Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



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

Comment Re:Why is this news? Obama has the power now... (Score 4, Interesting) 549

Except that Obama is perhaps the least corrupt individual to hold the Presidency since Jimmy Carter. Sure, he's a politician, and somewhat beholden to his donors - but in the scope of things, he's run a pretty clean administration. So in that light, using "Chicago-machine" to impugn him as corrupt? Why? Because he happened to come from Chicago? That won't fly. So I'm sticking with "Democrat" or 'Urban" or (dare I say it) "Black".

And I'm not one of those Democrats who's willing to chalk Trump's success up to racism. He certainly had the support of just about every racist you can find, but that doesn't make all of his swing supporters racists any more than Obama's coming from Chicago makes him corrupt. What it does make them is less uncomfortable associating themselves with racists and a politician (and party) who courted the racist vote than they are frightened and angry in general about the state their lives and the ability of the government to do anything that might make it better. I doubt they expect Trump to make it better either - they just want him to blow a few things up. Judging by his cabinet picks, they're likely to be disappointed even on that count. Maybe he'll keep them on board with a steady diet of tweeted conspiracy theories and personal insults...

Comment Re:Why is this news? Obama has the power now... (Score 5, Insightful) 549

Well, I assume you don't trust Trump to tell the truth - since it must be obvious even to you that he lies more or less constantly. So you trust him to be 'different', I suppose - with some kind of faith that 'different' in his case will turn out to be better. All very optimistic of you.

But have you considered that, for example, there was nothing stopping Trump from developing (or adopting) a coherent plan for, say, 'repealing and replacing Obamacare' sometime in the past 6 years. To me, the fact that he hasn't done so, and campaigned (and won) on a promise of 'something better', implies that he didn't have something better to offer - or he'd have offered it. There's no need to play political chess in pursuit of a popular policy, so let's assume his eventual 'something better' won't be better for enough voters for him to have presented it to them...

Yes, Obama is a politician - and a bit of a disappointment at that. 'Chicago-machine', I guess, carries a lot of specific negative meanings to you, but I'll assume it's is essentially code for 'Democrat' or 'urban' or something. But as far as 'trust' is concerned, Obama governed pretty much like he said he would - way to the right of where people (and the Nobel committee) 'hoped' he would, based, I guess, on their projections of what the first black President would do. But he was pretty trustworthy in the sense that he didn't misrepresent his policies much. Trump, on the other hand is claiming he's going to restore middle-class factory jobs by, what? Cutting taxes, mainly. Well, if you haven't figured out that 'tax cuts for the rich pay for themselves and help the middle class' is a lie by now, you're just not paying attention - or you've chosen sides and don't care about the truth.

Well, we're all about to see your assumptions and your faith tested. And I predict a continued rise in income inequality, with some various uglinesses on the side. If that happens, what will your reaction be?

Comment Re: Change the law (Score 1) 1424

The electoral college itself isn't the main problem. It's that the electoral college grants more weight to voters in low-population states. Even accepting that the Senate is a compromise to protect the interests of small states, that doesn't mean that in a national election for a single candidate, those small-state voters should get more votes than big state voters. The concentration of population in a few big states is a newish phenomenon, and it's begun to seriously undermine the principle of one person, one vote. Of course, we can't expect the beneficiaries of this distortion to work to end it...

Comment Re: When DNC loses vote, legal action follows (Score 1) 297

The issue isn't necessarily the closeness of the results - though there'd be little point pursuing this if the states in question weren't close enough and involving enough electoral votes to make a difference. But what makes this recount reasonable is the way the polls were 'off' in such a consistent way leading up to the election - and even including exit polls on the day of the election. If all the polls showed Clinton winning, and all the cases where the results didn't match the exit polls were cases where Trump did better than the exit polls said he did, then it's worth finding out why, no?

After all, we've all talked on this site for years about how hackable our voting systems are, and the only possible red flag to indicate it would be discrepancies between exit polls and the official counts. So if this doesn't qualify, what would? Of course, it's possible that enough people were ashamed enough of their Trump votes to have lied to the pollsters. A bit frightening, but possible...

I'm willing to believe that something real was missed in all the polling - though I wouldn't put it past some of the actors in this election cycle to have tried tampering with the results either. Mostly, though, I think Republicans had less of an issue 'holding their noses' than Democrats did. Personally, I think the stink coming off the Trump campaign was way more noxious than anything about Clinton - and the thought of a wild-eyed Rudy Giuliani as Secretary of State is utterly nauseating. But that's just me...

Ultimately, I do think that the Comey letter on top of a closely-contested election was enough to do the trick of turning the election. Throw in voter suppression efforts and the systemic skew of the Electoral College toward small states, and Democrats needed a decisive win to get over the top. I'd also add the Wikileaks releases of DNC and Podesta emails, but at least that information was real, and though illegitimately gotten, added some real info into the mix. The Comey letter, however, was utterly inappropriate, and created an unnecessary, false impression of something significantly new at the last minute. Key word there is false. That info should not have been in the mix, and the FBI had no business putting it there.

Comment Re:And Obama once again is a blatant liar (Score 0) 534

I suppose you think Obama started the wiretapping program. He didn't. He didn't shut it down, either, but Bush still gets 'worst president ever' cred for that one.

And by "Mother of Lies", I'm guessing you mean Hillary Clinton. And I guess you're giving her sole credit for starting the Afghanistan and Iraq wars - which, yes, she voted to authorize if Hussein didn't let the inspectors in. It's a fine-ish point, indeed, but at worst hers was one of over a hundred votes that authorized the Bush Admin to go to war as a last resort, but the Bushes went to war as a first resort anyhow. Bush gets that prize too.

Benghazi? Well, she lobbied for our limited participation, so she gets some of the 'credit' there.
Syria? Well, no. I think we're doing whatever it is (or isn't) that we're doing under the original Iraq authorization. In any case, we're not quite 'at war' there, and in any case, the Secretary of State does not have the power to go to war.

But I forgot. Hillary Clinton was all powerful - as long as she was running for President, and you wanted to blame her for everything wrong with the world. And now, I guess it's safe for you Obama haters to go back to blaming him for everything bad.

George W. Bush? Dick Cheney? George who...? Dick who...?

Comment Re:Ubiquitous != Popular (Score 1) 280

This. There's nothing wrong with providing a powerful new scripting language - for y'know, scripting. But there's also a need for a simple way to string a bunch of commands together in a file and execute them all. Why on earth would they remove that - or make people re-string the commands they've 'scripted' and used for years? Not all command-line users are using it for System Administration. They sysadmins can already find their way to powershell. Why inconvenience the rest of us - just to try to get bash programmers to think Windows has something as good or better. Because, face it, that's what's driving this.

Comment Re:I don't think this is a well thought out plan (Score 1) 83

Maybe, since they're trying to push Ximian as a cross-platform development environment - and because all iOS developers are currently developing on Mac's, they're moving VS to the Mac so that they can woo iOS devs over to Ximian without their having to have a second, Windows system.

This is certainly not about using VS to build Mac desktop apps.

Comment Re:Can you cross-compile with it? (Score 0) 133

The whole point of Xamarin is to hold out the prospect of cross-platform API's to get people not using Microsoft API's to switch to a Microsoft-specific API, that yes - for now - is kind of platform agnostic. Maybe that's okay-ish, but it'd have been a better solution had Microsoft not bought it. And it's not a desktop solution at all - it provides some decent mobile GUI stuff, but nothing to get WIN32 desktop developers to switch.

Comment Re:In that case I'll use a bluetooth keyboard inst (Score 1) 46

Cyanogenmod (I think?) used to have a very clever fix for this. An option to scramble the positions of the numbers on your lockscreen so that 'finger movement' patterns would be meaningless. That helps with prying eyes watching you enter your pin too.

But I'm running CM 13 on my phone, and it doesn't seem to have that option anymore.

Comment Re:It's not surprising... (Score 1) 176

In this day, lots of business will ask that documents be sent in PDF. And certainly, governments can get away with this.

Sure, there are plenty of businesses that have gone all in with MSOffice - or some other proprietary Windows-only app. But that stuff is legacy. That's not to say they can all switch desktop OS's any time soon, but that time is coming. And by that time the new OS may as often as not be Chrome - or Android. Or some other thin client system following a similar model. Even Microsoft knows this - if they're fans haven't accepted it yet.

Comment Re: Microsoft did mobile wrong (Score 1) 114

Sure Google had knowledge of where Apple was going. But they didn't need any special access to know that Apple alone wouldn't control mobile. And the only other likely contender was Microsoft. The same Microsoft that was already trying to grab Google's business on the desktop. My point is that Android vs Apple was probably better for Apple than Windows vs Apple. There was going to be a cheap OEM smartphone OS one way or the other.

Comment Re:Microsoft did mobile wrong (Score 0) 114

I'm not sure Google really wanted to screw Apple. They must've (smartly) realized that eventually Microsoft would come up with something good enough to compete with iOS, and once the OEMs standardized on that, MS could use their mobile OS to grab search away from Google. They'd have been happy for Apple to continue on using Google's applications - but Apple got pissed off and tried to 'hurt' Google by removing their apps from iOS. Apple would've been in the same (or a worse) competitive position had Microsoft succeeded, so I don't get what they were thinking. Sure, Google had bigger ambitions than were obvious at the time - but Apple's hubris and their sense that they're entitled to 'own' a whole category just because they got there first - despite their high-priced approach not serving the bulk of the market - is downright stupid.

Google, in establishing Chrome (and standards-based browsers in general) as a viable cross-platform 'platform' did more to save Apple's computer business than anything Apple ever did. Yes, it entails some new challenges, but it's better than competing with Microsoft's monopoly of yore.

Comment Re:Microsoft failed at legacy, too (Score 1) 245

Well, that was Microsoft's mother of all big mistakes. If they had made it easy to port existing WIN32 code to ARM prior to releasing the Surface RT, they might have had a hit on their hands. A crummy, legacy-encumbered hit, but a hit nonetheless. But they were too jealous of Apple's clean, secure-ish new OS implementation and 'app store' distribution model. So in typical me-too mode, they cloned the iPad instead of taking advantage of their legacy platform to make up for their late-to-market status.

Slashdot Top Deals

After a number of decimal places, nobody gives a damn.

Working...