Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. ×

Comment Re: I blame Trump. (Score 1) 1028

I'd blame Trump's ilk for that too. If you vilify a group (gays in the Orlando case) long enough some unhinged asshat will decide he's taking action for the greater good.

Somehow I don't think it was Trump vilifying gays (which he has not done, BTW) that pushed a Muslim shouting "Allah Akbar!" to gun down gays in Orlando. Perhaps you're unaware of the standard treatment Muslims visit upon gays in places where Islam is the dominant religion? And I don't think it was Trump that pushed a pair of Muslims to gun down their co-workers at a holiday party in San Bernadino. And so on and so forth.

But hey, go ahead and blame Trump for stubbing your toe in the dark last night, or for the flat tire you got last year, or for the bird shitting on your windshield right after you washed your car. He's obviously the root of all evil and must be blamed for anything and everything you don't like. You look like a goddamned uninformed fool for doing so, but please, by all means, exercise your right to broadcast that fact to the world. It does wonders for your argument.

Comment Re:"Police found Purinton 80 miles away at Applebe (Score 1) 1028

I am suggesting that you are in denial that a problem even exists, despite the figures, and before you can improve things there you need to change you way of thinking.

No one is in denial that homicide is a problem. Where we differ is the severity of the problem in relation to the severity of the proposed solutions. For example, the most recent statistics show there were over 30,000 automobile deaths last year, far more than deaths due to violent use of a gun. Do you propose banning automobiles? There are nearly 4,000 deaths annually due to drowning in pools, more than violent homicides by firearm, yet I don't hear you calling for a ban on pools.

There is no such thing as a perfectly free yet perfectly safe society and a great deal of harm can be done trying to achieve such a thing. For example, while shootings such as these make gun usage seem uniformly bad, there are no newscasts highlighting positive use of firearms for self defense. Nobody gets any air time when a five-foot, 100lb woman doesn't get raped by a six-foot, 220lb thug because she successfully defended herself with a firearm. There are innumerable permutations on the latter, none of which get any attention. Ban firearms by law-abiding citizens and you guarantee a target-rich environment for criminals, none of which will give a damn about any gun ban laws because criminals do not obey the law.

If you could snap your fingers tomorrow and magically delete every gun in existence then I might agree with your stance. That is impossible and any rational, reasonable person should know that. So long as criminals can get their hands on a weapon do to harm upon me and my family, I absolutely demand the right to legally obtain and wield one of my own for defense.

Comment Re:"Police found Purinton 80 miles away at Applebe (Score 1) 1028

If everyone had a gun I probably wouldn't be posting this right now.

Far more people have guns than you are probably aware. That's because the vast, huge, overwhelming majority of them are kept for defense instead of assault. There are over 300 million guns in private hands in the United States. If the owners of these decided to be a problem, trust me, you'd be dead by now. That you're not is prima facie evidence of the stupidity of your argument.

Comment Re:"Police found Purinton 80 miles away at Applebe (Score 1) 1028

Fine. Let's assume for the sake of argument that guns are a fundamentally bad thing and need to be banned. There are over 300 million guns in the United States alone. Please tell me how you plan to get rid of them in such a way that disarms criminals equally as well as it disarms law-abiding citizens.

You can't, and that's the crux of the problem. Criminals, by definition, do not obey the law. Law-abiding people, by definition, do obey the law. Pass a law banning handguns and you guarantee 100% disarmament of law-abiding citizens whilst simultaneously stopping very few if any criminals from getting them. Congratulations! You just made violent gun crime easier for every thug, bank robber, rapist, murderer, and so on. We absolutely need more of that, right?

Every time there's a shooting, people like you come out of the woodwork screaming about how bad guns are and how they must be eliminated. As noted above, there are over 300 million guns in circulation in the United States. Today about 99.99997% of them were not used in a violent criminal way, yet you insist they are a dire threat to anything and everything. Your argument is both irrational and illogical.

Comment Re:All this has happened before ... (Score 1) 232

I suppose it means that money is too free, and I suppose the market will correct that.

You meant it sarcastically but your second point is actually correct. People who invest in startups like this have a fiduciary duty to themselves or their firms to investigate what they're investing in. It's all "buyer beware" so I have no sympathy for those who lost money; you plays the game, you takes your chances. If you win -- with a Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, etc. -- you win big. If you lose, you lose big. That's how it's supposed to work.

The net results of crap like this is investors (should) become more wary about what they invest in. They should vet companies before they invest and hold its executives to higher standards than this Nardone idiot was held. All of that is a Good Thing no matter what angle you look at this debacle from.

Comment Re:So now under Trump... (Score 5, Insightful) 341

I don't know if Trump supporters are smart enough to do the same, but these rioters are certainly discrediting the cause they nominally claim to support.

Funny, I saw the protesters as doing exactly what they said they'd do all along: act like a bunch of spoiled babies who didn't get their way and are now throwing a tantrum. They don't rationalize. They don't listen. They don't engage cognitive thinking skills. They distill it down to "you don't agree with me, therefore you are a hateful, mean, stupid, intolerant, bigoted, racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic Hitler lover and I'm completely justified in doing whatever my emotions lead me to do and you can't criticize me because criticism is racist, sexist, bigoted, homophobic, etc."

It's the logical endpoint of the "there is no truth and right/wrong is an illusion" ideology.

Comment Re:Don't commit the crime if you don't have the ti (Score -1, Redundant) 341

If you want to play statistics, you could also say "billions of people did not protest Trump." Hey, sorry if you don't like it but that logic works both ways. You want to minimize the (obvious and improper) damage caused by rioting liberals, I'll be happy to minimize the (pathetically small and insignificant) number or protesters.

Comment Re:So now under Trump... (Score 5, Interesting) 341

Funny how, if we're all a bunch of racist, sexist, bigoted, homophobic, xenophobic, neo-nazi, fascist, greedy, evil, violent, intolerant bastards like you say we are, we didn't riot, burn shit, threaten to blow up the White House, dress up like vaginas, scream, whine, cry, bitch, moan, and boycott everything when Obama was elected (twice!). I mean, it's not like we AGREED with Obama's policies in the slightest, certainly no more so than you agree with Trump. Yet somehow the only time you see this behavior is when liberals lose. Conservatives...not so much.

It reminds me of the argument that gun owners are some sort of threat to the general public. We've got more than 300 million guns and several trillion rounds of ammunition. Trust us, if we were a threat, you'd know it by now.

Comment Re:Now it begins (Score 1, Interesting) 1069

A guy who claims he knows more than all the generals.

Which, of course, explains why he's hired complete lap dogs like General "Mad Dog" Mattis. Mattis is well-known for his soft-spoken manner, desire to "go along to get along" and his political finesse. The troops hate him and his military record is a joke.

OK, there's only so much sarcasm I can spew before I choke. Point being, Trump is doing what any skilled executive does and that's surrounding himself with people who are damn good at what they do. Trump is shoring up his weak points by finding strong people. You may not like his picks but it's difficult to argue that each one of them aren't formidable in their own arena.

I don't think you're the least bit frightened of a bad President Trump. You're terrified he'll be a good President. You're scared he WON'T destroy civil liberties, round up gays, or wipe his ass with the Constitution. That'd be the ultimate terror attack on your ideology, wouldn't it? That his policies might be effective and actually good for the country, thus proving your ideas are, at best, not worthwhile.

Comment Re:America hates Hillary Clinton (Score 4, Insightful) 1069

Ah, yes. The new liberal mantra: If you didn't vote for Hillary, you're racist, misogynist, sexist, xenophobic...

Trust me, it's not new.

1. Take control of the language.
2. Redefine what your opponent does using inapplicable-yet-nasty-sounding terms.
3. Dismiss anyone who disagrees with your redefinition as part of the problem.
4. Use "new" language to cast your opponents as Hitler reborn.

Only problem is it didn't work this time. Liberals went full-bore mental on Trump and, as a result, he looked mild by comparison. Liberals and their water carriers looked like complete fucking idiots as a result. Trump's election has as much to do with their frothing zealotry as anything he might've said or done as a candidate. His election was quite simply a repudiation of all this ridiculous PC, safe-space, diaper-pin-wearing, everything-offends-me culture.

Comment Re:Privatization of the public square (Score 4, Insightful) 410

If Facebook Twitter, Reddit and other leftist dominated companies run all the communications mediums, how are those who disagree to compete in the arena of ideas?

There's not supposed to be competition in the arena of ideas, didn't you know that? It's supposed to be an infinite echo chamber where all the heads nod up and down at the same time in the same way and nobody ever says anything that challenges anyone's preconceived notions. Those that do must be exiled, ridiculed, and called racist, sexist, homophobic, Islamophobic, xenophobic, arachnophobic, hydrophobic, and anything else derogatory the echo chamber can come up with regardless of whether or not it actually applies. Such is the mentality of the left in political discourse.

This is nothing new with the left. Go back to the origins with Marx, Lenin, Trotsky, and so forth. Controlling thoughts and implementing groupthink has always been part and parcel of leftist ideology. It preys upon the typical desire to "fit in" and not be left out of a crowd. That's why every leftist government has always sought to ban certain types of speech -- either legally or extra-legally -- as part of its method for retaining power. The USSR did it to great effect for almost a century before it came crashing down. Today's "political correctness" is nothing more than the same ideology repackaged into something more aesthetically pleasing to the masses.

Comment Re:OH NOES! (Score 1) 410

So he trolled the trolls.

So basically you're saying what he did was fine because he did it against Trump and his "fifth column." So trashing free speech is fine with you so long as it's trashing free speech you don't like. The cognitive dissonance...it burns. Why do I get the feeling you'd be singing an entirely different tune if this was a conservative forum host that censored pro-Hillary or anti-Trump comments to align with conservative viewpoints?

There's a simple litmus test you must always apply when rendering judgement on things like this. If the positions were reversed would you still feel the same? If the answer is "no" then you're not being objective enough to have a valid opinion on the subject.

Comment Bot vs. bot (Score 2) 62

Since the bulk of the Comcast reps on the other end of the line are doing little more than entering the customer's comments and choosing from a list of pre-made responses, this truly is a bot vs. bot conversation. I've designed and built call centers for companies like American Express. The humans in the call centers are glorified text-to-speech engines with almost no knowledge or expertise on what they're discussing. They follow scripts and don't know how to deviate very far from their loops.

Comment Re:Also too early to spend trillions of dollars (Score 2) 201

The administration sold it on lies and misinformation, and a lot of people bought it.

Speaking as someone who was not only alive at the time but actively serving in the military at the time, you seem to forget Saddam himself was being conned by his own scientists who feared for their lives if they reported failure. Furthermore, the CIA believed they had WMD's, and the head of the CIA advised the Bush administration that WMD's were present.

So here you are, the President, sitting in the Oval Office. You've got a murderous thug of a dictator, someone who has shown no compunction about using WMD's against his own people when it suits him. His own services report having WMD's. Your own intelligence services confidently say he has WMD's. What do you do? Ignore all that?

Put this way, if you go to three different doctors and they all diagnose you with cancer, are you gonna say "nah, I feel fine, these guys don't know what they're talking about"? Or are you going to get treatment for cancer as if you actually HAVE cancer? And if afterwards when the chemo has made you sick as hell and all your hair falls out you discover you didn't really have cancer, are you going to blame yourself for making the decision to get treatment? Or are you going to blame those that wrongly advised you?

Based on your above comments, you'd have to blame yourself and hold those who wrongly diagnosed you as completely innocent. Not that that makes any fucking sense, but that's what you're doing.

Slashdot Top Deals

This restaurant was advertising breakfast any time. So I ordered french toast in the renaissance. - Steven Wright, comedian

Working...