Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



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

Comment Re: Thanks Trump! (Score 3, Interesting) 214

Talking to Taiwan sounds smart, if you're an idiot who doesn't have the most basic grasp of the nuanced dynamics at play. He'll do all the things people like you will think is bold, smart, independent, whatever - and predictable reactions from China will happen, just somewhat small but meaningful consequences. And people will keep wondering why they have to live in a world the way it is, not the way they think it should be. Much like the adage that there's no such thing as a stupid question, it sounds like a cool move emotionally, but in reality, leaders need to know how to tread.

Comment Re:What happened to merit? (Score 0) 266

Please explain the double standard at the heart of A normally chooses A, so a bunch of A think it's a good idea to let B pick.

What I generally find are that the people who complain about stuff are the people who are not where they want to be, and for some reason, they think that a true ideal meritocracy will favor them even though the only people they're really competing against are the people who are favoring trying to make things more fair.

Source: my entire professional life.

Comment Re:Discourage? (Score 5, Insightful) 241

At this point, the civilized world doesn't need to worry about the government coming at them - they need to worry about the multinationals coming at their government. Trade agreements are good in theory. This is the problem. People look at trade agreements between countries. They are more like agreements that companies want to make, with no particular interest in being fair. Citizens tend to have no particular interest in being fair either, favoring what is best locally. Governments *should* in theory be working towards a general contract as we do locally. Compromises that are beneficial. But people vote for governments or vote for weakening the power governments have over the single minded goal of industry.

Comment Re:Discourage? (Score 4, Insightful) 241

That requires a metric ton of qualifications. (What does still bought it mean? What article? Actors in an article?)

I mean, I'd think the answer would just be "yes". If you want to own property, you need to put it in your name. Journalists pay the price of being more transparent than pretty much anyone else out there. I don't understand the opposition to it. The easier it is to not be transparent, the easier it is for organizations of people, be it companies or otherwise, with the money to do so.

Comment Re:What about the rest? (Score 3, Insightful) 215

That's a strange position to take whether or not you are for or against this. It could be applied to literally any technology, policy, or anything that helps law enforcement solve crimes. Crimes were solved before computers, although I don't think anyone would argue that the cops should just get along fine without them.

Slashdot Top Deals

1: No code table for op: ++post

Working...