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

 



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

Comment Joao wrote a book about this over a decade ago (Score -1) 238

I read Joao's book "Faster than the Speed of Light: The Story of a Scientific Speculation" on this topic over a decade ago. The first half of the book was not really that groundbreaking as it rehashed some relativity and talked about Joao himself. But the 2nd half was interesting. I started thinking that having a speed of light that was much higher than today would explain why it looks like the earth is so old despite not actually being that old due to discrediting current carbon dating results. The entire carbon dating concept is based on an assumption that light speed is a constant without ever having a way to prove that our 'measuring stick' is properly 'calibrated' despite having so many theories depend on that 'fact'.

Comment Lessig is grasping at straws (Score -1) 1424

Complaining that the electoral college weights the votes in Wyoming roughly four times as heavily as the votes in Michigan, Lessig argues that the popular vote should be respected, and that the authors of the U.S. Constitution "left the electors free to choose. They should exercise that choice by leaving the election as the people decided it: in Clinton's favor."

The only problem with this logic (but it's a big problem) is that it sounds like he wants all electors to choose Clinton just because she won the national popular vote. But what would be the point of having states-specific electors if he advocates voting based on the national popular vote results? As someone explained recently on facebook (I forget what the guy's name was), he used a baseball analogy to state why we shouldn't be changing the rules of the game. Back in the 20th century the Pirates beat a team in the world series 4 games to 3, but the other team had more overall runs throughout the series. The rules of the game ignore who has the most overall runs and instead bases who wins on the number of games they won. Should we change the rules of the game just because a particular team didn't win one year? For every person who wants their team to win there is another who wants a different team to win. But rules exist for a reason: to make processes consistent, and therefore fair. They are still fair even if you don't get the result you wanted because next time you may very well get the result you wanted as the rules are consistently applied.

If anyone should support the electoral college it should be Lessig, given that he is a lawyer. We are a constitutional republic, not a pure democracy. Therefore we don't vote purely on the majority wins mentality. If you prefer that then move to another country. Conservatives didn't ask for a recount nor did they riot in the streets or do their damnedest to figure out how to make electors change their minds either of the last 2 elections when Obama won. I guess they are just more honorable losers.

The electors will indeed be exercising the choice of the voters *in their individual states* rather than the national vote since our electors are at the state level, not national.

Comment Re: What an empty life (Score 1) 725

No, draining the swamp is about changing the way lobbying works. Banning people from being lobbyists after working in the government, banning them from ever lobbying for foreign governments, a proposed constitutional amendment for term limits in congress, etc. It has nothing to do with replacing bad people with good people but with changing the system that enables systemic corruption. These are not things he can do until after inauguration, though, so whether or not the swamp will be drained is unknown, but cabinet appointments have nothing to do with it.

The speech: https://www.donaldjtrump.com/p...

And the five points:

First: I am going to institute a 5-year ban on all executive branch officials lobbying the government after they leave government service.

Second: I am going to ask Congress to institute its own 5-year ban on lobbying by former members of Congress and their staffs.

Third: I am going to expand the definition of lobbyist so we close all the loopholes that former government officials use by labeling themselves consultants and advisors when we all know they are lobbyists.

Fourth: I am going to issue a lifetime ban against senior executive branch officials lobbying on behalf of a foreign government.

Fifth: I am going to ask Congress to pass a campaign finance reform that prevents registered foreign lobbyists from raising money in American elections.

Comment Re: Genuine question (Score 1) 1321

You need to stop sniffing glue. And smoking crack. This election was largely a revolt against the Republican establishment that has betrayed the Republican voters who 1) worked their asses off to get them there and 2) desperately need relief from mass immigration and free trade catastrophes. If the establishment fucked Trump, there would literally be blood.

Comment Re:It's RIGHT THERE in the summary! (Score 1) 624

You've got to stop watching CNN. It's rotting your brain. Jeff Sessions desegregated Alabama schools, had the head of the KKK executed and broke the back of the organization with a crippling $7 million judgment, effectively ending them. And I'm supposed to believe this guy is a racist?

And Steve Bannon? White nationalist?! Breitbart is the most pro-Jewish, pro-Israel newspaper outside of Israel. The actual white nationalists call it "kikebart."

You're smearing some good people here with some really nasty lies. I can't imagine what it would be like to have executed the leader of the KKK and have political assholes try to smear me as a racist.

Comment Re:Why won't Democrats support the outcome? (Score 1) 1321

I'm saying you should probably be certain before you go to the press. Do your analysis, have other researchers take a look and try to reproduce your results or poke holes in your methodology, take it to the other campaign and see what they want to do. Only after you're sure do you go to the press and say "HAX!!!!" But when you go to the press before you've done that you just stoke resentment and maybe incite riots.

That said I'm fine with it as is. Angry buttmad lefties rioting in impotent rage are entertaining, look awful to moderates, and waste time instead of trying to mount an effective response.

Slashdot Top Deals

Disc space -- the final frontier!

Working...