Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



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: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:Hell no (Score 1) 373

Programming isn't terribly complex.

Awesome that you think so! Now, program some realtime flight surface control software for a fly-by-wire jet and sleep well knowing that your program will never, ever, kill anyone... (Or, substitute any other safety critical software you can think of - and theres a lot!)

"Programming" (by which I really mean software engineering) is one of the most complex activities in existence...

Just because it can be doesn't mean that it always is. The avionics-software programmer is working very differently to the muh-first-website programmer. It can be complex like avionics, but it can also be simple like javascript text-adventures.

"Programming" can be, at times, one of the most complex activities in existence. It can also be, at other times, one of the simplest activities you can find paying high salaries. Lets not pretend that programming is always more complex than brain surgery. It can (on rare occasions) be, but it's usually not much more complex than arithmetic.

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

I see you're not denying it was sexism. Now you know you've lost the argument, you're trying to have a different argument.

I knew your memory was short, but this is a new record ... even by your usual standards! Let me quote, in full, *my* assertion and *your* response to my original "not sexist" assertion:

Attacking a single woman does not make one sexist.

Depends on the nature of the attack. In this case [...]

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?

Thanks for playing.

How does it feel, now that your bubble about societal norms is thoroughly burst? Will you make a new /. ID to post again in 4 years when all the doom-and-gloom you're predicting fails to materialise? Does your virtue-signalling address whatever need you have within you that makes you accuse everyone of thought-crime?

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

Attacking a single woman does not make one sexist.

Depends on the nature of the attack. In this case (suggesting it was PMS) was pretty much the textbook definition of sexism because it is attacking here merely for being female. I now look forward to you rationalizing it away.

So, when you get called dickhead you accuse the caller of misandry? Rationalize that.

Comment That quote says it all (Score 5, Insightful) 93

He blamed a more cautious outlook from VCs focused on tech as the primary reason for letting 40 of Pebble's staff go.

In what universe is this quote acceptable?

This man appears to believe that businesses get money from VCs and pays money to employees+suppliers. Last I checked, businesses got money from customers. They'd get /loans/ from banks (but that has to be paid back).

The problem with a lot of SV/Tech startups is that the people involved appear to believe that their income comes from VCs. Their business plan is effectively "Get VC Money, Then Sell Company!"

A depressed market would soon separate the wheat from the chaff.

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

To imply that a female professional at the top of her game couldn't aggressively question him because she was some how out of her wits because of a natural bodily function she's been dealing with since she was 13 is absolutely sexist.

Attacking a single woman does not make one sexist. Attacking all, disparaging all, certainly. But your use of the word "sexist" to describe the way a person treats a couple of specific individuals is objectively incorrect.

Comment Re: Necessary (Score 1) 394

While I think that mppp is a fuckwit, but minus the wit, the statement (alone):

Mass surveillance is a necessary consequence of mass immigration from the Muslim world.

does not tell you anything about his support for or against mass surveillance.

Someone stating that $X is a necessary consequence of $Y in no way implies support for or against $X, regardless of whether $X is or is not a necessary consequence of $Y.

Comment Re:oh boy (Score 1) 524

I think you mean 75% of the country. The thought HRC was well-supported, but it turns out only 25% of the country (or less) actually supported her. This means that these pundits were (and still are) out of touch with the 75% of the country who did not vote for her.

Trump's 62mil votes is not "75% of the country", unless you're using geographic area.

No one claimed that. My claim is that HRC's ~64m votes is 25% (or less) of the country. She has, whether you like it or not, the support of roughly 25% (or less) of the country. There was, whether you even want to acknowledge it or not, only a 0.66% difference in support between Clinton and Trump.

The margin of popularity between Clinton and Trump is barely a rounding error. Plotted on a 0%-100% chart printed on A4 paper, you won't even see the difference!

you numpty.

Nice. Classy.

Slashdot Top Deals

"...a most excellent barbarian ... Genghis Kahn!" -- _Bill And Ted's Excellent Adventure_

Working...