Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. ×

Comment Re:Anchor admits to lies on RT (Score 1) 405

I can't hold the media accountable for proving Iraq did not possess a significant WMD program. Considering how extensively Saddam had lied about his WMD programs throughout the 90's, who would want to go on the record and state that someone as ruthless and dangerous as Saddam had completely dismantled his programs and be left holding the bag when something awful happened. How could one reliably prove such a thing, especially in an environment like Iraq then?

Comment Re:LOL (Score 1) 899

Though that's true, it's a shame how the narrative of a movement can be shaped in minutes by a concerted effort of just a few folks. I read the Wikipedia entry on the alt-right a while back when it was becoming a more mainstream term. Literally every reference was from after 2016, and showed every sign of being written by folks with no sympathy for any part of the movement. Though I was not part of the alt-right movement, I was part of another movement that was similarly stifled when outside forces were brought to bear, and I'm concerned that folks will to easily be swayed from getting behind a movement when bad apples (real or false-flag) can so easily spoil the batch.

Comment Re:More trades / tech schools are needed and not 4 (Score 1) 537

The fact that this has always been there yet has not caught on despite being cheaper shows that the market for employees that lack a broad (dare I say liberal arts) education are not in demand. This surprises me but I support it because I want an educated citizenry.

Comment Re:All about the fight (Score 1) 502

a huge part of the post-election conversation is trying to understand why the left lost touch with the white working class.

I hope you're right. I have seen very little in terms of tone change since the election. In fact, I've heard the opposite stated a few times, that it would be akin to giving in to racist coercion to have a more straight-up populist message with less of the identity politics.

It seems to me from the voter turnout perspective, it wasn't so much that Trump and Republicans turned out huge numbers, but that Hillary and the democrats failed to turn out the Obama coalition and didn't woo a significant number of new Latino voters. I think it speaks more to lacking a charismatic leader at the top or perhaps hubris by democrats due to all the expectation that the election was in the bag.

Comment Re:A lot of smart talent - will this thing backfir (Score 1) 540

Fortunately, there's a limit to the supply by virtue of the number of visas, so I can actually see this being better for everyone involved (stateside). More foreign competition for the limited visa slots, and US workers are more appealing with the cost of living imbalance lessened.

Comment Re:I just got done hiring two people... (Score 1) 540

The fact that you are calling it an 'engineer' position makes me think you're bolstering the requirements for a position beyond what's needed to do the job. Was this a position for a programmer or for someone doing rote testing? I'd be interested to see the salary and requirements for such a position.

Comment Re: Breadth & Accuracy 120 years ago (Score 1) 436

Thank you for the links. A few comments:

-The first link is merely a comment paper, and seems measured in it's response. The methodology critique seems nit picky.
- The second link is about the AMA, which is not made up of the same folks that would be publishing climate science research. From their website:

Our more than 13,000 members include scientists, researchers, educators, broadcast meteorologists, students, weather enthusiasts, and other professionals in the fields of weather, water, and climate.

-I don't have access to the 3rd paper at home, so can't comment.
-The springer article seems unduly narrow in their definition of consensus:

the standard definition of consensus: that most warming since 1950 is anthropogenic.

It seems like the tipping point in many of these articles is whether the environment has a significant or equal impact on climate change. Even in the cooking the books article:

"Only 59% of the scientists said the ‘climate development of the last 50 years was mostly influenced by man’s activity. One quarter of those surveyed said that human and natural factors played an equal role.’"

Put another way, that's 84% say that humans play at least an equal roll in climate change. I'd still call that consensus, even if it's not 97%.

Slashdot Top Deals

Live within your income, even if you have to borrow to do so. -- Josh Billings