Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Not up to judiciary (Score 1) 505

Ahh, I really appreciate it when someone writes a well-written, level-headed argument that I disagree with. It feels less common in slashdot these days.

I'd first ask, do visa holders who were affected by the EO have constitutional rights, specifically the right to due process? If so, does an EO ostensibly about foreign policy render the EO unreviewable despite the clear fact that it tramples on the due process rights of visa holders?

I believe the answer to the first question is emphatically yes and the jurisprudence I'm aware of around this question suggests that USSC has established this as precedent. For example, Zadvydas_v._Davis. As to the 2nd question, I'm not aware of anything in the constitution to suggest the president is able to override due process rights and therefore the order is reviewable in the specific. Nor is there any part of the constitution that says the president is able to label executive orders as foreign policy orders in order to escape constitutional review.

More broadly, it seems like quite a blank check to issue to state the executive can merely ascertain on its own that its orders are about foreign policy and therefore unreviewable or that if there is a foreign policy element, as adjudicated by the courts, then other constitutional concerns are rendered irrelevant and the judiciary must consider the order unreviewable. Basically, while I agree the executive should have broad discretion with respect to foreign policy, they shouldn't be allowed to revoke visas, once given, without due process; which was the affect of the order.

Comment Re:Nonsense (Score 1) 311

I'm concerned you don't have a mental health policy in your plan.

Certainly, it's challenging to expose market forces because of situations like you described -- a point I admitted in the post you're responding to. Other than you basically explaining one of the reasons why it is difficult to bring market forces to bear on health care, the point I made, you don't seem to have responded to my post or understood that I am for universal health care despite stating it explicitly.

Also, I was posting from work. I'm sure it's common to post anonymously from work.

Comment Re:ADP said 230,000 (Score 1) 108

My roads are paved. I don't have to bribe policemen. It's shocking that there's a city with lead in the water. I can drive from one end of this massive country to the other on awesome highways and be free of highwaymen. I'm sending this message to you on a government invention.

Trust is not binary. Corporations are not perfect entities. Learn you some nuance, please.

Comment Re:Thanks Obama (Score 1) 108

Oh these early months are not worth bickering about. Like the quote about the stock market, "In the short term, it's a voting machine. In the long term, it's a weighing machine." We'll see what happens over the next 4-8 years. And, there will be two hundred thousand explanations for it, only a few of them driven by carefully crafted hypothesis. Those precious few will be ignored by the couch potatoes.

Comment Re:This is what happens... (Score 2) 505

None of the terrorists had come from those countries. Calling those judges SJW diminishes the power of the insult. It's like calling Trump a nazi. It's soon (already?) going to only mean "people we don't agree with politically." You're also not responding to the real argument for why they issued injunctions.

Comment Re:Okay. (Score 1) 325

Such a limited imagination. Does your employer know what porn you look at? Do you want to live in a society where such things come up in background checks? Your employers, clients, or business partners may not care, but many will and with that power people will feel more repressed. Do you want to live in a society that feels more repressed?

Comment Re:Nope, nothing to see here (Score 5, Insightful) 445

If that were the case, the FBI conclusion would have settled the matter. Also, if that were the case, the rabidity on display would go unexplained. A much simpler explanation exists, the right's outrage machine riled up a bunch of people and it's not going to do so for Pence.

Comment Re:GUIs and AIs and Ohs (Score 1) 169

Obviously, some mistakes are less likely or impossible in a GUI just as some kinds of work are more efficient with a GUI, but the opposite has always, and will always, be true. Some mistakes are much more likely, and CLIs can do many things more efficiently. GUI also tends to be more expensive to write well to achieve similar functionality.

Comment Re:playbook?? This is my data not a football! (Score 1) 169

It might be your data, but it's Amazon's football game. Their field, their ball, their refs, their rules, their playbook.

It sounds so sinister until you consider that it could analogously apply to self-storage companies or handing over your luggage to an airline. Consider that the former have caught on fire and the latter have misplaced luggage. It's a platform that you don't have to use that makes a lot of things easier. Like all services, it's not perfect.

Slashdot Top Deals

You're using a keyboard! How quaint!