Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



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

Comment Re:Translation (Score 1) 369

Your hypothesis:

Actually my hypothesis is that you're pretty dim. Reality matches.

It must be humiliating for you to get your predictions wrong when someone else, whom you call dim, gets their predictions correct. If your intelligence was as high as you appear to believe it is, you wouldn't have been so completely blind-sided by an electorate.

Reality: Fairly progressive website (/.) scored my comment +5 insightful.

So, you agree with every +5 post out there! This should be interesting.

I notice you still haven't provided any evidence for your original claim beyond a few upmods.

Which claim? That your predictions were wrong? That governments (literally) telling media that if the media doesn't censor, then the government will censor for them? FTFS:

"If Facebook, YouTube, Twitter and Microsoft want to convince me and the ministers that the non-legislative approach can work, they will have to act quickly and make a strong effort in the coming months

Comment Re:Translation (Score 1) 369

Assuming you are correct

Trust me, I am.

Remember: If reality differs from your hypothesis, it's not reality that is wrong.

Exactly. So why invent fantasies then?

Your hypothesis:

The thing is, if you open with clearly false fantasies, people will quite rightly dismiss you as an idiot

Reality: Fairly progressive website (/.) scored my comment +5 insightful.

Reality is disagreeing with your hypothesis here.

Comment Re:I'm sure that'll work (Score 1) 112

I'm sure this will work perfectly, and everybody will respond honestly and accurately based on whether the story is factual, rather than whether or not it follows the correct political opinion.

They want to do this because they think that the correct political opinion of the masses agrees with them. They also thought that the current political opinion of the masses agreed with them prior to the election, too. I think they may be in for a bit of a shock (again) when they discover that their ideals are not as widespread as they believe them to be.

Comment Re:Translation (Score 1) 369

The thing is, if you open with clearly false fantasies, people will quite rightly dismiss you as an idiot (as opposed to here where your username is sufficient).

Assuming you are correct, the fact that the majority of people aren't dismissing me as an idiot means that I did not open with false fantasies.

Remember: If reality differs from your hypothesis, it's not reality that is wrong.

Comment Re: Bad Headline (Score 1) 587

I found you an example, one on which he even doubled down later.

If you refuse to understand the plain meaning of the words uttered in that example, I'm afraid I cannot help you. You will just keep saying "that's not what he meant" or "that shouldn't be taken serious" or "he said something else later" regardless of any actual quote, so why bother? We've seen how it works multiple times during the election.

And if that is the case, any conversation with you is fundamentally meaningless for any purpose other than gathering data on how to thwart you and your ilk as much as possible. I'm certainly not going to convince you of anything.

Comment Re:If??!?!?!! Really, now Twitter?!?!?! (Score 1) 1054

So I've already denied it was sexism; in fact, that's how I entered this thread. Just what kind of "scientist" were you anyway? Gender studies? Social sciences?

Bro, do you even read? You made a claim, I made a counter argument, and you made no further comment. That's called losing the argument.

Nope. GGP made a claim. I denied his claim. My first post to this thread was a denial, stating my position - you want I must continue restating the same position? Why?

Will you make a new /. ID to post again in 4 years when all the doom-and-gloom you're predicting fails to materialise?

again? this is is about 13 years old. And what predictions have I made, eh? I could use some insight into your weird fantasy. I look forwards to you claiming I've made all sorts of claims that other people made because libruhls all think the same amirite?

Well, *you* are quite predictable, so no surprises there. However, you've made plenty of claims about how Trump is the next Hitler, and about all the bad things that will happen if Trump is president. I look forward to seeing your posts when those doom-and-gloom predictions of yours do not materialise.

I predict that you will either go silent on your claims of doom-and-gloom, or you will say that your predictions failed because he was actively prevented from doing what you said he will do, and from becoming what you said he will become. Remember, I predicted both that he'll win and that he'll adopt more moderate positions.

A hallmark of good science is testing your predictions. If the test fails it's not reality that is wrong, it's your hypothesis.

Comment Re: Bad Headline (Score 1) 587

The question doesn't ask about a specific Trump plan - that would be impossible, because Trump contradicts himself all the time. They ask about a specific plan of a "national Muslim registry", which was talked about by Trump during the election. The lack of details is deliberate - it shouldn't really matter what such a plan entails, exactly, the only sensible answer for anything with such a name is "no".

Slashdot Top Deals

Never say you know a man until you have divided an inheritance with him.

Working...