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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re: Its easier to pick sides (Score 1, Flamebait) 181

No, though Trump is more centre than right.

The left can't tolerate anyone who thinks differently to them, because their ideology is their identity. To disagree with them is to claim they're wrong, and they can't be wrong, because they're so much smarter than everyone else that they should be The Great Leader telling everyone what to do.

The right can handle diversity of opinion. The left can't. That's why the left always try to censor or murder anyone who disagrees with them.

Comment Re:What's changed? (Score 1, Troll) 181

"This may sound strange, but people who I've always considered "conservatives"/"Republicans"/"right-wingers" have started to express some of the most positive and hopeful sentiments."

Why would that be strange? We're watching the left self-destruct as they take identity politics to its inevitable conclusion and start to eat each other. I haven't felt this hopeful since the collapse of the USSR.

The right is driven by love of their family, their nation, and their communities. The left is driven by hatred of anyone who's different to them. The only reason you think it's strange is because the left have had better PR, thanks to decades spent infiltrating the media.

Comment Re:Its easier to pick sides (Score 0, Flamebait) 181

If there's one thing the left can't stand, it's diversity.

Sure, they want to eat Mexican food, but they don't want anyone who thinks differently to them. Everyone must be a compliant drone in the hive-mind. Everyone must think and behave the same, or be sent to the death^H^H^H^Hre-education camps.

And, thus, we're heading at an accelerating pace toward civil war.

Comment Re:Leftism is causing more division and strife. (Score 0, Flamebait) 181

Pretty much. The left set out in the mid-20th century to take over most of the social institutions across the West. They've succeeded, and strife and hatred is the inevitable consequence.

Along with the collapse of those institutions, of course, because they can't both do their real job and make politics job #1.

Comment Re:Remember what broke the internet... (Score 1) 77

The underlying problem is that so much software is farmed out to Indian code-monkeys who have no idea how to program, so they just copy-and-paste whatever they find on the web. They'll have a new job in three months anyway, so why would they care that the software is crap, insecure and unsupportable?

Comment Re:Libreoffice is a thing (Score 1) 204

"Something as simple as bullet points and modifying paragraphs spacing or adjusting the indentation on the ruler is enough to reveal its many flaws"

How strange. That's exactly what I could have said about Word.

And at least I can figure out where to find things in LibreOffice, whereas I can never tell where anything will be hidden in Word's 'Ribbon'.

Comment Re: Becaue you aren't offering to do the work. (Score 2) 368

That's unfair. Blender did undergo some big changes, but they were more than justified. It's not like they're just continuously changing it, or that the changes weren't warranted. I think Blender is a better tool today because of their changes.

I have much more of an issue with GIMP. Pushing forth changes that the vast majority of the userbase hated (and railed against on the forum), and got a big "FU, if you don't like it, use another tool" response from the developers. Comments on the "can only save XCF through the save menu, changes to other formats pester you about "unsaved changes" even if you do export" design change were over 10:1 against. The brush size slider is a mess. Text editing is broken in about ten different ways, from it forgetting what font size you're typing in to not rendering full text deletion in some cases. The general quality has gone way downhill. Meanwhile, things that have supposedly been "in the works" for years, like higher bit-depth colour, seem further away than ever. Even if I didn't want to export to a higher bit depth, if I want to do a gaussian blur on a high-res image I need to do a combination of dithers and blurs because of the loss of precision at 8 bits per channel.

Facebook is the classic example of terrible product evolution (particularly Messenger... have these people never heard of the concept of screen real estate?). I'd also like to zing Google for Google Maps. Today it's way slower, they took the very convenient full-length zoom bar out (and only put the tiny one in after user complaints), buttons with similar functionality are scattered out (e.g. satellite is on the bottom left, but landscape hidden in the menu top left), photo integration is terrible (no longer shows photos where they actually are, but in a giant "bar" on the bottom of the screen, opened by an ambiguous icon that looks like three different buttons, with lines that point to the map seemingly at random), make you zoom in twice as far to see the same amount of map information (ex. road labels), added icons to the upper right that have no connection to Maps at all just for "product consistency", and so on. And it's 2017, why is their landscape option still so terrible? Even little local companies' map services have vastly superior landscapes.

Comment Re:This is meaningless..... (Score 1) 357

Seriously, that's the best you have, a case from over a decade and a half ago? No country is perfect, but when you have to reach back sixteen years to find something to damn them for., you're really stretching.

World Justice Project (which uses a peer-reviewed methodology to rank judicial systems from around the world; there are over 17 experts just for Sweden alone) ranks Sweden the best in the world in terms of fundamental rights. Their biggest weakness in the rankings? Letting criminals off too easily. But never mind that, because there was a single incident sixteen years ago involving two people who had no legal right to be in the country (versus Assange who has no legal right to *not* be in the country) and who had been misidentified as convicted terrorists being extradited, that means that the whole country is evil and corrupt and just loves to extradite people, right?

Comment Re:Oops (Score 2) 215

Indeed. There's a lot of skepticism here. When you factor in confounding factors:

Crucially, the association with stroke and dementia disappeared after adjusting for diabetes and vascular risk factors, such as high blood pressure and prior heart attack

The study appears to be an excellent example of the reverse causality effect. For example, let's say I was doing a study on on the effects of taking a heart medication on heart attacks. So I randomly collect thousands of people and study their incidence of heart attacks, and compare which people who had heart attacks were taking a heart medication and which weren't. Lo and behold, the people taking heart medication are far more likely to have a heart attack! Does that mean the medication is to blame? Not at all; it means that the people who are on heart medication are already more likely to be taking heart medication. It's the risk of a heart attack that's causing the taking of heart medication, not the heart medication that's causing the risk of heart attack.

Comment Re:This is meaningless..... (Score 1) 357

Not even the women who are the victims say it was rape.

1) According to the witness statements, SW told several people that she was raped.
2) AA did not, and denied that she was raped.
3) There were only rape charges concerning SW, not AA.

And this isn't an arrest, it's asking questions

Only if you play word games between "anklagad" and "åtalad". The Swedish judicial system, shock of all shock, isn't exactly the same as the US judicial system, and does not break down the concept of charging in exactly the same manner. Regardless, the British court system - at every level - ruled him as considered "charged", under the guidelines of an EAW.

Beyond that, from the sworn statement of the prosecutor herself:

10. Once the interrogation is complete it may be that further questions need to be put to witnesses or the forensic scientists. Subject to any matters said by him, which undermine my present view that he should be indicted, an indictment will be launched with the court thereafter. It can therefore be seen that Assange is sought for the purpose of conducting criminal proceedings and that he is not sought merely to assist with our
enquiries.

Comment Re:That's going to be tought to prosecute (Score 1) 357

As it stands right now, if the US charged him and he were kicked out of the Ecuadorian embassy, the following things would happen:

1) He would be surrendered to Sweden under the EAW, which takes precedence over extradition, and was also the first filing.
2) If tried and convicted in Sweden, he would serve his sentence.
3) Regardless of the outcome in #2, he would then be returned to the UK, as standard in the EAW surrender process (which does not allow for transfer to "third states")
4) He would serve time for skipping out on his house arrest and jumping bail in the UK, as he's already been convicted of that; it postdates the EAW filing but would predate any extradition request.
5) During the events of #1 - #4, the UK court system would rule on the US request. The UK government would also have the right to block the request. Because of brexit, the UK may well drop out of the ECHR; if so, that avenue of appeal would be lost. The US would likely have to guarantee certain standards, likely including no supermax prison, to get the extradition approved.
6) Assuming the extradition is approved, he would be sent to the US, tried, and if convicted, sentenced and serve. The details depend on the exact nature of the charges.

Slashdot Top Deals

The unfacts, did we have them, are too imprecisely few to warrant our certitude.

Working...