Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Get HideMyAss! VPN, PC Mag's Top 10 VPNs of 2016 for 55% off for a Limited Time ×

Comment Re:Love it and stay (Score 1) 236

Hillary lies much less than Trump does.

They're both liars. Trying to decide which one lies less is an exercise in masturbation, unless you have an agenda, in which case whichever one you happen to support will always be found to lie less.

You can't even argue magnitude as a means to differentiate them. Hillary has plenty of "yuge" lies of her own (like claiming she landed under sniper fire and had to run for safety).

Comment Re:empty waste land not equal to best location (Score 1) 119

To be accurate, its kinda like how people like you spent the last 8 years blaming everything on the present occupant.

Thanks, present occupant!

To be fair, most people blame the current guy for everything if they don't agree with his politics. If they do agree with his politics, they blame the previous guy (or the guy before that, if the previous guy has the unfortunate handicap of also sharing their politics).

To most democrats, everything is Dubya's fault. To most Republicans, everything is Obama's fault (before that it was Clinton's fault). Timing is largely meaningless (take a look at how many conservative types blame Bill Clinton and Janet Reno for Ruby Ridge (which happened before the 1992 election) or the laughable way Obama was nominated for a Nobel peace prize for the accomplishment of not being George Bush).

Comment Case-by-case basis (Score 1) 91

Those customers that got "badly burned" are going to want to know that you've learned your lesson.

If the event hit the press or word got around to your target customer base, you'll need to convince them that it won't happen again (I'm looking at you, Southwest Airlines).

If your industry is one where the failure could cause death or injury if it happened again - even to a competitor - then you have a moral and possibly legal obligation to "go public" within your industry so they can learn from your experience (I'm looking at you, Blue Bell Creamery).

Even if it's not life-or-death, you may find it good busine$$/good PR to share details within your industry or to the general public (thank you, Google).

There are some cases where publicity isn't critical.

For example, if you sell widgets and you had a no-critical-lessons-learned systemic failure in one of your factories that shut down production in that factory for a week, but your other factories were able to ramp up production so all your distributors and major customers noticed was a half-day shipping delay on some parts resulting in their own inventories, but your other end users didn't notice anything, then all you need to do is apologize for the inconvenience and say is that a plant had to be taken offline and it took half a day to add shifts to the other plants and get your widgets shipped out. If you are a public company you may need to issue a press release for the benefit of investors. If you had temporary layoffs or if employee health and safety were affected, you may have to notify the goverment, unions, and affected employees. Other than that, you probably don't need to say much more.

Comment Re:Incorrect (Score 1) 180

Unfortunately, that's not how it works. Without taxes, the wealthy and corporations mostly transfer wealth among themselves, and very little of it ever actually manages to trickle down. Perhaps you missed the memo, but "trickle down" economics doesn't work, and never has done.

I'm not supporting trickle down economics here, I'm just saying that Apple's $250B in cash would probably not be stuffed under a mattress. It would be doing SOMETHING in our economy (whether that benefits everyone or just the 1% is an open question) rather than doing something in someone else's economy, which is the current state.

IOW, this is a false dichotomy. "We need to tax that money to realize a return on society's investment" is all well and good, except for the fact that we're not actually taxing that money, Ireland[1] is.

[1] - Or the Cayman Islands, etc, but the point remains.

Comment Re:Incorrect (Score 1) 180

For the sake of argument, let's take everything you said as fact (both literally and morally). The status quo has all of that money (that our infrastructure enabled them to earn) leaving our nation to go elsewhere, and enrich other economies, so we're not benefiting from it at all (but we're still out the cost of the infrastructure).

I'm NOT suggestion that the tax rate here should be 0, but if it were, that money would be in our economy and working, thus a net benefit to us.

To put it another way, half an apple is better than no apple at all, and our tax code should realize that rather than levying punishing rates that absolutely NO ONE actually pays and discourages the repatriation of those funds.

Comment Re:Yeah so (Score 4, Interesting) 175

Up until the point that he got on the Hillary train, I had a LOT of respect for Sanders. You're right that most of his positions are close to "normal" for Democrats, but unlike most politicians, he was not trying to walk both sides of a line, and he was that rare (almost unique) straight shooter. He didn't hide behind weasel words, he didn't equivocate, he stated, simply, what his ideals were, and appeared to live by them.

When's the last time you heard ANYONE at his level of politics say something like "I have to get my tax returns from my wife, she does them" and then further find out that he's actually living on his Senate salary and not "speaking fees" or other similar near bribes?

I'm actually pretty upset over the whole thing--I would NEVER have voted for Sanders, because his politics are too far off from mine, but he was a politician I could admire... until he became just another party hack at convention time.

Comment Re:That's the last straw: TRUMP IS A TRAITOR (Score 1) 1005

The former hed of the CIA seems to take this pretty seriously. One does not commit treason even as sarcasm. It isn't funny, and at some point, this is taken pretty seriously.

Your copy of the constitution must have a different definition of treason than mine does (mine's pretty specific, and though people have LOVED to throw the word around for the last 15 years at both the Rs and the Ds at various times, very little of it has actually come even close, much less passed muster).

The really amusing part (to me) is all the people that are getting worked up shouting "treason" etc can't seem to remember that (according to Hillary) none of the contents of that server were classified or sensitive, the data in question is "missing or deleted," and that we're talking about a "personal email server" and not a computer belonging to the US government (a computer that doesn't even exist to be hacked anymore).

I stand behind my statement that this is manufactured controversy. "hey russia, you guys have those 30,000 emails that Hillary didn't turn over to the FBI?" is not an inducement to hack something--at best, it's a request to provide something they may have ALREADY hacked in the past. It's VERY obviously a dig at Hillary's other email problem, and pretty much anyone "viewing with alarm" right now is probably anti-Trump to some degree or another.

I can't believe I'm put in a position where I'm actually defending that walking carrot with a toupee, but the sheer lack of critical thinking involved in this "controversy" is mind boggling.

Comment Re:How were crimes solved before cell phones? (Score 4, Funny) 254

That's how Billy the Kid got off... they tried him for shooting Sheriff William Brady, but he was acquitted because his iPhone was encrypted and they couldn't get at the data. They even tried getting Steve Jobs' great grandfather involved, but the sonofabitch insisted that he didn't even know what a cell phone was, much less how to remove the encryption from one.

Julius Rosenberg also went free because they couldn't decrypt his thumb drive to prove he was spying for the Soviets.

At least that's the impression I get from listening to these assholes whining that they can't spy on all of us 24/7.

Comment Re:That's the last straw: TRUMP IS A TRAITOR (Score 1) 1005

I don't think even Donald Trump is oblivious enough to suggest that someone should hack a server that was decommissioned years ago.

I'll agree that man does a fine job of de-calibrating sarcasm detectors, but I just don't understand how anyone can take this seriously. The idea that professional journalists are doing so (apparently it was played as straight news by CNN as their top story) does not pass the smell test with me, and (in my opinion) is just an excuse to manufacture controversy.

Comment Re:What's the legal basis? (Score 1) 245

If they're basing this on owning the copyright to the Olympics, this isn't going to work - owning a copyright on the name of a thing doesn't mean that you can prevent anyone from talking about your thing, just that nobody else can sell it. Lawsuits like this fail often - confused people think that they can use copyright to do more than control the right to copy...

They don't have to (and probably don't expect to) win, but they have the power to ruin anyone they choose to that violates their demand (they will simply sue them into the ground, regardless of merits, and their resources will significantly exceed that of their targets).

Comment Re:That's the last straw: TRUMP IS A TRAITOR (Score 4, Insightful) 1005

Your biases have blinded you to the fact that this was humor. I admit that I laughed when I read the story today. This is the same joke my colleagues in Germany have been making to me for the last couple of years ("we don't make backups anymore, if we lose data, we'll just ask you to call the NSA so they can send us their copy")

Trump is a walking train wreck, but your apolplexy over this is just as ridiculous as his candidacy.

Comment Re: Because money (Score 1) 270

Ok, so how do you write laws that apply to a corporation as well?

I'm proposing that criminal laws applying to a corporation shouldn't be written at all. There are more than enough civil laws to go around, and any criminal liability can (and should) be put on the shoulders of those involved.

You're showing a severe lack of legal knowledge. Almost everything is codified to people. A corporation for legal purposes is just like a person. Unlike illegal aliens and foreigners (in America), they can't vote, however.

I never claimed to have much in the way of legal knowledge. I'm not a lawyer, I'm just an IT geek (I promise that is not Phil Hartman reference).

My initial point was to state "people acting together should not have fewer rights than when they act separately" and I stand behind that. That's not legal doctrine, that's philosophy. The opposite outcome in Citizens United would have enshrined just that idea into our wonderful, precedential legal system, and it would have taken decades to undo (if ever it could be).

Slashdot Top Deals

Stellar rays prove fibbing never pays. Embezzlement is another matter.

Working...