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


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:EU is not Democracy (Score 1) 373

Ok, well to quote the opinion:

"We admit that, in many places and in ordinary times, the defendants, in saying all that was said in the circular, would have been within their constitutional rights. But the character of every act depends upon the circumstances in which it is done. Aikens v. Wisconsin, 195 U.S. 194, 205, 206. The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic. It does not even protect a man from an injunction against uttering words that may have all the effect of force. Gompers v. Bucks Stove & Range Co., 221 U.S. 418, 439. The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent. It is a question of proximity and degree."

This, combined with the fact that the ruling banned the pamphlet, i.e. restricted free speech, would seem to belie what you're saying.

Comment Re:Yes (Score 1) 335

No, he tried to apply a blanket restoration in contravention of the Virginia Constitution. The Virginia Supreme Court ruled that he could not do such a thing, but had to rely instead on performing individual restoration of rights as the Governor is permitted to do. So, the roughly 200,000 people whose voting rights were unconstitutionally restored had their voting rights revoked. Since that ruling and revocation, the Governor individually restored the voting rights of more than 60,000 in accordance with his powers under the Virginia Constitution.

Comment Re:Bad Headline (Score 1) 588

Yes, well twitter completely controls their service, so they are in a position to say definitively that they would not provide support for such a thing.


Microsoft, on the other hand, sells product in a myriad of stores around the world. Even if they do not support such a thing, if they reply "NO", all it takes is one gomer in a staples store selling a windows notebook to a fed for "people" to start screaming about how Microsoft "lied" and really does "support" the evil deed.

Comment Re:Sociological work on the subject (Score 1) 624

Indeed, but perhaps it's simpler than that:

"All this was inspired by the principle—which is quite true within itself—that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying."

Comment Re:epidemic (Score 1) 624

Though historically much of what comes from a major news outlet wasn't fake, completely and demonstrably false.

Indeed. It seems to me, in the past, each side of an issue would spin a common set of facts to their respective advantage. The difference today is that one side, the other, or both, find it much easier to simply create their own facts. And I'm not inclined to place all the "blame" on uneducated people believing the bullshit because regardless of the point of view there will certainly be myriad web sites, blogs and other sources on the internet that can be turned to for "corroboration". I think if people don't "fact-check", it's because they don't know who to believe. No matter who you look to, there will always be someone who claims they're "biased".

Comment Re:Blame the news websites. (Score 1) 624

This single story sums up CNN: Math is racist. [cnn.com]

So, first, you're misrepresenting the title, which is: Math is racist: How data is driving inequality

What about the story is bullshit? I might agree that the title is over-the-top and if all you do is scan the first 15 characters of story titles, then you might have a point. But deliberately misrepresenting the title in order to excoriate CNN is part of the problem.

Comment Re:What about the far-left? (Score 1) 978

Hating an individual is not a hate crime ...

According to the FBI, a hate crime is:

"A hate crime is a traditional offense like murder, arson, or vandalism with an added element of bias. For the purposes of collecting statistics, the FBI has defined a hate crime as a “criminal offense against a person or property motivated in whole or in part by an offender’s bias against a race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, ethnicity, gender, or gender identity.” Hate itself is not a crime—and the FBI is mindful of protecting freedom of speech and other civil liberties."

Comment Re:What about the far-left? (Score 1) 978

Does that mean a baker doesn't have to bake a cake for a gay couple? They are both private companies, yet one gets to decide who uses their service based on political ideology.

No. The bakery is a 'public accommodation' and, as such, has to abide by things like the Civil Rights Act. Apparently, (IDK), Oregon extends these federal protections to LGBT people.

Are platforms of speech critical to political discourse in the country and should they be protected?

I personally believe so and, if twitter were the only internet platform for disseminating (political) speech, then they should be compelled to restore the accounts they've suspended. But they're not the only platform, so...

Slashdot Top Deals

We will have solar energy as soon as the utility companies solve one technical problem -- how to run a sunbeam through a meter.