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 Re:Why have a democracy at all? (Score 1) 613

So, can you do a net effect of this behavior on the social and political environment of area, the industry, and the nation?

Because what you're saying is that a chilling of the political climate where anyone that is a threat to the one party rule of the united states is effectively exiled or silenced is fine... So long as you do it a certain way.

So... one party rule is fine I guess. All hail Empress Clinton and her scion Chesley who will one day give birth to the future kings and queens of the Kingdom of America.

We either have a republic where people have freedom of expression or we don't. You want to play the game of "well they're just deciding"... fine... same thing happened with the Mozilla CEO. This is a pattern.

Humans have evolved to recognize patterns. It is a survival trait. Its one of the things we're good at. You're either bad at something that everyone else on this planet is good at... or you're just pretending to be stupid.

Which is it?

Comment Re:Why have ademocracy at all? (Score 1) 613

As to original notations, this is merely a confession of autism.

As to questioning statements, this is mindless nitpicking or autism. This does nothing to aid in rational and productive discourse. You concede my meaning but want every little line to compile. You're not a computer and neither am I. We are both much more complex and sophisticated creatures that are able to interpret meaning. To limit myself to what a computer would do would be to surrender that for nothing. Deal in meaning and be human.

As to write in candidates, then the notion is not especially credible. That's three for three.

As to coming down as hard on X as Y... Do it then. Judge both by the same standard. Calculate. Run the numbers. Process the program. Find your value for X. Do it. You want to play the "I'm autistic so I'm more rational" game... fine. Let us see precisely how rational you are... because I've played this game with other people that attempted the same ploy, and generally the logical contradictions happened almost immediately. Let us see if you're different. Execute.

As to autism as a pejorative, you were demonstrating an inability to grasp concepts in a larger context or interrelate phrases and topics with each other. This is a symptom of autism. I was hoping that by using the term you'd understand that your line of rhetorical argumentation was coming off as literally mentally disabled. Which to be very clear... that is how you were sounding. You take issue and then concede my points. If you weren't autistic or weren't behaving in that matter you'd have processed the context or the interrelation prior to taking issue and thus never found fault in the first place. Failing to do that demonstrated a dysfunction. Work on it.

Submission + - "Most serious" Linux privilege-escalation bug ever is under active exploit (arstechnica.com)

operator_error writes: Lurking in the kernel for nine years, flaw gives untrusted users unfettered root access.

By Dan Goodin — 10/20/2016

A serious vulnerability that has been present for nine years in virtually all versions of the Linux operating system is under active exploit, according to researchers who are advising users to install a patch as soon as possible.

While CVE-2016-5195, as the bug is cataloged, amounts to a mere privilege-escalation vulnerability rather than a more serious code-execution vulnerability, there are several reasons many researchers are taking it extremely seriously. For one thing, it's not hard to develop exploits that work reliably. For another, the flaw is located in a section of the Linux kernel that's a part of virtually every distribution of the open-source OS released for almost a decade. What's more, researchers have discovered attack code that indicates the vulnerability is being actively and maliciously exploited in the wild.

"It's probably the most serious Linux local privilege escalation ever," Dan Rosenberg, a senior researcher at Azimuth Security, told Ars. "The nature of the vulnerability lends itself to extremely reliable exploitation. This vulnerability has been present for nine years, which is an extremely long period of time."

The underlying bug was patched this week by the maintainers of the official Linux kernel. Downstream distributors are in the process of releasing updates that incorporate the fix. Red Hat has classified the vulnerability as "important."

Comment Re:But it was Ok to ban most of California voters? (Score 1) 528

Eich publicly supported Proposition 8, and donated a large sum of money

It was not deliberately public — only inasmuch, as largish donations must be registered (in violation of the First Amendment, which is usually understood to protect anonymous speech).

all to deny certain people the right

Whatever. My point was, 52% of California voters voted for the same thing. Which means, the entire State should've been boycotted until it purged those thought-criminals somehow.

He was a bad cultural fit for Mozilla.

He was a perfectly fine "cultural fit" for Mozilla for many years before that, and would've remained just fine after that — just as Mr. Thiel remains fine for Facebook.

But the boycott threatened to dent Firefox' market share and that is why they panicked. The fears were completely unjustified, of course, as Chick-Fill-A has shown, SJWs lack the stamina for any sort of long-lasting damage.

Comment Re:Why have ademocracy at all? (Score 1) 613

Shows what you know:

Look, sit at my feet and learn or don't bother to argue with me because you know nothing. The very notion that you'd presume to contradict me at this point is offensive to reason.

The only blacklist that should be in place is on people both ignorant of the issues and arrogant enough to think they still have a relevant opinion despite knowing nothing.

As to the dubiousness... it was so dubious that the Hillary campaign fired him. That's how dubious. You want to spout talking points like a trained parrot? Go for it. I've not crackers for you, my dude.

As to police unions, the dubious videos that were so dubious that the campaign believed them entirely and fired him... those videos along with other evidence points to the agitation actually being choreographed by the DNC. So... yawn, my dude... yawn.

As to no one advocating censorship, actually when you start basically firing people for participating in the political process and holding contrary positions on issues that is exactly what you're doing.

But that's okay. You've just changed the rules of the game. So now your opposition can do this to you. Game on.

Comment Re:Why have ademocracy at all? (Score 1) 613

I'm saying that if you don't get funding if you interfere with the attempt by the DNC to create a one party oligarchy that it creates a chilling effect on the democracy itself. You are creating a situation where ruthlessness, deceit, bribery, and extortion decide elections and not the conscience of the voting public.

If that's the future you choose, you may well get it. How many people have you personally killed? Because if the answer is zero... this might not be a future you can compete in, chump. Things are going to get more and more vicious if this is the basis on which power is decided. You can calm it down by not rewarding this behavior... or encourage it.

Why is it that the people crying for rivers of blood and pyramids of skulls always think their blood will be spared or their skulls won't be polished and mounded in the obelisk?

Comment Re: Why have ademocracy at all? (Score 1) 613

Indeed, the name is taken... By the same people. Crypto Marxists are Crypto Marxists.

I know I know... there is no true marxist... there are more flavors of marxist than there are flavors of ice cream at 31 flavors. And if you point out anything any flavor does the other flavors say "he isn't a true marxist because only I am the true marxist"...

Its about as rational as saying that ice cream ceases to be ice cream with the inclusion of sprinkles.

The PV videos showed that Hillary is engaged in brown shirt type activity. Paid agitators at protests for media impact.

The DNC also colluded with Hillary to kill the Bernie campaign.

Your vote means nothing to these people. They will tell you who to vote for and what to believe in.

And those deserving to be treated like peasants will accept it.

Comment Re:Why have ademocracy at all? (Score 1) 613

You don't understand what the word blacklist means. You've likely confused it with "government censorship" which is a different term.

What is more, this "you can't censor someone unless you're the government" argument is moronic. You can absolutely censor someone if you are not the government. You merely are not violating the First Amendment because that only applies to the government. However, the blacklist is itself not a matter of government versus non-government.

And really, if you want to play this game... fine. We'll just divide the country into political camps and neither side will do anything with the other. Great. And there is the end of the republic.

You're a genius.

Comment Re:Why have a democracy at all? (Score 1) 613

... You're the morons that created that situation.

The mishandling of Russian relations and the abandonment of Iraq lead to the current situation.

You people take no responsibility for anything.

Russia is a great power in the world and the cold war is over. We have an opportunity to ally and cooperate on common interests. The Europeans especially in the West are of almost no military value at this point. If we want aid in securing strategic peace in Eurasia, then we are greatly benefited by cooperation with Russia. Add to that, Eastern Europe which generally has a fierce determination to remain independent. We can use their interest to remain free... which we will support and reinforce as a bulwark against any future Russian adventurism whilst directing Russian power either to keep their sphere stable or to advance them into the middle east and various other places to maintain stability.

As to the Islamic Caliphate, that would be the stupid Fabians fucking that one up. Remember the Arab Spring? Remember Libya? Remember who left Iraq thus creating ISIS in the first place?

As to European Caliphates... that is the EU and Merkel. They opened their doors. They intentionally brought in hundreds of thousands of people that they didn't know, didn't vet, and by any half way rational estimation they had to know were full of radicals.

They did that. Not the US. And how you put that at the feet of Trump is baffling.

What is more, both Obama and Merkel are if anything doubling down on the whole thing. So if you want it continue... elect Hillary. Because she's going to try and do that to the US as well. We're already seeing forced settlements of "Syrian" refugees in the US contrary to the wishes of the local communities. They are given housing, they are given food... and everything is paid for with your tax dollars.

Look, keep it up. I'm not going to stay here whilst my country is destroyed around me. The Pacific is full of beautiful tropical islands. I will leave and sip fruity drinks with island girls if you idiots keep this crap up.

Comment Re:Why have ademocracy at all? (Score 1) 613

The vast majority of people in any ideology are never blacklisted. To say this is to confess that you don't understand how blacklisting works. It works mostly by picking prominent people and hitting them. The vast majority of people with communist leanings were not blacklisted by the hollywood McCarthy blacklists. Rather, the most prominent communists in Hollywood were blacklisted.

If you have no problem with blacklisting... then fine. You're on record, Marxists. When you cry foul later... it will be ignored.

Comment Re:Why have ademocracy at all? (Score 1) 613

Actually the DNC colluded with Hillary clinton against Bernie. This is why the last DNC chair stepped down. Emails leaked show there was a strong institutional bias towards Hillary which was a violation of the DNC charter.

So that's the first point you're wrong on.

The second issue is that the PV videos recently released show that Hillary is engaging political bagmen to create media incidents. Keeping mentally ill people on the pay roll for example to use as fight instigators for media stunts. The operative that was outed by those videos was recently fired by Hillary, but it is unlikely that he was the only one.

As to everyone being anti free speech, okay... show me Hillary supporters getting their venture capital funding cut for being Hillary supporters? Failed? Okay... then I was right and you're wrong.

As to mutual blacklisting being fine... so you're fine with the old McCarthy Hollywood blacklists of Communists?

Cool. Now the Marxists are on record. They have no problem with people being censored or blacklisted... they just personally don't like it happening to them. Good to remember. Noted and logged.

Comment Re:Why have ademocracy at all? (Score 1) 613

If you're too autistic to grasp the difference "will not happen because of standing conditions that make it impossible" and saying "won't happen"... then any further argument on that point is a waste of my time.

If you're too autistic to grasp the tactical and strategic difference between someone voting for a real threat to their power and someone that is voting for someone that is not a threat to their power... then any further argument on that point is a waste of my time. What is more, you're not contradicting that people are being blacklisted based on who they support in an election. Would you be so sanguine if this were applied against Hillary supporters?

How many times in the history of the United States of America has a national write in Candidate won the national election? If you have a point then this happens with some frequency. If it doesn't then you're throwing out more irrelevancies. I can't tell if you're going out of your way to be obtuse to argue points in bad faith or if you're so autistic that you honestly think these are valid points.

Because you're either being intentionally obtuse or unintentionally autistic, I suspect you won't acknowledge that were the shoe on the other foot the existing political and social orthodoxy would not be comfortable with Hillary supporters being given the same treatment.

Comment But it was Ok to ban most of California voters? (Score 3, Insightful) 528

"We can't create a culture that says it cares about diversity and then excludes almost half the country because they back a political candidate,"

When Brendan Eich was ousted from Mozilla, it was for his private backing of California Proposition 8, which won the backing of over 52% of California voters. By the hateful logic of Mr. Eich's detractors, the entire State of California should've been boycotted by the freedom-loving web-sites until the State purged their thought-criminals.

Where Mr. Zuckerberg stood on that boycott is unclear, but the words he is preaching now, should've been uttered then.

Submission + - Soros-linked corporation supplies voting machines to 16 States (dailycaller.com)

mi writes: Remember, how suspicious (and wrong!) it was for Diebold, whose management openly supported Bush, to be supplying voting machines? We even discussed it here over the years...

Well, a Soros-linked company from the UK is supplying 16 States with voting hardware this year. Will there be a comparable amount of suspicion?

Submission + - SPAM: Soros-linked corporation supplies voting machines to 16 States

mi writes: Remember, how suspicious (and wrong!) it was for Diebold, whose management openly supported Bush, to be supplying voting machines? We even discussed it here over the years...

Well, a Soros-linked company is supplying 16 States with voting hardware this year. Will there be a comparable amount of suspicion?

Link to Original Source

Slashdot Top Deals

"'Tis true, 'tis pity, and pity 'tis 'tis true." -- Poloniouius, in Willie the Shake's _Hamlet, Prince of Darkness_