcement than private citizens do!

It's funny the terminology people use. When the government throws someone in a room they can't get out of, they're "jailing."
When I do the same to someone who wrong me, they call it "kidnapping" instead. Unbelievable!

Comment Re: It's not his arrest that is a priority (Score 1) 357

a non-aligned party (like me) necessarily must consider China the least aggressive of all.

I'm surprised, given Trump's rantings, that he's been so quiet about China's state-sponsored hacking. The country has pillaged just about every secret from an enormous number of non-Chinese company. It has gotten to the point where there is a truism in the IT world: "There are two kinds of companies: those who have been hacked by the Chinese, and those who don't yet realize they have been hacked by the Chinese." This seems like the sort of thing Trump would be all over, yet Obama made more of a stink about it. Maybe the topic is a bit over Donald's head.

the US thinks it can arrest non-nationals as if everyone were US citizens all over the world

They can, if they have extradition treaties. It's pretty much the point of having those treaties in the first place, to go after people who have committed crimes against US citizens but aren't geographically located in the US.

> They ALL spy on everybody, you stupid motherfucker
Since when is it an excuse to do something wrong because others do it?

Because if you don't, you lose. You win or you die.

Comment Re:So the real crime is... (Score 1) 357

If Snoewden decides to steal classified docs, and then decides to give them to you, then you're in the clear. You didn't commit a crime, you just published what he gave you.

If you actively encourage someone to steal those specific docs, or if Snowden asks you for help on how to steal the docs, and you help him, then you've become an accomplice in Snowden's crime.

It would be nice if Slashdot had a way to mod up one comment to +10. I know this doesn't fit into the ultra-cynical "these guys are all super-corrupt blah blah" hand-wringing that usually gets modded up here, but this is easily the most insightful comment attached to this story.

Comment Re:No, the real crime here is... (Score 1) 357

(GASP) A Democrat who does not care if his party breaks the law, as long as they win.

I'm still waiting for these criminal charges; the DoJ does not have as its executives people I would say are sympathetic to the DNC.
The DNC fucked up, and it was stupid. But the Bernie bros pretending the dude had any chance whatsoever and think that the establishment threw the primary to Hillary are crazy. Just crazy. I guess it's something they tell themselves at night to feel better, but they learned the wrong lessons in the primary.

Comment Re:I have to wonder (Score 1) 357

That's usually not what I hear from the left. What I currently hear is the left telling Trump voters "you told us he wasn't really serious when he said he was going to do these things, turns out he is."

The left doesn't doubt that he's going to try to come through with his campaign promises. They just feel like most of his promises are either abhorrent, such as getting into another Middle Eastern war and reworking the tax code to benefit his family and super-rich friends, or the promises were naively unrealistic, like how we're somehow going to end Islamic terrorism or get Mexico to pay for the wall or replace Obamacare with something that is cheaper and better and yet provides universal coverage.

Comment Re:BETRAYAL (Score 1) 357

Hillary couldn't beat a junior senator with almost no voting record, and she couldn't beat Trump. But that is all the Russians fault

It's not "all the Russians' fault," but they have a lot of culpability here. The election was extremely close, so close that any of these factors, including Russian hacking, swayed the election. That is, if any of those factors (Hillary being nearly as shitty a candidate as Trump, Russian hacking, Hillary's dumb email server move, Benghazi, Clinton Foundation) were absent, it's likely that she would have won. Put ALL of them together and Trump just barely squeaks through. So yes, you can (and should) blame all those other factors AS WELL. But the Russian interference absolutely had an effect, most notably in turnout.

Comment Re:Oops (Score 1) 215

Perhaps it is just a semantic argument, because when I hear someone is a soda drinker I assume at least a few sodas a week, if not an average of at least one per day. I guess that should be called a regular soda drinker instead of just a soda drinker.

And by "a soda," I would hope something like a 12 ounce soda, not 32-oz Big Gulp.
In college I used to get 44-oz gulps of Dr. Pepper. Looking back, I really don't understand why.

Slashdot Top Deals

On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog. -- Cartoon caption