Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


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

Comment Re: This is dumb (Score 1) 73

And until what you say comes to pass, there are still plenty of people getting whatever they want for free, just like it was with music. Eventually they'll figure out how people want to watch shows and allow them to pay for that, but until that happens I'm still going to watch things how I want to regardless of whether or not there's a way for me to pay the producers.

Comment Re:As much as I dislike Trump ... (Score 1) 384

OK, well, you have fun making arbitrary assumptions about other people to help you believe that you're right, and have a great time voting for one of the two most disliked candidates in the history of presidential polling. Apparently you're still under the assumption that I'm refusing to vote so it's pointless to try and carry this any further.

Baseless assumptions, and poor reading comprehension. At least you've found the candidate who represents you, I can say that much.

Comment Re:Clean up needed in aisle 11 (Score 1) 160

TFA has a graphic showing landing locations for the various probes. From an analysis of the pixels, it appears that Opportunity and Schiaparelli landed in the same location. Of course, by now Opportunity is halfway up Olympus Mons, but maybe it could look behind itself and find the hydrazine cloud.

Comment Re:As much as I dislike Trump ... (Score 1) 384

One of those two will be president.

Yes, that is the unfortunate reality, and too many people seem happy to play along with this stupid game. The Republican party is telling you "the other candidate is awful and unqualified, we know that our candidate isn't perfect and is in fact disliked by a majority of the country, but you have to vote for us to stop the other candidate". Meanwhile, the Democratic party is telling you "the other candidate is awful and unqualified, we know that our candidate isn't perfect and is in fact disliked by a majority of the country, but you have to vote for us to stop the other candidate". The media pushes that same narrative, in addition to saying that no other candidate has a chance so no one else should be included in debates (which is a self-fulfilling prophecy) or receive anything near to the airtime that we give the Republicans and Democrats, because we know that they will reward us with interviews and access so we'll play the game and act like 2 parties represent the majority of the country.

People like you accept that, you understand that, hey, maybe the 2 candidates this time around aren't the best, but I'm sure it will be different next time. They'll stop beating me soon, because they love me. No reason to try and change anything about how the system is set up, right? The Democrats and Republicans enshrined this system in 1988 to ensure that they would always be in power because that's in our best interest. We need either a Democrat, or a Republican. No one else can represent America, if you're American then you fit into one of those two boxes, period. Keep anyone else out of the debates, vote for the candidate that you hate the least, and remember, next time it will be better and we'll stop beating you soon.

Oh, and thanks for playing.

You don't have much clout as an individual, but you can at least use the little you have.

That's funny, because that is the specific justification that I use to not vote for either of them. Trump or Clinton would never even notice if I voted for them. Other candidates would appreciate my vote much more, and if enough of us feel like I do, then maybe we can force the media to change their coverage and work towards an actual difference in the next election cycle instead of the same shit cycle repeating itself again. Utah looks like they might send their electoral votes to a third candidate, and I'd love to see "smaller" candidates beat out one of the two majors in several other states. It would send a message that the media has their heads up the asses of the major parties, and that they don't represent the interests of the public any more than the parties do. That kind of change won't happen if I vote for Trump or Clinton.

But, hey, if you want Donald J. Trump to be your representative to the world and the person in charge of the most powerful military on the planet, you go ahead and vote for him. That's not what I want, so I'm not going to vote for him. I don't want Clinton in power either, so I'm not going to vote for her either. I'm still voting, just not for either of them. I'm done playing the game where they try to scare you about the opponent so badly that they guilt you into voting for them even though you don't even like them. I refuse to vote for someone that I actively dislike just because the other half of the same machine put up a candidate even more frightening.

Must just be my inner two year old talking though, so thanks for the outright dismissal. I'm sure you're operating on a much higher level than I am, a level that has allowed you to convince yourself that voting for Donald Trump to be the President Of The United States somehow makes sense.

Comment Re:As much as I dislike Trump ... (Score 1) 384

Don't get angry at me man, I'm agreeing with you that Trump would never try to monetize the job. You made a fantastic point there which is obviously based in reality and backed up by all of the behavior we've witnessed from Donald J. Trump over the past 30 or 40 years (video evidence of Donald Trump helping someone), and as you can clearly see from my comment I am agreeing with you. I'm not mocking it in any way. Just spitballing here.

On the one hand we have Hillary trading uranium rights for CGI donations, and on the other we have... well. you don't like Trump. Do you have a college degree? Ask for your money back.

Let me guess. You're actually planning on casting a vote for one of the two historically bad candidates that have been shat out in front of you by an awful system, but you think I'm the idiot. Truly, I shrink from the might of your intellect.

Comment Re: Does anybody ... (Score 1) 471

If "the league" is "the list of the 2 most disliked candidates in the history of presidential polling", then they are in fact in the same league.

Guess what the #1 reason for voting for either candidate is? Because they are not the other person, because the voter dislikes their opponent even more than they dislike the person they're voting for. They aren't voting for that person because they like them, in fact they don't like them, they're voting for them because the don't like them slightly less than the other candidate. So, they have that in common too, maybe that's "the league" you were referring to. The league where candidates get votes not because of their own merits, but because of how historically awful the other candidate is.

Or maybe you're referring to the league where the candidate who wins the election is going to be the one who speaks the least, because no one wants to hear what either of them has to say, and whenever they open their mouths their favorability rating and poll numbers drop. That's the league where people shut up and let the other person defeat themselves. They're also both in that league.

I suppose they're in a lot of the same leagues, actually.

Comment Re:As much as I dislike Trump ... (Score 1) 384

Ha! Yeah, if there's one thing I know, it's that The Classy And Luxurious Donald Trump(tm) would never try to monetize the office of President Of The United States. No, no, his sole motivation in this and everything else he does is to help people, not build a "personal brand", whatever that even means. That's what he is, he's just a big helper. We should call him President Helper. But, don't worry, because even if he doesn't get elected you'll still be able to watch him help people every day on The Classy And Luxurious Donald Trump TV Network(tm) featuring Roger Ailes. Tune in tomorrow to see whose pussy Donald and Roger will try to grab next!

You should "spitball" some more, that's some funny shit.

Comment Re:Signal Aquired (Score 1) 242

Well, "success" is really more of a continuum than a point.

nine hydrazine-powered thrusters arrest its descent to a few meters per second. A crushable structure will absorb the impact force at the planet's surface.

The primary role of Schiaparelli will be to demonstrate this landing technology so that a planned follow-up mission in 2020, complete with a rover, can also safely reach the Martian surface.

So, we've got some good news and some bad news. The good news is that we're pretty sure that the crushable structure was crushed as intended.

Comment Re: Does anybody ... (Score 2) 471

The 2 major parties have both managed to nominate possibly the only candidate who can lose to the other one. No matter who wins, the loser will have deserved to lose to that person. In any other election year either of these candidates would basically be handing the victory to the other party, but somehow we've managed to nominate the 2 most disliked candidates in the history of presidential polling to face each other. It's awful. It would be comedic if it weren't for the inevitable tragic outcome.

Comment Re:Does anybody ... (Score 2) 471

Assange failed. Probably a good thing for him and his work anyway: Trump's on record as wanting Snowden executed. Clinton's only joked about "droning" Assange. There's little doubt Trump would kill him.

Yeah, and Assange is so afraid of Trump trying to kill him that he's working overtime to release information that is only damaging to Democrats.

Quick question - when Wikileaks released the State Department dump that was handed to them by Manning, who was in charge of the State Department during that time?

There's a reason why Assange is anti-Hillary, and it's because she's out to get him. He embarrassed her department and herself, and if you think she's not the kind of person to hold a grudge then I'm not sure you're looking at the same person. If she gets elected Assange probably thinks that he'll spend the next 40 years in prison. He does not seem afraid of Trump at all, and I haven't heard Trump say anything bad about Assange.

If Trump gets elected it's going to be because the Democrats managed to nominate the single person capable of losing to Trump, and because of the information leaked by Assange. Trump isn't going to turn around and try to kill him.

Comment Re:Interesting, Dave Chappelle. (Score 1) 548

Who can't search you, the private security hired at a private venue? They may not be able to force anyone to submit to an arbitrary search, but they sure as hell can say that a requirement of entry is that you allow them to search you. If you don't want to be searched, fine, you don't have to, go away. If you want to enter the private establishment then they can tell you that they get to search you first. There's nothing illegal about that, you don't have some right to enter any building you want on your own terms.

Slashdot Top Deals

"An entire fraternity of strapping Wall-Street-bound youth. Hell - this is going to be a blood bath!" -- Post Bros. Comics