Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


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

Comment Re:Surprised (Score 1) 533

"The idea that all those people are just stay at home moms and kids and grandmas is just pure fantasy doled out by the corporate media."

So if you don't believe the "corporate media" go look up what sorts of populations are defined in all the "U" employment numbers. It isn't a secret. We have been measuring employment for the same way for a very long time.

Or, if you don't want to parse the Bureau of Labor Stats website, search for any site referring to things like U3, U5, U6 and has references to BLS. LIke .

Comment Re:Michael Flynn Jr believes it (Score 1) 788

No, you have to be very intelligent. You spend a good chunk of your life learning about nothing but brain surgery.

Learning facts and what to do with them does not make your more intelligent. More importantly, being told what is true by professors of medicine for 8 years, concerning medicine, in no way gives you the skills necessary to evaluate new non-medical facts and data on your own years later after you get out of school.

Why would you? What ever made you think you could trust a doctor with a computer?

What makes you think we can trust a doctor to read and understand archaeological journals (or even just a scientific american article) so they can comment intelligently on the history of the pyramids? Hint: you can't.

You would be better off having a history, english/lit, or philosophy major, reading about the pyramids and then commenting on their history. At least those disciplines contain a lot of source evaluation practice.

Comment Re:What about cutting down full time to 32 hours a (Score 1) 537

Conservative minded people who think welfare is detrimental should research who is on it, how long they stay on it, what the conditions to get it are, etc.. Familiarize yourself with the facts from the actual stats published by reporting agencies, and I think you'll be surprised how "not detrimental" welfare is to society.

I only say that because I know a lot of conservatives who seem to be stuck in the Reagan era mindset that there are "welfare queens" milking the system with 20 kids for 50 years and never working once in their lives, and that this abuse is rampant and costing us a ton of money. That isn't true today and was likely never true.

Comment Re:Better be ready to be beat up when layed off wo (Score 1) 537

You and I may be happy with this. But a lot of people will not. People need a sense of purpose; a desire to be needed; to be valuable. Some may find value in free time to pursue artistic endeavors; many will not.

I think you are seeing this backwards. From birth to probably a little bit after college, the majority of people are perfectly happy to amuse themselves with "hobbies", regardless of the wealth generation (or lack thereof) of those hobbies. And yeah, a hobby could be productive, but it doesn't need to be.

Only after working 9-5 for a few years (and likely becoming more and more responsible for themselves), do people start to forget how to naturally find curiosity or amusement in the moment. I know many adults that literally can't sit still for a 2 hour movie, they have to get up and fix something, or clean something. But those adults didn't used to be like that, they used to be able to immerse themselves in something creative or otherwise pleasurable for hours at a time.

So a universal income would allow many people to (likely gradually) return to that mindset they had when they were younger. Letting their mind go where it wants to, instead of having a constant stressful feeling that they need to "get something done".

Comment Re:Surprised (Score 1) 533

I don't know if you care (few people seem to this election cycle) , but that "not working" number is a "lie" of sorts designed to support the narrative that the economy is in bad shape.

So by lie, I mean, it doesn't mean what people think it means. That large number includes children, stay at home moms, etc.. people that are not looking for work. And yes, that number has gotten larger in recent years, mainly because more baby boomers retired.

The standard unemployment rate is what we have used to gauge work force health for a long long time. Bringing in the "not working people" number was new to the Obama presidency, and hyped again during the election cycle.

Comment Re:Riiiight.... (Score 1) 736

You also notice in this post there is no difference made between the right wing (most people in America) and the alt.right (a few thousand people). They are put together in the same bucket so that the odious beliefs of the alt.right may contaminate the entire right.

It is kind of hard to separate the two groups when the newly elected leader that the right wing chose, has himself appointed the self-proclaimed voice of the alt-right as his senior advisor. It is also pretty hard to separate the two groups, because the supposedly larger one (right wing) isn't calling out and condemning the alt-right's racists members.

I don't think I saw even one Trump rally where the audience booed or put down people saying or doing racist/homophobic things. In fact, quite the opposite. The crowd seemed to encourage it sometimes.

Before joining Trump's campaign as its CEO in August, Bannon served as executive chairman of Breitbart News, identifying his outlet this summer as “the platform for the alt-right,”

Comment Re:Why did no one here mention the actual culprit? (Score 1) 736

Sure, you can find Macedonian teenagers, and idiots in California who claim that "only conservatives fall for fake news" and that it "doesn't work with liberals" (...) but that's a side show.

Start here, and read it until you grasp what is going on:

Russian propaganda effort helped spread 'fake news' during election, experts say

Does anyone have a real good sense of the ratio of people just out to make money vs Russia's more organized campaign? I haven't come across a break down of the fake news site owners yet.

Comment Re:Two possible motivations (Score 1) 736

The "jobs" argument for fossil fuels just doesn't make sense though.

It doesn't need to be true to be effective propaganda :)

Here's how a anti-agw/pro-oil "think tank" might make the case:

1. Renewable energy is more expensive, therefore
2. Cost of goods and services will rise, therefore
3. People spend less, the economy slows, therefore
4. less jobs.

Of course, in countries that are way more aggressive implementing renewables than the US, there has been no evidence of negative economic impacts. But those above 4 things "sound correct", so repeated enough times and half of America now believes them to be true.

Comment Re: What an empty life (Score 1) 736

"why are they JUST NOW making a big deal out of it?"

Because a way larger percent of the public is consuming those fake news stories now vs 8-16 years ago. And a higher percent of consumers of conservative media appear to be targeted with fake news vs liberal news. For instance, there are interviews with hackers/programmers/web designers in Macedonia who said that when they made fake news sites designed to entice Bernie supporters into viewing/clicking clicks, they got far fewer hits then when they created fake pro-Trump stories.

And in general the topic of truth in politics is now an issue because Trump lies so brazenly and blatantly. Even very easy to debunk stuff, like "you said X on this date". "No I didn't". Google X, first hit is Trump saying "X" on that date.

Comment Re:Pushback (Score 1) 275

Nobody likes the ribbons.

I don't like them either. But obviously the majority of people like them, because big companies like MS test the crap out of little features like that, with focus groups. usability studies, surveys, polls, etc..

We are not the target audience. (We, assuming you are a computer professional or geeky with computers like I am).

Comment Re:that's pretty evil (Score 1) 418

Read the actual email.

The CEO wasn't going to use Google's resources to spy/track/target voters for the campaign. He was donating his expertise as a private US citizen to help define what sorts of systems and digital strategies the campaign should build and use.

Or is Eric S. of Google no longer allowed to donate time to a campaign because he is the head of a large powerful company?

Slashdot Top Deals

I have a theory that it's impossible to prove anything, but I can't prove it.