Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



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

Comment Re:the more guns you have, the more likely you are (Score 2) 212

Wouldn't the statistical number of people who were shot which selected from among only those who were shot be 100%?

A statistical measure of the percentage of people who were shot who own guns isn't necessarily flawed on it's face. I'll grant that taken on it's own, it's not very meaningful. However, if the percentage of gun ownership among shooting victims is higher than the percentage of gun ownership in the general population, you just might have a correlation.

Comment Re:Well... (Score 1) 1017

Trump's comments (heck, Trump himself) is a good example of why a government that "serves the interests of a small coterie of oligarchs" is a bad thing. Why nobody notices that he himself is the bad thing that he is pointing out is a marvelous mystery.

Replacing a secret oligarch with an overt one, whose interests clearly and directly align with foreign countries which are not US allies. Yeah, that sounds like a great idea.

Comment Re:One of five big industries (Score 1) 416

Law enforcement should just enforce the laws, in my opinion. They should not be involved in lobbying for or against them, though.

http://www.republicreport.org/...

The opinion of law enforcement is one I'm actually interested in. Their input into how difficult something is to police is certainly useful in finding the best working solutions. (It's also possible that their input on a given matter is useless, but the only way to know is to listen to it.)

It's the lobbying bit that's the problem. Instead of gathering input from various groups and crafting the best workable solution, you often get the solution that best appeases the highest bidders.

Comment Re:I'm not a company (Score 1) 208

I think there might actually be a third option: Take responsibility, be a parent.

... leading to some rather unrealistic expectations and standards. It's not exactly a documentary...

As opposed to the realistic expectations set by movies, television commercials, and other mass media? Teach your children to use their brains. The rest will take care of itself.

Comment Re:films only need to be rated if they're in theat (Score 2) 208

Having ratings applied by a secret cadre hasn't made them all that meaningful either. "Rated PG due to scenes of minor peril." What the fuck does that mean? Is that really useful for information for deciding if you should watch "Ice Age" with your 6 year old? Is the mild peril in "Ice Age" slightly less mild or more perilous than the G-rated "The Lion King"?

PS: I can remember (barely) when movies didn't have ratings. Shocking, right? Oh, and when ratings were new, people understood they were guidelines that had little real meaning. My father took me to see at least one R rated film before I was 10, the only lasting impact of which was an appreciation for the films of Alfred Hitchcock.

I have the impression that most of the time when people say they want to protect children from being exposed to something, what they really want is to protect themselves from having to answer questions that make them uncomfortable.

Comment Re:I'm not a company (Score 2) 208

I have three grown children who grew up in an internet connected house. I never used a filtering system of any kind. Do you know how much of a problem I had with them accessing content they shouldn't have? None. Zero. I suppose parents actually have it a little harder now that 9 year olds have smartphones, but not much.

(Ok, there was that one time when my son was about 10 and and found a naked she-hulk drawing while searching for superhero pictures. We all thought it was pretty funny, but if you want to count that as a "problem', then have fun.)

Comment Re:Or they offer too little (Score 1) 496

Nice try. I wasn't disputing anything the article said. I was intentionally adding a point not covered in the article but likely a contributing factor.

Nice try. But the phrase "sounds like you are acknowledging" contains actual words, which have an actual meaning. In other words, that's not what you did at all. To make it crystal clear, you said that it "sounded like" the AC you replied to said a thing, when in fact nothing they said sounded like that thing at all.

On the other hand, I didn't say you were disputing anything. I've no idea why you think I did.

Comment Re:Or they offer too little (Score 1) 496

Pot, meet kettle. There was nothing in the statement which you responded to which in any way indicates even the existence of a welfare state. Your assertion otherwise says quite a bit about your own biases.
(Hint: It's entirely possible for wages to be too low to be worth working for, even in the absence of a welfare state.)

Slashdot Top Deals

!07/11 PDP a ni deppart m'I !pleH

Working...