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


Forgot your password?
Trust the World's Fastest VPN with Your Internet Security & Freedom - A Lifetime Subscription of PureVPN at 88% off. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. ×

Comment Re:The border exception is a usurpation. (Score 1) 356

The Supreme Court has held that the Constitution only applies to U.S. territory.

Yeah, and they fucked up Korematsu, Dred Scott and Kelo too. What's your point?

Technically it is Cuban territory being leased to the U.S.

Which is irrelevant to the bill of rights. The fifth amendment doesn't say "unless you stash the people you kidnapped on foreign soil". For any American official to hold anyone in custody without trial is a crime.

all countries need to protect themselves from unlawful entry

This is a reason for positively identifying anyone seeking entry. It's not an argument for violating their 4th amendment rights.


Comment The border exception is a usurpation. (Score 3, Interesting) 356

The US Constitution is the entirety of the legal basis for the very existence of the American federal government. Is it binding upon all American government officials, agents, and employees at all times and all places. There is no provision in the constitution for the suspension of the bill of rights at the border, and the fact that our rights are routinely violated when entering the country is because our courts are derelict in their duty to enforce the constitution.


Comment Re:Let's be clear on what we mean by election hack (Score 0) 249

Trump *did not* enter the race as a favour to Hillary.

Sure he did. They've been friends for decades, he's given her shitloads of money, and notice how quickly he reneged on his campaign promise to see her prosecuted?

He ran as a stunt, and was shocked at how much traction he got (with all of Hillary's media minions giving him the lion's share of the news coverage), so the ego took over and he went for it.


Comment Re:Let's be clear on what we mean by election hack (Score 4, Interesting) 249

the democrat apparatus also stuffed the ballot box for Trump during the primaries

Got a source for that? I know that Trump entered the race as a favor to Hillary to sow discord in the Republican ranks, but I haven't seen any evidence that the apparat did anything more for him than give him round-the-clock news coverage that starved out his rivals.


Comment Re:Sorry (Score 5, Insightful) 640

What's truly disgusting about this tragic situation is the the attorney. A good attorney would let the client know that given the circumstances, odds of winning in court are minimal and the pain of going through the pretrial procedures will be painful. Tesla might settle to make the case go away, but the client will still have to go through discovery and depositions. A settlement wont bring the people back, and it won't be that The defense will be all over the daughter's "lifestyle choices", the relationship with her boss, etc. The family of her boss will be forced to endure the same interrogation. The client's attorney doesn't care - He just sees easy money, no matter how much pain it causes everyone including his client. This is the kind of case that gives attorneys a very bad reputation.

Comment Re:You pay people to do fuck-all... (Score 1) 720

Marx used to claim that a single shoe factory could supply all the people of the world with shoes if only greedy capitalists got out of the way.

Marx was a thoroughly deluded idiot, and it's no surprise that state dependency with another coat of paint on it is being pushed by his brain-dead followers.


Comment Re:You pay people to do fuck-all... (Score 1) 720

You seem to somehow have missed that most jobs will go away and not be replaced with others.


In 1900, 80% of Americans worked on farms. Today, it's around 4%. This did not result in 76% unemployment. Any job that can be performed by a machine, should be performed by a machine. This drops the cost of goods and services, to everyone's benefit, but most of all to those with the lowest earning ability.

We can't know what kind of work people will be doing a century from now, any more than people could guess in 1900, but there is no reason to believe that there will be no use for human labor.


Comment You pay people to do fuck-all... (Score 2, Insightful) 720

and a lot of them will do exactly that. Your economy loses whatever productivity they might have contributed, socialists get more dependent voters to re-elect looters, and their kids grow up believing the world owes them a living.

You have only to look at the effects of multi-gerneration welfare dependents in the USA and the UK to know how destructive this is.


Comment Useless? That article. (Score 5, Insightful) 720

Here's the thing - basic income CAN theoretically not work out... but some an economist with a stake or two against it working is NOT evidence that this version of it hasn't panned out. Especially when it's posted on fricken Bloomburg news!

That's what the experiment is for. Instead, it's to see if the money spend on THIS style of program is as effective as the several other programs it can replace, and whether that replacement will be practical. It's money that will be spent in any case! You need experimental comparison to judge the merit of the approach.

Again though - until RESULTS are in, hearing some talking head berate the idea of it as not to his liking isn't helpful.

It's like folks who dismiss needle exchange programs to reduce communicable disease, without actually bothering to look at the numbers, and what the studies actually account for.

Ryan Fenton

Slashdot Top Deals

"May the forces of evil become confused on the way to your house." -- George Carlin