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. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. ×
User Journal

Journal Journal: ACLU T-Shirts...

The ACLU is selling T-Shirts with their logo that says "Dissent is Patriotic".

That's adorable.

Especially after telling us over the last 8 years that dissent was racist.
User Journal

Journal Journal: Javascript Frameworks are Broken 1

Hint for any advertising-supported blog or news site: Cut back on the number of your Javascript framework supported advertisements.

Yes, the average client computer has more than 4GB of memory nowadays, but that doesn't mean people's browsers can re-download the same framework elements 20,000 times and hope that the article they're trying to read will ever load.

Instead, use static, text and image based adverts. If you must have animation, use animated GIF. Stop abusing the memory resources of the viewers of your websites.

In the end, more page views will translate to more clicks, even with older technology.

User Journal

Journal Journal: Gorsuch 6

When Gorsuch was confirmed to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, he was done so unanimously.

NOT A SINGLE DEMONRAT SENATOR VOTED AGAINST HIM.

So take the perpetually outraged, professional (ie, paid by Soros) Left's vitriol against him with a grain of salt.

Facts

Speaking of which... why is it that when the Koch Brothers donate money to candidates it's a grave assault on our democracy but when Soros pays minions to riot we get the lecture about how dissent is patriotic*?

* Dissent is treason when there's a Demonrat in the White House. Remember, when there's a Demonrat President THE OFFICE MUST BE RESPECTED NO MATTER WHAT!!

User Journal

Journal Journal: This is tremendous... 7

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-executive-order-slash-regulations-151135855--business.html

I voted for Ted Cruz in the primary, but if this is how Trump plans to govern I'm really going to start liking the guy.

Directing Executive Agencies to start cutting regulations via Executive Order?

EXCELLENT. This is how executive orders should be used; telling executive branch agencies to get their act together.

Hiring Freeze on Bureaucrats?

EXCELLENT!

Temporarily stopping entry of people from Terrorist hot-beds as defined by Obama and Congress until we can get a true vetting process so we don't import another Dzhokhar Tsarnaev?

WELL DONE.

I know the liberals around here don't like that, but:
* Federal Law allows the President to do this
* Obama did it to Iraqis; so I have to ask, dear liberals, Where was your hand wringing and gnashing of teeth then?

Now Trump needs to nominate a Scalia-type Justice to the Supreme Court and get that National Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act through.

User Journal

Journal Journal: "Don't be rude. YOU ARE FAKE NEWS" 22

I honestly don't think I'll get tired of watching President Trump smack the MSM over the next 8 years.

And "fake news" has been a huge problem ever since the days of Dan Rather's "fake, but accurate" George W. Bush AWOL fake memo.

... and considering now you've got Buzzfeed and CNN getting trolled by 4chan about a fake story involving Trump hiring prostitutes to urinate on a bed in Russia -- something so obviously fake it's laughable, and yet -- I know lefties who believe it happened -- which is kind of the point. Tell the lie often enough and it'll stick a little. The MSM is no londer interested in facts, only to do whatever they can to further the leftist narrative. Right, Ezra and the JournoListers? Leni Reifenstahl approves of your tactics.

But Trump verbally smacking Acosta and CNN?

I enjoyed that. It's about time someone rubbed their noses in it. Go Donald!
User Journal

Journal Journal: First Carrier, now Ford... 1

LINK

Trump isn't even if office yet and he's already a better President than Obama.

Which, I know, is not saying much because a Goldfish would be a better President than Obama....
Censorship

Journal Journal: Mr George Michael: A Statement 1

I completely condemn the death of George Michael yesterday morning, which was senseless, a needless tragedy, and caused great pain to hundreds of millions of fans and those who enjoy music.

This utterly despicable death comes on the heels of the pointless loss of David Bowie, and combined with Brexit and the election of Trump, is more evidence of cruel and malignant mentality amongst those responsible for the guidance of the universe at this present time.

I call upon those responsible to stop it, and to end their monstrous campaign against humanity.

User Journal

Journal Journal: Some post election clarifications 16

1. No, Liberals were not "in a bubble". Our reaction isn't because we were surprised by the Trump victory, we knew there was a chance of one, pretty much every liberal I knew in a swing state voted for Clinton because we knew how close it was. Our reaction post election is horror, not surprise. Insofar as we expected a Clinton win, it was because the opinion polls seemed to suggest that. Those of us who trusted Nate Silver knew there was a one third chance of Trump winning.

2. No, Trump did not win because his supporters were called idiots, or racists, or fascists, or both. Nobody has ever said "That man called me a fascist! Well, that does it, I'm going to vote for a fascist who'll most likely destroy the country I live in and love! That'll show them!" Besides, we didn't, for the most part, call Trump supporters any of those things, we called TRUMP a fascist, and we also observed that actual self-described NEO-NAZIs ("Deplorables") were voting for Trump - as in David Duke was voting for him, and any analysis of what neo-nazis were doing showed they were enthusiastic about Trump.

(On that note: are you a fascist for voting Trump? You might be, you might not, but what is clear is that you don't consider fascism to be such a terrible thing that you'd refuse to vote for someone who runs as a fascist. That is not a good thing, and whether you're one or not, you should feel bad if you voted for him.)

2.1 No she didn't. She said half of Trump's supporters were "deplorables", an entirely reasonable statement to make. She never said that half of voters, or that all Trump supporters, were racists, you just made that up.

3. You may think he made it all up just to get elected. But you have no real evidence of that. We will be fearful that Trump intends to continue as a fascist until he proves otherwise. Thus far, he's been all over the map, we have to wait until he's in office before we can judge.

4. No, we will not "Hope for Trump's success". We'll hope for America's success, but to our eyes, that appears to be in conflict with the success of Trump. We'll hope that Trump somehow redeems himself, and turns into something completely unlike what we've seen so far.

Addressing a different crowd...

5. No, she didn't win the popular vote. She did great, and has a plurality, but she's not even near the 50% mark. The EC would have absolutely no mandate - moral or otherwise - to substitute Clinton for Trump. Both candidates lost the popular vote.

6. She was a shitty choice of candidate, get over it. No, she's not Nixon, she's the victim of a 25 year long smear campaign, but she's also a neo-con who doesn't represent liberal values on certain key issues like war and civil liberties, and she's spent so much time cosying up to the various establishments that she appears aloof of ordinary American's problems. She's rightly or wrongly associated with her husband who may or may not have been popular but is infamous for regressive anti-progressive positions during his time in office. In the primaries we may have had two shitty candidates to choose from, we may or may not have picked the best of the two, but she was still shitty.

6.1 Sanders? You really think a country brainwashed for more than a century to think Socialist is a bad word would have voted for Sanders? Really? Even Trump had the good sense to not explicitly use the word that described the ideology he was campaigning on. He wasn't even a great campaigner - he might have beaten Ron Paul if the latter had been the Republicans choice, but nobody else.

7. No, we're probably not going to win back either house in 2018. We're not Republicans, we're obsessed with looking reasonable and getting the blessing of the media, and the media is going to normalize Trump and the Democrats will end up compromising themselves and fucking themselves over. When Obama won, the Republicans went Scorched Earth despite there being no reason to think he was particularly offensive. Democrats need to go Scorched Earth now, but won't, because they're pathetic.

8. No, we shouldn't abandon our principles to win the next election. Supporting minorities didn't kill us, failing to address issues that affect everyone might have done, but the two are not in conflict. We need to abandon people suffering real hardship and discrimination so we can focus on the "White Working Class"? Bullshit. We need policies that lift up the whole of the working classes, not just whites. And while we do so, nothing prevents us from reforming chronically discriminatory institutions, or dealing with hate crimes at the same time.

We have precious little we can do at this stage, but we can resist in our own small ways, and make it politically possible for others with more power to resist too. That's what we must, at minimum, do right now.

User Journal

Journal Journal: No more /. subscriptions? 2

I realized that I had not topped up my /. subscription in some time and went to do so. Saw this:

"Please Note: Buying or gifting of a new subscription is not available
at the moment. We apologize for the inconvenience. This downtime though
does not effect your current active subscription in any way. We will
keep you posted on the latest"

Any idea what's going on? Are they sticking to a pure ad model (all blocked anyhow, but I did like to subscribe as I like the ol' barn.)

User Journal

Journal Journal: Fuck Obamacare 13

Trump has been all over the map about the Affordable Care Act since he "won" the election, stating he'd like to keep the "popular" bits after meeting with Obama, then stating he'd organize a special session of Congress the day after he's inaugurated to repeal the whole thing. (He's apparently unaware Congress will already be in session, but, whatever.) If he chooses to keep the "popular" bits, the health insurance industry will crumble, for what it's worth, because they'll be forced to provide coverage for pre-existing conditions to people who refuse to pay a penny in premiums until they fall ill.

My view is nuanced on Obamacare, so I expect 99% of the replies to this post to miss the point completely, probably just focusing on the headline, but...

...this was entirely predictable. Obamacare was a really bad idea. I said so at the time. I stand by my comments. It was never feasible in the long term and it was politically the most inept attempt to introduce universal health care ever devised.

That it's going... is not to be celebrated, because it means suddenly a huge number of people will be unable to afford health care. That's bad. But simply blaming Republicans and Fascists for its removal is missing the greater picture: it was insanely unpopular. It was something Republicans were able to rally around to defeat Democrats. Think about that for a second: UH should be popular. It should have been a real concern by most of the country that they were going to lose it. When in 2012 Democrats wanted the Senior vote, they pointed out Paul Ryan planned to replace Medicare - UH for seniors - and were rewarded by a shift towards them. Nobody was able to stand up in 2016 and say "Hey guys, Trump will kill Obamacare, you don't want to lose that!" In fact, the opposite happened, Trump used Obamacare against Clinton.

Why did it fail? Because it sucked. It didn't control prices significantly enough that people noticed - in fact, most believed Obamacare was to blame for rising insurance costs. Most had insurance before, they had insurance afterwards, and the insurance afterwards was still going up in price way above inflation. It was the same system as they had before, but it was more expensive.

And those who didn't have insurance before, well, they resented it. Suddenly they were forced to pay for something they hadn't been required to have before, and most people don't have cancer or require an MRI, so they never saw any value in what they were forced to buy, despite the subsidies and so on.

The Democrats, if they ever get back into power, have to decide where they want to go with Universal Healthcare. But next time - if there is a next time - there's really only one option, and that's an income tax funded single payer system. If that's not politically possible thanks to Blue Dogs or whatever, then don't address the issue - it's a waste of time, and it'll result in Democrats being unable to address any other aspects of their agenda. But Single Payer is virtually the only healthcare system you can create that people would be frightened of losing. Which makes it politically the only choice worth pursuing. And in practical terms, it's also the only way to deliver truly universal healthcare.

RIP Obamacare. I'm sorry for the people who'll lose coverage, but I'm not going to blame the Republicans for getting rid of it.

Slashdot Top Deals

Much of the excitement we get out of our work is that we don't really know what we are doing. -- E. Dijkstra

Working...