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:'Developed a Clear Preference' For Trump (Score 1) 734

...and.... so?
If your uncle was a woman she would have been your aunt.
IF both drumph and killary had been going for a popular vote they would have campaigned differently. That was not the rules.

Though the day that popular vote matters at the fed level is the day the US is no longer a United States... as there is zero reason for smaller states to stay in the union as their voice would not be heard. Only NY, TX, CA, and a few other states would matter... a 'tyranny of the majority'. THAT is the reason for the EC in the first place. Read what the founding fathers had to say on direct democracy and why they 'compromised' on a EC setup.

Comment Re:'Developed a Clear Preference' For Trump (Score 1) 734

Not even close. Cali is bankrupt. Has been for years now. The only reason they are staying afloat is because they are part of the US and can get cheap bond loans. Cali would be utterly fucked if they go through with their threats to leave the US.

Comment Re:Wait a year (Score 1) 533

The media coined a phrase early in Bush's presidency. It was call 'mcjobs' and they went out of there way to 'explain' that even though X jobs were added most were 'mcjobs' and not 'real' jobs.

The fact of the matter is most of the jobs added have been part time crap jobs. BUT do we here a peep of 'mcjobs' anywhere on mainstream medai? Nope.

I expect mcjob to make a come back in 'news' reporters lexicon come Feb 2017 (ie one month after Drumph takes office).

Comment Re: Finally (Score 1) 540

Yeah... and magically companies dont fire 90% of their people when this happens. Instead they make 1000% more than they can sell. Sure they lose money but heaven forfend they tell people to 'make do with less'. Nope. Not in this world. No way do companies try to maximize profits. Nope. Nope. Nope.

Comment Re:Coal to grow in the USA?? (Score 1) 275

Yeah. No. When Obama comes out and says on national air that you can indeed make as many coal plants as you want but we (the government) will bankrupt you for doing it... its not natural causes. Its premeditated homicide.

Coal air emissions is just like anything else. It can be clean, it can be dirty. BUT to kill the entire industry because the green nuts thick its 'icky' is the same bullshit that happened to nuclear plants in the 60s and 70s.

Comment Re: Finally (Score 4, Insightful) 540

Sadly a large portion of workers are doing very easily automated tasks. Sadly a large portion of these people are also not creative enough.

Lets take a recent example of a spring factory that REopened in MI. In the 90s they employed 200 employees. They went over seas (out sourcing) but the QC was crap so they moved back. Just one problem. The new factory only employs 20 people as the other 180 were replaced by machines. So while YES there will 'always' be some human input needed its only 10% or less of what is needed now. Where do the other 90% go? Hell where does the 90% of 90% who are not that smart go when there are no more 'make work' jobs for them and they have neither the aptitude nor inclination to become 'creative'?

This article is pie in the sky, unicorns for everyone BS. Yes eventually humanity will figure out WTF to do... but as history has shown it takes a couple GENERATIONS for us to figure it out. Thats a lot of pissed off, hungry people with nothing to loose. That is a recipe for disaster.

Comment Re:Ob. xkcd (Score 1) 978

But that is what you are saying. That would be the end result. "We don't wan no gawd darn chinamen in this here bar". Ready some history.

Now in theory I do agree with your POV... but the reality is that is not how it would work out. It would be 'black' bathrooms and 'white' bathrooms writ large. If a company is open to the public they do have to respect public laws. Its the only way things can work... as people suck.

NOW where it gets murky is when two rights are in conflict. Say religion vs sexuality. Then it comes down to which right is more important to society. Which impacts the most people. That is what the courts are for. ;)

Comment Re:Ob. xkcd (Score 1) 978

ALL hate speech that meets the legal definition IS punishable by jail time. We as a society don't need more gate-keepers deciding on what is or is not 'hate speech'.... let alone 'wrong thought'.

Twit and Facebook has proven to block and disable any account that was intolerant of the left's POV. Saying Hillary lied =/= hate speech.

Like it or not a huge majority of people get their NEWS from Facebook. Thus censorship is a bad thing m'kay.

Comment Re:No. You're 100% wrong on all counts. (Score 1) 978

Its almost as if you came sooo close to grasping the concept of freedom of speech and protection thereof... then you lost it.

Groceries ARE regulated. Ever hear of the FDA... the FOOD and drug admin? Hmm?

Freedom of speech is a civil right. It was just so damn important it was added directly to the constitution.

You are wrong on cab companies. They are regulated because they are using public roads and thus CAN be regulated under the interstate commerce clause.

Most of the Internet is built upon public funds. The US alone gave billions (and still does) to ISP to build the internet... that is what makes what Google and GoogleFibre so radical as they are /gasp/ paying for it themselves.

Comment Re:Ob. xkcd (Score 1) 978

The problem is defining 'hate speech'. Right now that is anything joe admin does not like at facebook. The other has a very narrowly defined legal definition. Facebook has been shown to censor ALL right wing groups under the umbrella of 'hate speech'... so much so the zuck had to kiss ass and try and make nice due to the backlash from blocking news from rather large right wing groups. That is discrimination, not protection from hate speech.

Personally Im in favor of all speech being free and uncensored. Yes that means some asshats will say shit that few agree with. BUT it is better to have that out in the open then have it go under ground. Its better to talk things out than the let the cancer fester.

Right now the left AND the right live in their own echo chamber... and lot of that is because each side censors thoughts/ideas it considers offensive. This is not a good thing.

Comment Re:Ob. xkcd (Score 3, Insightful) 978

Bullshit.

At one point AT&T / 'Ma Bell' were private entity that could do what they like. Now they are regulated. Once society feels something is important enough / would hinder human interaction enough... it can indeed be regulated much like MOST non-gov entities in existance. Facebook and Twitter have already surpassed that standard. These companies make use of a publicly created and funded system: the internet. They can not have it both ways and claim to be private and still benefit from the public. Much like a taxi cab company can not use the public roads and discriminate against groups of people.

That or are you OK with the phone companies all not selling to black people, women, homosexuals, and other groups... as they are simply a 'private platform'?

Comment Re: The other campaign (Score 1) 445

Depends on the next two years... so dont count chickens until they hatch. IF drumph does turn around the economy the Rs will probably get a super-majority in 2018. This is what the left fails to grasp. For most people it is NOT about moral issues it about feeding your family. Whoever does that best gets the avg joes vote.

Slashdot Top Deals

"The algorithm to do that is extremely nasty. You might want to mug someone with it." -- M. Devine, Computer Science 340

Working...