Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


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

Comment Re:Wow... (Score 1) 190

So, because Apple is involved, it's ok to pass off shoddy untested and unverified products at the same time as ripping off a company's trade dress and defrauding customers.

These aren't just generic USB chargers you plug into the wall - these are made and advertised to look like genuine Apple products, using Apple logos and everything. Except that they aren't.

Good to know that irrationality still wins the day with both Apple's fans, and detractors.

Speaking of irrational, which ignorant consumer thinks they're actually buying a "genuine" Apple cable from the most infamous fixed-price electronics vendor on the planet, at a fraction of what they charge everywhere else?

Give me a break. Yes, you have a point regarding counterfeiting, but when something is way too good to be true, it probably is.

It just makes me all that more certain that Apple is price gouging on all their products.

There is NOTHING in those cables that should make them cost 26 bucks.

Comment Re:Relationship of technology to this election? (Score 1) 325

My first degree included sociology and I studied quite a bit about polling. I even followed up with math before switching to computer science for my second degree. So I'm telling you [tbannist] to stop projecting your ignorance or bias.

So, are you a sock-puppet account for meta-monkey? Or are you just jumping on the "polling isn't accurate because I don't like the results" bandwagon?

Short summary: It is quite easy to deliver any poll results you are being paid for.

I would strongly suspect that vast majority of polls are paid for accurate results. In the case of political campaigns, for example, they may only release the results of favourable polls, but deliberately inaccurate polls seem like a waste of money. It far cheaper to simply choose the poll(s) that other people have paid for that most resemble the result you want and trumpet those. Also, few people are going to believe a poll that the campaign paid for that produces wildly different results from everyone other poll. Without a sound procedure and definite reasons for the discrepancies, it would be immediately be dismissed as paid-for-results and it would damage the credibility of the polling organization that produced the results.

The hardest thing is to produce an honest poll that gives you meaningful insight into any deep issue.

There's a qualitative different between biased results and deliberately dishonest results. Most polls have some degree of bias and we can compare polls to each other and to election results to see how accurate they and develop and estimate of how biased the poll is and in which direction. But meta-monkey made the claim that they don't even try to be accurate until the last week before the election and if you believe he is correct, then you're also an ignorant fool.

Comment Re:Relationship of technology to this election? (Score 2) 325

The pollster picks the demographics for the poll, but never justifies why those demographics are reasonable.

As far as I am aware, the normal procedure is to record the demographics from a random poll, and then adjust the weightings of each demographic group based on the actual recorded demographics from the last similar election.

The rest of your comments display a considerable amount of the Dunning-Kruger effect. I really don't think you should write about things you so clearly know nothing about. Maybe you should spend some time and educate yourself about polling procedures, practices and organizations?

Comment Re:Ellen Pao (Score 1) 619

Anybody afraid of Trump is moron. Yes, he's sexist, he's racist, and he's just a complete jerk - but he hasn't "attacked" anyone, or threatened to implement any policies that should make anybody feel "threatened."

There's nearly a dozen women who say differently.

He's not fueled by hate, he's fueled by greed and a sense of self grandeur, and when has he ever encouraged violence?

How about when he suggested that "second ammendment types" could kill Clinton to prevent her from passing any gun control laws? How about the way he's setting the stage for post-election violence by loudly declaring that his defeat won't be because he's losing the election and the popular vote, but because the election is rigged? Trying to de-legitimizing the results of an election is a pretty good way to incite (and legitimize) violence.

I don't find it ironic that, with the exception of the religious fundamentalists perhaps, conservatives are a lot more open minded and accepting that people have different philosophies than liberals.

I know a lot of liberals and conservatives, and I have not observed the same thing. Conservatives are, almost by definition, less accepting of people who are different. It's a pretty big part of what makes someone a conservative, the belief that people should be forced to conform to certain roles and norms for the ultimate benefit of society. On the other hand, liberals, tend to be less concerned about forcing people to fit in, and are more concerned about what people do (in a moral sense).

But the lesser of two evils is still evil (so keep making fun of third party votes while you vote "evil").

And, yes. How enlightened of you to vote for the lesser of 3 or 4 evils, when everyone else is voting for the lesser of 2 evils. You should always be voting for the lesser evil, no matter which party you choose. Of course, the reason Trump is doing so well in the polls is because he's convinced a sizeable demographic to deliberately vote for the greater evil.

For the vast majority of supporters, a vote for Trump is not a vote for sexism or racism

Of course, it isn't, but that's because they can't reconcile the idea that they're good people and still voting for an evil monster. So, clearly those claims are overblown and they're just voting for the smart, rich guy who will fix everything. And he clearly said all the sexual assault allegations were just the corrupt media, and so what if he, himself, has been recording on tape boasting about his criminal actions. The media will do anything to defeat poor little Donald, even play back his own words, for everyone to hear. Have they no shame?

Comment Re:"Gay Culture" is blind devotion then? (Score 3, Informative) 619

Or you know, maybe because we heard Trump bragging about assaulting women, then denying it, pretending it was "locker room talk", and then we've seen almost a dozen women come forward and say he assaulted them. Then there's the recordings of him boasting about how he he would deliberately go backstage to peep at the Miss Teen Universe contestants, and the recordings of him (in his sixties) claiming he'd soon be dating 10 and 12 year old girls.

Clearly, it's all the crooked press. How dare they play unedited recordings of Trump talking.

Comment there is no new money here (Score 1) 169

Congress (the opposite of progress) is going to get appropriations requests, and the public utilities will bring wheelbarrows full of critical failure points they haven't worked on for 50 years to the body.

considering that many city water and sewer systems are in default of the law already and running on baling wire and duct tape, ouch.

Comment Re:Yeah. Right (Score 3, Insightful) 367

Or are you one of those gullible people who believe that the media is biased against Trump despite the media actually greatly assistingTrump's campaign by repeating every damn stupid thing that he says? He'd never have made it through the primaries if the mainstream media weren't so obsessed with him.

They unconsciously assisted Trump. They were competing with each other for viewership. The media didn't believe its own adage, "Any news is good news" because it gives name recognition. Now, the main news outlets, and even Google search results, clearly favor Hillary.

It's the same stuff every day: Everybody is SO Appalled by ______ (insert modified v of what he actually said) that Trump said.; Clinton is (destroying, crushing, obliterating, overwhelming) Trump in popularity.

Just look at tomorrow's lead stories. That's what they will say.

This, btw, is why you should vote against Hillary. At least Trump will have a hostile press.

The part I'd like to know is when did "the news" become 24/7 instructions on what to think and feel about things.

Try it, just consume whatever news you do, and take note of the time they spend on "the what" verses the time they spend telling you what to think and feel. "You will be shocked!" No. Dude. A responsible and intelligent (not to mention wise) person decides that stuff for themselves. YOUR job as a "journalist" (in quotes, because there aren't any anymore) is to find information, collate it into useful form, and present it.

Comment Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? (Score 1) 269

The one-sided nature of the leaks suggests that either Wikieaks has an agenda, or it is the willing accomplice of someone who has an agenda.

In any case, the failure to redact phone numbers and other personal information suggests that Wikileaks cannot really be regarded as a reasonable way to leak data.

Finally, I suspect that the one-sided nature of the leaks is upsetting many people who would otherwise support Wikileaks.

Two possible reasons for this:

Insiders are doing the leaking
RNC break-ins happened and aren't interesting, exposing corruption isn't fun if there isn't any

Also note; conservative thought did not do SJW twat-juice battle against Anon and 4chan trying to enforce political correctness. i.e. they aren't angry at the RNC yet.

You are right, this is vindictive. Deliciously so.

Slashdot Top Deals

How come everyone's going so slow if it's called rush hour?