Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



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

Comment So does it still let you "always click to flash"? (Score 2) 78

So does it still let you "always click to flash"?

It'd be a real pain in the ass if, by watching one video, I have to always allow Facebook (major example) to run flash content, rather than just the specific flash content I authorize.

Also: where's the "click to run HTML5 video", please?

Comment Re: Those who something, something (Score 1) 473

Mark 16:15-16

And he said to them, âoeGo into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.

Matthew 28:19

Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

Matthew 24:10-20

And then many will fall away and betray one another and hate one another. And many false prophets will arise and lead many astray. And because lawlessness will be increased, the love of many will grow cold. But the one who endures to the end will be saved. And this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come. ...

And that was just 3 minutes of cursory research.

The point being, we're all living in the same glass house and it behoves all of us to be sparing with our rocks :).

For the record, in the 'none of the above' camp, being a follower of the flying spaghetti monster, may His noodley appendages flavor your life with aromatic spices.

Min

Comment Re: Those who something, something (Score 1) 473

And I would put it to you that once again, you could swap places with Christianity and Islam in your statement. Even as a total outsider to both cultures, the simple math when you consider there's 2.08 BILLION Muslims in the wold will tell you that if anything more then a "small subset" (I'd say very small myself) of them wanted to "spend their entire lives trying to spread Islam" we'd notice, because they'd be at our doors every day!

The argument is even more striking when you consider how small a proportion of that 2.08B must be who favor violence, given that we're both still here to argue with each other.

Min

Comment Well, that's utter bullshit (Score 1) 473

Well, that's utter bullshit.

The very first link's very first sentence in the transcript:

"During the presidential campaign, Donald Trump suggested that he might favor creating a database for Muslims who enter the United States."

That's just adding religious affiliation to the already massive amount of information we collect about visitors entering the U.S., including their fingerprints and criminal records.

It's for visitors.

Slashdot editors: Please corrector your headline to add the word "Visitors" after the word "Muslim", and replace "Muslim-Americans" with "Muslim Visitors" in the first sentence of your summary.

Thanks.

Comment Re:Thanks to (Score 1) 472

In the last year, I've run across *so* many people posting on sites like Ars Technica, The-Kinja-Formerly-Known-As-Gawker and other places where every single post was either an attack on Clinton or a pro-Russian promotional. It's just mindboggling that this is happening. I always took the whole "There are paid shills all over the place." viewpoint as being rather paranoid, and in most cases I still do. But this? I swear, this has me worried about just how many Americans really have turned off their brains and just follow the herd they think they're in, if they can be led around on a leash by Putin's troll army.

Comment Re:Stupid (Score 2) 203

You cannot haul loads of people or freight on batteries

Logic and reality means nothing to these officious, ignorant twits.

Yes, because ad hominem attacks are the solution to our problems. If only there was a solution for moving people without desiel, but such a thing is obviously not possible right?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Min

Comment Re:Fake news (Score 1) 503

No, what you're saying is that people with no expertise in a field feel that they have an ability to critique a rather specialized field they have no expertise in.

It's a fallacious appeal to authority, full stop.

You are claiming authority without evidence when you argue, but when they argue under the same circumstances, you claim fallacy.

You are engaging in a variant of the false equivalence fallacy called the false inequivallence fallacy.

You right, because you're right, and they're wrong, because they disagree with you, even though you are not an acknowledged expert, nor are you citing sources who are acknowledged experts. Full stop.

Comment Re:Fake news (Score 1) 503

So what you're saying is that a lot of people who have no expertise in a given field believe that they're unrelated qualifications make them an expert.

No, what I'm saying is that their ability to think critically qualifies them generally to make judgements as to whether *your* qualifiecations in unrelated fields make *you* an expert.

And you have been found wanting.

Comment Re:That can't be right (Score 2) 503

Well, that all depends on what the rest of the world was doing. The US doesn't exist in a vacuum. If things get only a little bit worse in the US, but much worse in the global economy, then the president has done a good job.

That's not actually true, if the rest of the world's economy is an amplified following function of the U.S. economy. Which it is, since the U.S. dollar is the defacto world reserve currency. Yes, there are other reserve currencies, but as long as the vast majority of oil exchanges are denominated in U.S. dollars, it's the only commodity backed currency. That makes it the benchmark.

Comment Re:Fake news (Score 1) 503

I can speak to any story on AGW, where every pseudo-skeptic poster shows up en masse to attack climatologists, so yes, the Libertarians and Conservatives here are a significant fraction of the posters.

I'm pretty sure half the problems are:

* so many of the people on slashdot are STEM educated, and realize correlation is not causation, which damages the narrative
* the people speaking in favor of GW tend not to be accredited climatologists with PhDs
* the people speaking in favor of GW portray it as having solely AGW origins, rather than humans as a contributing factor
* presuming (as I do) that GW is real, but not solely attributable to AGW, no one is willing to give a percentage breakdown on cause

It doesn't help that there is a strong following of conspiracy theories on slashdot, and the disclosure of the emails talking about investigators specifically squelching debate reeks of conspiracy.

It doesn't help that the GW == (AGW & GW) proponents tend to be rabidly antinuclear, and can't solve some of the basic technical problems -- most of which, BTW, could be resolved by placing the panels in orbit, rather than on rooftops.

It doesn't help that a lot of us think "So what? We'll just science the shit out of it".

You don't really have to be a libertarian or a conservative or a "pseudo-skeptic" (whatever the hell that is) to jump down the throat of an AGW proponent who's not an accredited climatologist. In fact, in this forum, it's kind of considered your civic duty, like serving on a jury, or going out to vote.

Comment Re:That can't be right (Score 1) 503

Don't forget the downward trend he had to battle. Things aren't stationary if the government doesn't move, and thus when the new president takes office things are continuing based off of the previous administration's policies as well as international, national, and local markets. It's the trend that matters.

Slashdot Top Deals

1: No code table for op: ++post

Working...