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


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

Comment So? (Score 1) 110

Do we get to push our laws into foreign countries?

If so, can foreign countries start enforcing their laws in our country?

Their house, their business. Our house, our business.

Push products they do want and maybe they'll change the mind on products they don't.

And seriously, would you want your private information stored on a server in a foreign country? Seems like a no brainer for Russia.

Comment Re:Um... they haven't really done any of that (Score 1) 1069

We don't need federalism. The federal gov't were the ones that put a stop to the farce that was "Separate but Equal". They broke up the Trusts. They enabled the Unions that created the middle class. They bring in real and effective disaster relief and keep our shipping ports open.

The judicial body which struck down "seperate but equal" is the same one that made the Dred Scott decision. The federal government has committed Indian genocide. They've locked up Japanese in internment camps. They built Gitmo and secret offshore prisons. They've pushed No Child Left Behind, the drug war, Mccarthyism and any number of other bad policies.

Where the federal government has been successful is in implementing at a national level policies which have been proven effective and desirable in an increasing number of states. If you're only going to look at the tipping point then it's easy to blame the states which are still holding out as the enemies of progress. But what you're forgetting is that under a single national government the more progressive states would also have been prevented from being progressive up unto that point. Vermont ended slavery in 1777, and the other northern states by 1804. It would been an awful long time before there were any free blacks in the United States if it had to wait for nation-wide concurrence.

Look at Flint, Mi's Water supply (that Gov Snyder is still fighter the cleanup of) and the complete breakdown in Democracy it represented.

You're going cite one of the fifty states having a major problem as proof against federalism? So how many of the 43 presidents behaving badly do I need to cite in response? How does the Flint debacle compare with the EPA spill in Colorado?

Any government is prone to good and bad, whether at the state or national level. The advantage of a federalist system is compartmentalizing the bad while allowing the good to gradually increase its purchase. For that matter, if we had not been conferring so much power on the national government in recent years, the prospect of putting Trump in charge of it would be far less ominous.

Comment If you want to write a book, just do it (Score 2) 381

Sure, yeah, you could take a few weekend courses and bang out some stuff and possibly even find a job paying decent money.

But if you want to move up in the world you need to turn your hack and slash techniques into a refined art.

The kind of crap commodity programmers write is the stuff that skilled developers get paid a lot of money cleaning up or just re-implementing.

It the difference between dime store trashy romance novels and real actual novels. The different between the the Divergent movies and Hunger Games.

If you're content being a direct to DVD wholesaler of crap sure, just get to work.

If you want to work in the big leagues on important things, you need to be open to learning some things and respect the craft.

Comment Re:Electoral college does reflect the popular vote (Score 4, Insightful) 1430

There's no reason that amount of total area won should mean anything at all. Moreover, there's no reason you can reasonably object to cities dominating simply because they happen to be dense areas. Disagreeing with a group doesn't mean you get to use essentially arbitrary criteria to decide you'd like to ignore their wishes.

Social and political interests tend to have a heavy coincidence with geography. If you are on the coasts you care way more about the fishing industry than people in the heartland. If you are in a desert you care more about water conservation. If you are near oil and natural gas your livelihood or the livelihood of your neighbors probably depends on the energy industry. By virtue of being in a population dense area, you automatically have a powerful voting block on various area specific issues. What's more, the people in other areas are not your neighbors, you have much less incentive to protect their interests, and are much less likely to hear their anger and complaints when you don't. By and large people from Wisconsin are not going to be able to come and protest march down the streets of LA if California -- 8 x the population of Wisconsin -- decides corn should be taxed to subsidize making action movies.

The electoral college helps protect various minority populations from being exploited by a tyrannous majority. And that is the main point of our republic, why it is based on constitutional rights, competing branches of government (one of which is not voted on), an electoral college, etc., and super majorities are required to enact any substantial changes. Our government is not a mechanism for enacting the will of the 51% (or even the 60%) on every issue, it is built as a balance of interests which makes the government accountable to the people while also making it fairly difficult for any one group of people to use the government as a cudgel against another group.

Comment Clearly We Need Government Intervention (Score 0, Offtopic) 403

This obsession with "fake" news is all about one thing: government censorship.

All this study proves is that young kids are gullible (duh) and our public education system is one of the worst in the world (not news).

First liberals complained about Citizens United endlessly. And now that Trump won with far less spending than Hillary, suddenly they're concerned about "fake" news while ignoring the false editorializing of the liberal media and rampant lead burying.

Liberal Fascists just can't stand that they no longer control the narrative. And it's really a thumb in their eye whenever Trump tweets out something they don't like. Historically, if the President wanted to say something, they had to go through the filter of the press.

Not anymore.

And good riddance.

Comment You Can't Be Serious (Score 1) 243

"Michael also believes that Trump has been singled out by God to be president of the United States, a conspiracy theory popular with 4chan users who believe that Pepe the Frog is a reincarnation of an ancient Egyptian deity."

This is your story? Do people also seriously believe in the flying spaghetti monster?

Liberals are really digging deep for their Gulf of Tonkin to establish their Ministry of Information to "protect" us from contrary information.

First they came for Pepe the Frog...

Comment Re:It's the transition team, people. (Score 5, Informative) 820

mandate that families hold funerals for miscarried or aborted fetuses

This was so crazy that I had to look it up. Turns out "hold a funeral" is "dispose of remains properly" -- the bill required that fetal remains be either interred or incinerated. Generally speaking that would be the responsibility of the healthcare facility in custody of the remains.

Tell me straight, is "require families to hold a funeral" truly the most accurate and reasonable way you could come up with to indicate the nature of the bill, or is it a purposeful deception?

Comment Check income levels (Score 1) 488

Hillary is only winning those who make less than 35K a year.

She's not winning college educated voters. She's winning diploma holding voters who can't support themselves. If you have a degree and not a good job then access to higher education was not your problem.

People who support themselves are for the most part supporting Trump.

Slashdot Top Deals

"I'm not afraid of dying, I just don't want to be there when it happens." -- Woody Allen