Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



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

Comment Re:Change the law (Score 2) 1429

The trouble is that it's inherently never going to be a hot button topic for the winner.

Whomever wins the election, using the electoral college, will put electoral reform on the bottom of the priority list. Catch-22.

I've said for some time now, I'd vote for a candidate who ran on a single issue: total reform of the voting process. Republican. Democrat. Whatever. The system needs updating and until that happens the rest is just side-effects.

Comment Re:Study bias? (Score 1) 180

I'm very sorry that you feel compelled to lash out for not real reason.

I had a question. I implied nothing, simply asked a question. Often the Slashdotters are better informed on many topics than I am, and usually a few folks dig into any given subject posted and really dive deep. Asking a question that this group might answer seems pretty reasonable for a discussion board.

Not everything is a conspiracy. Sometimes a question is just a question. Reading the attached article(but not the study) pointed out multiple flaws in the approach, but did not address this question.

Cheers

Comment Study bias? (Score 3, Interesting) 180

I'm not saying there's any intentional bias here, I'm just curious and posing the question. If the data was collected from a any study with multiple data points on population... is there a control factor for whether studies including population data in general are more likely to occur on species that are dwindling? If a species has no population issues to begin with, is it likely to have a study?

Comment Re:What's good for the goose (Score 1) 756

I think the trouble with your stance here is the assumption that "rigging" is not the designed operation of the Convention.

There's no clause in the Constitution that guarantees voting equality in a party's primary. The primaries are run, each according to the rules set forth by that party. Superdelegates have been a part of the Democratic party's charter for quite some time now.

The Superdelegates provides a means for a level of centralized agreement when it comes to choosing a candidate. For example, if one of the potential candidates were a Totally Racist Underhanded Misogynistic Pig, the party can turn to Superdelegates to avoid that person from becoming the nominee. Think of it as a way to prevent hate and fear mongering from being the party message. They have a chance to exert some control over what SHOULD be a rational process, but can be easily subverted by a candidate that panders to the worst instincts of the people.

At this very moment, I'm betting the GOP wish they had Superdelegates, they might have been able to head off the disaster that is tearing their party apart.

Comment Re:If you didn't RTFA... (Score 1) 332

I would guess (not scientific) that most of the drop in complaints are because people realize they might be caught on camera and acting better or not lieing to try and get a lawsuit. I am certain there are some police that are acting better as there are bad apples, but I would guess the drop is probably 10%/90% with the 90% being the people changing behavior as opposed to the police office.

This does not track

If there's a 50% chance that encounters had a camera present, then -at most-, the public could have seen cameras and behaved better in half of the cases. This could not cause the 93% drop.

It is far more likely that police, being the only ones who definitely knew that recordings are happening (themselves, their partner, other officers on the scene) rose to the occasion and acted in a manner that led to less escalation and antagonism.

I think your guess at the 90/10 split is actually the reverse.

Comment Re:Of course (Score 5, Insightful) 332

I find it difficult to attribute a preponderance of the change onto the public. The individuals who might have normally filed a complaint would have no inclination to not file a complaint when the officer in question was not wearing a camera.

If the reduction in complaints matched the likely hood that a camera was involved, sure, I'd agree that the numbers track. I find it far more likely that the officers, knowing there's a chance that someone is recording (themselves, their partner, or another unit that shows up) are acting on their best behavior in all cases and thsi have a larger impact on the overall results.

The two factors together are likely what is influencing the outcomes.

Comment Re:what deadlock? (Score 1) 199

I hear the anger in your voice, I can only imagine at what drives that, but I think an understanding of how a business works is missing from your stance here.

"without bias" I think everyone can agree to, excepting the ISPs

"without throttles, and without caps" is a fever dream. The cost of providing service to meet such a bar would cause a rate shift that would drive us all off the net. You think a $19 per month user should expect petabit throughput and unlimited usage no matter what?

"if, you, a provider faces congestion issues, it's your own fucking fault for overselling your resources too much." This is exactly what you are demanding they do. Your yardstick of success is unattainable. If they improved their infrastructure by a factor of 10 they could still never meet your expectation.

Comment Pardoned for what? (Score 1) 387

I'm all for what Snowden did.

But Snowden hasn't been tried and convicted of anything yet. He did not put himself at the mercy of the justice system, That's where he lost the moral highground. If he were convicted and had served a few years, he could make a case for being pardoned. As it is, it's an ex-pat and has little claim to mercy.

Comment It's a factor of overall scale. (Score 2) 467

I'm sorry to be the one to point it out, but you are wrong.

Someoen spends 50 hours on Peggle or Tetris and asks for a refund? I would agree that's a suspicious request.

But 50 hours is an arbitrary number. There are games for which 50 hours is a trivial drop in the bucket of the overall playtime value of the game. I'm sure you could fill a phone book with players of WoW that have a thousand plus hours in it. NMS was promising a universe so vast that it sets a far higher expectation of playtime where 50 hours is trivial.

What justifies "giving a game every change to live up to it's promise"? Seems to me that the people with 50 hours (which can be done in just a couple of days) have given the game every possible opportunity to shine and the game has failed. They were coming at this with expectations set by the developers of a universe so vast that they could spend thousands of hours in the game world. After 50 hours they have had enough and found the vast array of missing features and at that point are actually UNIQUELY QUALIFIED to call BS on the game and ask for a refund.

To me, the bottom line is that the developer failed to deliver what was promised. Users paid for what was promised. Therefore it's fraud and asking for a refund is the least that the developer be worried about.

Comment It would be cheaper to just... (Score 1) 242

It would probably be cheaper to AirBnB to just create and hand over a system to SF that automates the registration and payment process. For a tech company that would be trivial, compared to government bureaucracy. Offer SF a solution for online registration and payments and you can probably even get them to pay a small fee to have AirBnB administer the site for them. Happens all the time,.

Slashdot Top Deals

Statistics are no substitute for judgement. -- Henry Clay

Working...