What are you talking about? The US has been in a depression for 10 years with less than 3% GDP growth. Forbes called 2009-2013 the "worst five years since the Great Depression". If anything America is due for a boom.

Steve Huffman of Reddit is an admitted faker. He's admitted gaming reddit for years, first to get the site some unearned exposure, then to boost staff posts, and more recently changes to the algorithm to suppress the popularity of the_donald reaching the front page. He stealth edited posts on the_donald by directly writing to the database so the post wouldn't look like it was edited. He faked it so it seemed like the original user said those things. The_Donald users archive their site daily so things like that become easy to spot and prove, and he was forced to apologize.

Reddit is predominantly white and male. Trump's supporters are predominantly white and male. It stands to reason they would be highly active on reddit as they are on other forums like 4chan, and so on. Yet if you listen to Steve Huffman he seems to act like they are a minority on the site and any activity must be Russian Trolls. It just doesn't seem likely.

These CEOs want us to believe they have these brilliant investigative skills into this mythical army of russian trolls, yet they can't cover their own traces when they manipulate votes, edit people's posts or alter algorithms to favor political forums they agree with.

Why do you people keep calling him "orange"? Why is that the level of discourse from the supposedly more enlightened and educated? Are your arguments really that devoid of intellectual content?

It appears it affects their body clock in some way. They always seem to think they never have time to exercise and lose the excess weight even though babies sleep 20 hours a day and coffee shops usually close at 5PM.

92% of startups fail in the first 3 years. Can a startup afford to install a safe space around every desk before the next election cycle.

Honestly, the hysteria from these anti-Trump people is hilarious. They're one chalk scribbled MAGA away from having a nervous breakdown.

Ebert never demonized entire groups of people, or made racist or disgusting remarks about them. Even when he made a dumb statement about video games not being art he made his argument respectfully and dealt with the criticism respectfully. His perspective was completely ignorant, not as glaringly stupid and lacking in reason as Sarkeesians, but it was still from the point of view of someone who never played games. However, he didn't run to the media about being a victim. He was the media, one of the few good ones in an industry of trolls and he respectfully disagreed. When he realized he couldn't convince anybody he wrote a follow up article and left it at that. He was told he was wrong many many times by many smart people, and probably a few trolls as well. He handled it like a reasonable adult.

Sarkeesian on the other hand responded by playing the victim, demonizing her critics, and using the media to write a narrative that she was the victim of an "abuse" campaign. The negative response Sarkeesian gets is as a direct response to the way she insults and generalizes entire groups of people, making arguments from ignorance. She's also taken huge amounts of money in donations and failed to deliver on her Kickstarter promise which is now overdue by 3 years. She is considered to be a scammer, but also a racist and sexist scam artist who avoids addressing her critics directly, and instead uses the media to attack them indirectly. Hopefully that should explain why she gets a more negative reaction than Roger Ebert.

Do you have a citation of this? Show your workings. What are you defining as harassment? Who specifically is being doxxed and by whom? How are you calculating that "most of it" is "by gamergate fanboys". You mentioned Felicia Day, but what evidence do you have that she was doxxed and that it was a "gamergate fanboy"? Was this information publicly available information that was just copy\pasted from a public source? Is that really doxxing? Or was this private information known only to a few? If so, who discovered this private information? Where was it stored? Was this someone close to Felicia or in a position of power? How was this private information transferred to a public medium? Who made this transfer, and how do you know their personal feelings on gamergate? These seem like basic questions. I presume you have answers for all them. I'll be checking. BTW, "gamergate fanboy" just seems like a meaningless label to carry emotional rather than specific factual information. What are you specifically trying to communicate with that label?

But they didn't think about it, and then they did it. So it's done. What's your solution? Welfare? You pay out of your taxes in exchange for them learning their lesson about trolling little girls. Though technically, they could probably still troll and collect welfare.

Or what? Deny them welfare, employment and education? Follow them around for life?

What is your actual solution to the people behind these public shamings? Because when you find a new mob to bring excitement into your quiet and timid life, these people are still roaming about, and have to do something, and have to feed themselves somehow.

The problem with assholes is that everybody has a different definition of an asshole. I think you're an asshole, because you shit on assholes. Shitting on assholes is still shitting on somebody.

You should have learned not to do that.

Yeah, okay but then what. You don't hire them. I don't hire them. Nobody hires them. Then what?

"Oh but they should have thought". Yeah, obviously they didn't. Now they have no job, and according to some people shouldn't have an education.

No job, no prospects of bettering themselves.

Then what. You have angry men with nothing to do walking around. What's your SOLUTION to these specific people?

And then what? Go on welfare? Be homeless? Beg on the street? Never get an education or an opportunity to better himself? Life in jail? Never be able to get a job again? What's your plan that doesn't somebody else (likely us taxpayers) having to support them for the rest of their lives? Are you comfortable with angry people walking around with no money, nothing to do, and completely desperate?

I don't see any pedo material there. Do you know something law enforcement doesn't?

Since this story has been around for a couple of days I would have hoped slashdot would know better and have avoided the sensationalist headline. Here's what the experts say.

The biggest problem is that this has been described as three-parent IVF. In fact it is 2.001-parent IVF," Gillian Lockwood, a reproductive ethicist, told the BBC. "Less than a tenth of one per cent of the genome is actually going to be affected. It is not part of what makes us genetically who we are. It doesn't affect height, eye colour, intelligence, musicality. It simply allows the batteries to work properly."

That's not really a nice way to look at people. You personally find it difficult to see what their goals are, so your next assumption is that they are dishonest? I believe that's a variation of argument from incredulity. Surely you can't be going around in life assuming dishonesty everytime you don't understand the aims of a group.

I don't really see what the goals are for most political movements, to be honest, such as Occupy Wall street, but they sure seemed like nice friendly people when I talked to them.

Also, how does an entire group of probably tens of thousands of loosely connected people act dishonestly? It would be difficult to organize that. It also doesn't hold up well to Occam's Razor.